69

In 2018, Zidane asked What is the smallest unsolved Diophantine equation? The suggested way to measure size is substitute 2 instead of all variables, absolute values instead of all coefficients, and evaluate. For example, the size $H$ of the equation $y^2-x^3+3=0$ is $H=2^2+2^3+3=15$.

Below we will investigate only the solvability question: does a given equation has any integer solutions or not?

Selected trivial equations. The smallest equation is $0=0$ of size $H=0$. If we ignore equations with no variables, the smallest equation is $x=0$ of size $H=2$, while the smallest equations with no integer solutions are $x^2+1=0$ and $2x+1=0$ of size $H=5$. These equations have no real solutions and no solutions modulo $2$, respectively. The smallest equation which has real solutions and solutions modulo every integer but still no integer solutions is $y(x^2+2)=1$ of size $H=13$.

Well-known equations. The smallest not completely trivial equation is $y^2=x^3-3$ of size $H=15$. But this is an example of Mordell equation $y^2=x^3+k$ which has been solved for all small $k$, and there is a general algorithm which solves it for any $k$. Below we will ignore all equations which belong to a well-known family of effectively solvable equations.

Selected solved equations.

  • The smallest equation neither completely trivial nor well-known is $ y(x^2-y)=z^2+1$ of size $H=17$. As noted by Victor Ostrik, it has no solutions because all odd prime factors of $z^2+1$ are $1$ modulo $4$.

  • The smallest equation not solvable by this method is $ x^2 + y^2 - z^2 = xyz - 2 $ of size $H=22$. This has been solved by Will Sawin and Fedor Petrov On Markoff-type diophantine equation by Vieta jumping technique.

  • The smallest equation that required a new idea was $y(x^3-y)=z^2+2$ of size $H=26$. This one was solved by Will Sawin and Servaes by rewriting it as $(2y - x^3)^2 + (2z)^2 = (x^2-2)(x^4 + 2 x^2 + 4)$, see this comment for details.

  • Equation $ y^2-xyz+z^2=x^3-5 $ of size $H=29$ has been solved in the arxiv preprint Fruit Diophantine Equation (arXiv:2108.02640) after being popularized in this blog post.

  • Equation $ x(x^2+y^2+1)=z^3-z+1 $ of size $H=29$ has solution $x=4280795$, $y=4360815$, $z=5427173$, found by Andrew Booker. This is the smallest equation for which the smallest known solution has $\min(|x|,|y|,|z|)>10^6$.

  • Equation $ y^2-x^3y+z^3+3=0 $ of size $H=31$ has been the smallest open equation for over two years, and then has been solved by Denis Shatrov, see the answer.

  • Equation $ 3-y+x^2 y+y^2+x y z-2 z^2 = 0 $ of size $H=33$ has been the smallest open cubic equation for some time, and then has been solved by Denis Shatrov, see here.

  • Equation $ x^3 + y^3 + z^3 + xyz = 5 $ with $H=37$ has been listed here as the smallest open symmetric equation, but then I found solution $x=-3028982$, $y=-3786648$, $z=3480565$, see the answer for details how it was found.

Smallest open equations. The current smallest open equations are the equations $$ y^3+xy+x^4+4=0, $$ $$ y^3+xy+x^4+x+2=0, $$ $$ y^3+y=x^4+x+4 $$ and $$ y^3-y=x^4-2x-2 $$ of size $H=32$.

One may also study equations of special type. For example, the current smallest open equations in two variables are the ones listed above. The current smallest open cubic equation is $$ (x+1)y^2-xz^2=x^3+2x+2 $$ of size $H=34$, the current smallest open symmetric equation is $$ x^3+x+y^3+y+z^3+z = x y z + 1 $$ of size $H=39$, while the current smallest open 3-monomial equation is $$ x^3y^2 = z^3 + 6 $$ of size $H=46$.

The shortest open equations. I was told that it would be interesting to order equations by a more "natural" measure of size than $H$. Define the length of a polynomial $P$ consisting of $k$ monomials of degrees $d_1,\dots,d_k$ and integer coefficients $a_1,...,a_k$ as $l(P)=\sum_{i=1}^k\log_2|a_i|+\sum_{i=1}^k d_i$. This is an approximation for the number of symbols used to write down $P$ if we write the coefficients in binary, do not use the power symbol, and do not count the operations symbols. Note that $2^{l(P)}=\prod_{i=1}^k\left(a_i2^{d_i}\right)$ while $H(P)=\sum_{i=1}^k\left(a_i2^{d_i}\right)$. If we order equations by $l$ instead of $H$, then the current "shortest" open equations are $$ y^2-x^3y+z^4+1=0 $$ $$ 2 y^3 + x y + x^4 + 1 = 0 $$ and $$ x^3 y^2 = z^4+2 $$ of length $l=10$.

For each of the listed equations, the question is whether they have any integer solutions, or at least a finite algorithm that can decide this in principle.

The paper Diophantine equations: a systematic approach devoted to this project is available online: (arXiv:2108.08705). Paper last updated 13.04.2022.

The plan is to list new smallest open equations once these ones are solved. The solved equations will be moved to the "solved" section.

Of course, in addition to the solvability question one may ask many other questions, e.g. whether the solution set is finite or infinite, how to describe all integer solutions, etc. Please see here for the current list of all smallest open equations in this project.

Bogdan Grechuk
  • 5,947
  • 1
  • 25
  • 42
  • 7
    Concerning $x^3y^2=z^3+6$, once upon a time it was conjectured that no two powerful numbers differed by $6$. But then Narkiewicz found $7^325^2=463^2+6$. – Gerry Myerson Jul 31 '21 at 12:49
  • 1
    Yes, this solves equation $x^3y^2=z^2+6$ with $H=42$. Because $42<46$, and I am moving in order, you may guess that I have already solved this equation and found this solution. By the way, for a similar equation $x^3y^2=z^2-6$ the smallest solution I found is $19^3(755 031 379)^2=(62 531 004125)^2-6$. – Bogdan Grechuk Jul 31 '21 at 12:58
  • 8
    Unless I made an error, the first two equations and the symmetric one define smooth cubic surfaces. It would be interesting to calculate the Brauer group of the surfaces and determine whether there is a Brauer-Manin obstruction to solutions. If not, I suspect one can use techniques as in Heath-Brown's paper "The density of zeros of forms for which weak approximation fails" to guess the asymptotics for the number of solutions and make predictions about when one should be found. – Will Sawin Jul 31 '21 at 13:51
  • add the "big-list" tag? – Gottfried Helms Aug 16 '21 at 10:49
  • 7
    @Gottfried, since there haven't been any answers posted at all, I'd say it's a little premature to tag the question with big-list. – Gerry Myerson Aug 16 '21 at 13:13
  • Hmm, the paper is not up to date, eg (51) is now known to have no solutions. I guess this is because it is in the form it will appear when published? – David Roberts Aug 20 '21 at 12:00
  • 6
    If you look at the submission history, you will see that the paper has been submitted on the 2nd of August. So, equation (51) has been posed as an open problem in my paper submitted 2nd of August and then has been resolved in a later paper submitted 5th of August. It is a question to arxiv moderators why they needed 18 days to check that my paper is of sufficiently good quality to be accepted to the arXiv. – Bogdan Grechuk Aug 20 '21 at 12:37
  • 1
    @Bogdan that is odd, I agree, and rather unfortunate. – David Roberts Aug 28 '21 at 10:36
  • 3
    @WillSawin Is there software available for determining whether there is a Brauer-Manin obsruction? – Timothy Chow Sep 06 '21 at 03:15
  • 2
    @TimothyChow This is a great question, which I do not know the answer to, but was also wondering about. – Will Sawin Sep 06 '21 at 03:18
  • 2
    Computing the Brauer-Manin obstruction to rational points on a smooth projective cubic surface is something one can always do in principle, and usually in practice. In the past I've written various snippets of code implementing some steps in the procedure, but it's the kind of calculation that benefits from a bit of human input. It wouldn't surprise me if, say, Stephan Elsenhans were to have some fairly general code. However, the obstruction to integral points on an affine cubic surface is another matter: the Brauer group can get bigger and have transcendental elements. – Martin Bright Sep 08 '21 at 13:09
  • 1
    A code for rational points would also be useful, at least we could automatically eliminate all equations which, for this reason, have no rational points (and hence no integer points). Starting with H=31, my current program (that eliminates only trivial equations) returns too many equations, and it becomes a nightmare to, by hand, solve almost all these equations and leave only the most interesting ones to be posted here. Some kind of non-trivial automation is a must to continue. – Bogdan Grechuk Sep 08 '21 at 13:24
  • The surface $y (x^3-y) =z^3+3 $ can be written as $z^3 + 3 + (y- x^3/2)^2 = x^6/4$, so as degree $6$ cyclic cover of $\mathbb P^2$ branched over an elliptic curve. This is a smooth rational surface, albeit one with very high Picard rank. If we look for solutions with $x \approx M$, $y \approx M^3$, $z \approx M^2$, we heuristiclly get $\approx 1$ solution, so maybe this one will also see logarithmic growth of solutions, or maybe the Brauer-Manin obstruction or the Picard rank messes with it. – Will Sawin Sep 08 '21 at 13:57
  • 1
    Also note that $y(x^3−y)=z^3+3$ has a few rational solutions such as $x = 604/1323$ , $y = 8$, $z = -5353/1323$ per this set of Reddit comments https://old.reddit.com/r/math/comments/pk8bit/which_hilbert_unsolved_do_you_find_most_intriguing/hc3y0fq/ (I told the person to make a comment here but they don't apparently have enough Mathoverflow karma to do so so I'm .) – JoshuaZ Sep 08 '21 at 23:06
  • 3
    Can anyone recommend the best place where I could create a website about this project, with many hundreds of equations, solved and unsolved? It should be free and easy to use, support latex, and allow everyone to add the content (e.g. solutions to the equations). In fact, community wiki question on Mathoverflow would perfectly satisfy all these requirements, but I am not sure this would be appropriate on Mathoverlow. – Bogdan Grechuk Sep 15 '21 at 14:29
  • 7
    @BogdanGrechuk A wordpress blog would work reasonably well: each equation could have its own blog post for discussion, as well as various tags ("H=46", "3-monomial", etc.) that one could use for navigation, and one could have additional pages that organize the equations in various ways (either updated by hand or by some automatic script). Alternatively one could look at databases such as the L-function and modular form database https://www.lmfdb.org/ for inspiration. – Terry Tao Sep 16 '21 at 14:52
  • 1
    @JoshuaZ: The nicest solution Magma found for $y(x^3-y)=z^3+3$ so far is $(x,y,z)=(13/3,81,3)$ with bound $2^{11}$. I'll let it run for a while. – Maksym Voznyy Jan 14 '22 at 16:46
  • 1
    @JoshuaZ: The second (still rational) solution for $y(x^3-y)=z^3+3$ is $(5/3, -108, -23)$, and the two connected ones: $(-13/3,-81,3)$ and $(-5/3,108,-23)$. – Maksym Voznyy Jan 14 '22 at 19:54
  • place where I could create a website: You could try a Google Sheet with links to Google Docs for separate equations. Apparently, this add-on instantly converts every math equation in your document into LaTeX images.

    – Maksym Voznyy Jan 14 '22 at 19:58
  • 1
    @MaksymVoznyy Did you brute force these completely or did you do something to narrow your search parameter? – JoshuaZ Jan 14 '22 at 22:00
  • @JoshuaZ: I used the PointSearch intrinsic in Magma. The code (on my MEGA) can be run on Magma Calculator online, it finishes in 70 seconds. It is running bound $2^{13}$ now, no integers results yet. If you have access to the installed Mathematica / Wolfram Alpha, their FindInstance / Reduce might be of use. – Maksym Voznyy Jan 15 '22 at 02:11
  • 1
    @JoshuaZ: Bound $2^{13}$ took 10 hours. One more rational solution $(50/3, -2538, -263)$ and $(-50/3, 2538, -263)$. Denominator of $x$ prefers to be $3$ so far. – Maksym Voznyy Jan 15 '22 at 04:09
  • 1
    @JoshuaZ: Bound $2^{14}$ finished in 31 hours with no new results. It might be an interesting homework exercise (e.g., for my Python students) to extend a sequence of integer solutions for $(y,z)$ (and then to build an infinite sequence of them, if possible), when $x=a/3$ for an integer $a$. It seems that we'd learn something new in the process. Bound $2^{15}$ would finish in 4 days, I'll pause PointsSearch for now. – Maksym Voznyy Jan 16 '22 at 16:46
  • @JoshuaZ: Although not very numerous, but there exist rational solutions for the shortest equation $y(x^3-y)=z^4+1$. – Maksym Voznyy Jan 16 '22 at 22:28
  • @JoshuaZ: One more rational for $y(x^3-y)=z^3+3$ is $(52/3, 1683126, -14135)$ and $(-52/3, -1683126, -14135)$. Here I narrowed the search suggesting $x=a/3$ and pushed the bound up to $2^{22}$. – Maksym Voznyy Jan 16 '22 at 22:37
  • 1
    @MaksymVoznyy Hmm, so we have multiple points which are two integer values and one with denominator of 3. This makes me suspect that proving this equation doesn't have any integer solutions is going to be tough. – JoshuaZ Jan 17 '22 at 02:44
  • $(x,y,z)$=(730/9,533628,117),(13604/3,90230511816,6480837) other solutions of $y (x^3 - y) = z^3 + 3$. – Dmitry Ezhov Oct 10 '23 at 10:42
  • More general remark, it might be nice to have all of the "tough" equations that are done by this project to be in a single file somewhere with explanations for each. It might be a handy reference for techniques for people (e.g. me) who are only so-so with solving Diophantine equations but who frequently need to do so. – JoshuaZ Feb 06 '24 at 16:43
  • Yes, I am doing exactly this, but I also included a lot of interesting equations that I was able to solve myself without asking and as a result "single file" became a book, which will be published with Springer soon (I plan to submit within a week or two). Also, today I have prepared a "single file" with the list of all current OPEN equations from my book, it is available at https://diofeq.wordpress.com/list-of-the-smallest-open-equations/ – Bogdan Grechuk Feb 06 '24 at 17:25

3 Answers3

31

The equation $$ x^3 + y^3 + z^3 + xyz = 5 $$ is solvable in integers. For example, take $$ x=-3028982, \quad y=-3786648, \quad z=3480565. $$ Verification is straightforward, but I would like to add more details how this solution has been found. If we just try $x$ and $y$ in order and then solve for $z$, then there are $10^{12}$ pairs $(x,y)$ even up to a million, hence finding the solution above was out of reach, at least for my computer.

Instead, I have noticed that linear change of variables $$ y \to y - z, \quad x \to x + 3 y $$ reduces the equation to $$ -5 + x^3 + 9 x^2 y + 27 x y^2 + 28 y^3 + x y z - x z^2 = 0 $$ from which we can see that $28y^3-5$ is divisible by $x$. Hence, we may choose any $y$, then choose $x$ among the divisors of $28y^3-5$ and solve the resulting quadratic equation in $z$. This allows to find the above solution in just a few hours on standard PC.

Bogdan Grechuk
  • 5,947
  • 1
  • 25
  • 42
  • 3
    Nice, +1! If I may ask, how did you notice that particular change of variables (or did you just try several simple linear changes)? – Noah Schweber Feb 17 '22 at 18:51
  • 4
    I made substitution $y \to y-z$ to cancel $z^3$ and made the equation quadratic in $z$. The term near $z^2$ in this quadratic equation was $(3y-x)$, which suggested the second substitution. – Bogdan Grechuk Feb 17 '22 at 19:13
  • 1
    I have added new smallest open symmetric equation to the question: $x^3+x+y^3+y+z^3+z = x y z + 1$ with $H=39$. A similar transformation applies, which allows me in 24 hours check for solutions up to $|y+z|\leq 5,000,000$. No solutions found. – Bogdan Grechuk Feb 19 '22 at 08:31
  • 1
    After the new smallest open equation with $H=39$, the next symmetric equation the program returned has been $x^3+y^3+z^3-xyz=11$ with $H=43$. I used similar transformation, then did a lot of optimizations in the code, and then run it for a week. After a few days, the search returned the solution $x=-106179597, y=-530403428, z=567068662$. This is the first equation in this project such that in the smallest known solution all variables exceed $10^8$ in absolute value. In fact, I think such solutions are the largest ones that can be found by a direct search on one standard PC. – Bogdan Grechuk Mar 09 '22 at 09:48
5

The equation $$y^2 - x^3y + z^3 + 3 = 0$$ has no solutions. Let $t = x^3 - 2y$. Then $$x^6 - 4z^3 = t^2 + 12$$ Modulo 9 analysis shows that $t$ is not divisible by 3. Modulo 32 analysis shows that $t$ is odd or is divisible by 4. Consider this equation as an equation in the ring $\mathbb{Z}[\omega]$, $\omega = \frac{-1 + i\sqrt{3}}{2}$. All the facts about Eisenstein integers used in the proof are from the Wikipedia article in the "Eisenstein integers" section. Proofs of all statements are contained, for example, in the book Ireland, Rosen "A classical introduction to modern number theory". Let $\pi \in \mathbb{Z}[\omega]$ be a prime divisor of $t^2 + 12$. Modulo $\pi^{\nu_{\pi}(t^2 + 12)}$ analysis shows that, either $3 \mid \nu_{\pi}(t^2 + 12)$ or $2$ is a cubic residue modulo $\pi$. The idea of solution is to use cubic reciprocity: $\left(\frac{\alpha}{\beta}\right)_3 = \left(\frac{\beta}{\alpha}\right)_3$ for any primary numbers $\alpha$, $\beta$. Primary number is the number of the form $(3n \pm 1) + (3m)\omega$. We need to consider 2 cases

Case 1. $t \equiv 1 \pmod{2}$. We can assume that $t \equiv 2 \pmod{3}$, because $-t$ is a solution whenever $t$ is a solution. $$t^2 + 12 = (t + 2\sqrt{3}i)(t - 2\sqrt{3}i) = (t + 2 + 4\omega)(t - 2 - 4\omega)$$ \begin{equation*} \begin{split} \left(\frac{2}{t + 2 + 4\omega}\right)_3 = \left(\frac{2}{\omega(t + 2 + 4\omega)}\right)_3 = \left(\frac{2}{-4 + (t - 2)\omega}\right)_3 = \\ = \left(\frac{-4 + (t - 2)\omega}{2}\right)_3 = \left(\frac{\omega}{2}\right)_3 = \omega \end{split} \end{equation*} Hence, $t + 2 + 4\omega$ has prime divisor $\pi$ for which 2 is a cubic nonresidue and $\nu_{\pi}(t + 2 + 4\omega) \ne 0 \pmod{3}$. This contradicts previous statement that $t^2 + 12$ cannot have such divisors.

Case 2. $t = 4r$. We can assume that $r \equiv 2 \pmod{3}$, because $-r$ is a solution whenever $r$ is a solution. $$t^2 + 12 = 4(2r + i\sqrt{3})(2r - i\sqrt{3}) = 4(2r + 1 + 2\omega)(2r - 1 - 2\omega)$$ \begin{equation*} \begin{split} \left(\frac{2}{2r + 1 + 2\omega}\right)_3 = \left(\frac{2}{\omega(2r + 1 + 2\omega)}\right)_3 = \left(\frac{2}{-2 + (2r - 1)\omega}\right)_3 = \\ = \left(\frac{-2 + (2r - 1)\omega}{2}\right)_3 = \left(\frac{-\omega}{2}\right)_3 = \omega \end{split} \end{equation*} Hence, $2r + 1 + 2\omega$ has prime divisor $\pi$ for which 2 is a cubic nonresidue and $\nu_{\pi}(2r + 1 + 2\omega) \ne 0 \pmod{3}$. This contradicts previous statement that $t^2 + 12$ cannot have such divisors.

Denis Shatrov
  • 933
  • 1
  • 4
  • 13
4

I am very happy to see that the equation $$ y^2-x^3y+z^3+3 = 0, $$ which has been the smallest open equation for over two years, has now been solved by Denis Shatrov! Here, I would like to present an alternative argument which (while being longer and not self-contained because it uses some basic facts from the theory of quadratic forms and class group) works entirely over the integers. This proof is joint with Denis, all main ideas are his, all mistakes (if any) are mine.

We will need the following well-known facts.

Fact 1: A prime $p$ is a factor of $f(x)=x^3-2$ for some integer $x$ if and only if $p=3$, or $p \equiv 2(\text{mod}\, 3)$, or $p$ can be represented as $p=u^2+27v^2$ for some integers $u,v$.

Fact 2: Let $F$ be the principal form of discriminant $D$. Let $m$ be an odd positive integer with prime factorization $m=\prod_{i=1}^k p_i^{\alpha_i}$. Assume that, for each $i=1,\dots, k$ either (i) $p_i$ can be represented by $F$, or (ii) $\alpha_i$ is divisible by the class number $h(D)$. Then $m$ can be represented by $F$ but cannot be represented by any other (inequivalent) form $F'$ of the same discriminant.

Fact 3: For $D=-108$, the class group $H(-108)$ has three elements: the identity elements consisting on the forms equivalent to $u^2+27v^2$, and two other elements consisting on the forms equivalent to $4u^2\pm 2uv+7v^2$. In particular, $h(-108)=3$.

Fact 1 is a well-known characterization of primes $p$ modulo which $2$ is a cubic residue. Fact 2 is a direct corollary from, for example, Theorem 4.26 in [1]. Fact 3 is from standard tables of class groups of small discriminants, see, for example, pp 383-386 in [2].

A compbination of Fact 2 and Fact 3 implies the following lemma, conjectured by Denis Shatrov.

Lemma: Assume that $t$ is an integer such that $t \not \equiv 0(\text{mod} \, 3)$ and $t \not \equiv 2(\text{mod} \, 4)$, and let $t^2+12 = \prod_{i=1}^k p_i^{\alpha_i}$ be the prime factorization of $t^2+12$. Then there exists $i$ such that $\alpha_i$ is not divisible by $3$, and $p_i$ is an odd prime not representable as $u^2+27v^2$ for integers $u,v$.

Proof: Let $m=t^2+12$ if $t$ is odd, and $m=(t^2+12)/4$ if $t$ is divisible by $4$. Then $m$ is an odd positive integer, not divisible by $3$. If, by contradiction, in prime factorization $m=\prod p_i^{\alpha_i}$ we have, for all $i$, either $\alpha_i$ is divisible by $3$, or $p_i$ is of the form $u^2+27v^2$ for integers $u,v$, then Fact 2 applied with $F=u^2+27v^2$ and $D=-108$ would imply that $m$ cannot be represented by any other (inequivalent) form $F'$ of the same discriminant. In other words, $m$ is not of the form $4u^2+2uv+7v^2$ for integers $u,v$.

Let us now prove that $m$ is always of this form. Indeed, if $t$ is odd, then either $t=6r+1$ or $t=6r-1$ for some integer $r$. In the first case, $$ m=(6r+1)^2+12 = 4(-2r+1)^2+2(-2r+1)(2r+1)+7(2r+1)^2, $$ that is, $m$ is of the form $4u^2+2uv+7v^2$ for $u=-2r+1$ and $v=2r+1$. Similarly, in the second case, $$ m=(6r-1)^2+12 = 4(-2r-1)^2+2(-2r-1)(2r-1)+7(2r-1)^2. $$ If $t$ is even, then it is divisible by $4$ but not by $3$, and must therefore be equal to either $4(3r+1)$ or $4(3r-1)$. In the first case, $$ m = (t^2+12)/4 = 4(3r+1)^2+3 = 4(-2r)^2+2(-2r)(2r+1)+7(2r+1)^2, $$ while in the second case $$ m = (t^2+12)/4 = 4(3r-1)^2+3 = 4(-2r)^2+2(-2r)(2r-1)+7(2r-1)^2. $$ This finishes the proof of the lemma.

Now we are ready to prove that our equation, or, equivalently, equation $$ x^6 - 4z^3 = t^2+12 $$ has no integer solutions. Modulo $9$ analysis of this equation shows that $t$ is not divisible by $3$. Further, if $t$ is even, then so is $x$, and, by writing $x=2u$, $t=2v$ and cancelling $4$, we obtain $16u^6-z^3=v^2+3$. Modulo $8$ analysis of this equation shows that $v$ cannot be odd, hence $t \not \equiv 2(\text{mod} \, 4)$. Thus, by the Lemma, in the prime factorization $t^2+12 = \prod_{i=1}^k p_i^{\alpha_i}$ there exists $i$ such that $\alpha_i$ is not divisible by $3$, and $p_i$ is odd and not of the form $u^2+27v^2$ for integers $u,v$. Because $t$ is not divisible by $3$, $p_i>3$. Because $p_i$ is a divisor of $t^2+12$, this implies that $\left(\frac{-3}{p_i}\right)=1$, or $p_i \equiv 1(\text{mod}\, 3)$. Thus, by Fact 1, $p_i$ is not a divisor of $X^3-2$ for any integer $X$.

Now, write $x=p_i^\beta x_1$ and $z=p_i^\gamma z_1$, where $\text{gcd}(x_1,p_i)=\text{gcd}(z_1,p_i)=1$. Then $$ t^2+12 = x^6 - 4z^3 = p_i^{6\beta} x_1^6 - 4 p_i^{3\gamma} z_1^3. $$ If $6\beta > 3\gamma$, then $\alpha_i = 3\gamma$. Similarly, if $6\beta < 3\gamma$, then $\alpha_i = 6\beta$, in both cases a contradiction with the fact that $\alpha_i$ is not divisible by $3$. Hence, we must have $6\beta = 3\gamma < \alpha_i$, thus $x_1^6-4z_1^3$ is divisible by $p_i$. Now, $\text{gcd}(x_1,p_i)=1$ implies the existence of integer $\overline{x}_1$ such that $x_1\overline{x}_1 \equiv 1(\text{mod}\, p_i)$. Then, modulo $p_i$, $$ 0 = -2 \overline{x}_1^6 (x_1^6-4z_1^3) = -2(x_1\overline{x}_1)^6+(2\overline{x}_1^2z_1)^3 = -2+X^3, $$ where $X=2\overline{x}_1^2z_1$. This contradiction finishes the proof.

[1] Buell, Duncan A., Binary quadratic forms: classical theory and modern computations, Springer-Verlag, New York,1989, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4542-1

[2] Rose, H. E., A course in number theory, The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 1994

Bogdan Grechuk
  • 5,947
  • 1
  • 25
  • 42