Тёмный

Can I ever be natural? 

Michael Penn
Подписаться 305 тыс.
Просмотров 75 тыс.
50% 1

🌟Support the channel🌟
Patreon: / michaelpennmath
Merch: teespring.com/...
My amazon shop: www.amazon.com...
🟢 Discord: / discord
🌟my other channels🌟
Course videos: / @mathmajor
non-math podcast: / @thepennpavpodcast7878
🌟My Links🌟
Personal Website: www.michael-pen...
Instagram: / melp2718
Randolph College Math: www.randolphcol...
Research Gate profile: www.researchga...
Google Scholar profile: scholar.google...
🌟How I make Thumbnails🌟
Canva: partner.canva....
Color Pallet: coolors.co/?re...
🌟Suggest a problem🌟
forms.gle/ea7P...

Опубликовано:

 

2 окт 2024

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 238   
@GiornoYoshikage
@GiornoYoshikage Год назад
The interesting thing is that 7 is the value of infinite nested root √(42+(√42+√(42+√(...)))). Actually, if you replace 42 with x*(x-1) for x>1, the limit will be exactly 'x'.
@JeanYvesBouguet
@JeanYvesBouguet Год назад
Excellent observation! Making 42 a really special number 😊
@Neodynium.the_permanent_magnet
@@JeanYvesBouguet Not so special. Take any √(m+√(m+x)) and do m = x² - x For instance x=5, √(m+√(m+5)) take m = 25 - 5 ...
@vetbaitednv
@vetbaitednv Год назад
@@Neodynium.the_permanent_magnet 42 is certainly a special number though
@Rougarou99
@Rougarou99 Год назад
@@Neodynium.the_permanent_magnet I wonder if there is a name for numbers that fit this pattern. I.E. some pattern n(x), where n(7)=42, n(5)=20,...
@Neodynium.the_permanent_magnet
@@Rougarou99 It works for any N
@dlevi67
@dlevi67 Год назад
Case 2 can be even more quickly ruled out through parity. (4n² + 29 is odd, (2n+2)² is even)
@anshumanagrawal346
@anshumanagrawal346 Год назад
Exactly
@aaademed
@aaademed Год назад
There is much simpler way to find n from 4n^2 + 29 - is square Lets 4n^2 + 29 = k^2 then (k-2n)(k+2n) = 29 | 29 is a prime number so 29 = 1*29 then we got system of linear equations: k = 2n + 1 => k = 15 k = 29 - 2n => n = 7 The rest goes the same
@doodle1726
@doodle1726 Год назад
This is good
@swenji9113
@swenji9113 Год назад
Yes it's a shame not to use the fact that 29 is prime, given the opportunity
@anshumanagrawal346
@anshumanagrawal346 Год назад
Ikr
@lewsouth1539
@lewsouth1539 Год назад
Yeah, that's how I did it. For any odd prime p, the only natural numbers whose squares differ by p are (p ± 1)/2. Guess I'll delete my comment now....
@galveston8929
@galveston8929 Год назад
Another way: let sqrt(m+7)=a and sqrt(m+a)=b, then m+7=a^2 and b^2-a=m, replacing m from the latter to the former eq we have: b^2-a+7=a^2, after multiplying by 4 and adding 1 to both side, we can rearrange the last eq into (2a+1)^2-(2b)^2 = 29. Hence (2a+2b+1)(2a-2b+1)=29 which is prime therefore it can only be factored into 1 and 29. 2a+2b+1 is the bigger factor thus 2a+2b+1=29 and 2a-2b+1=1, solving for a and b we get a=b=7 thus m=b^2 - a =42.
@averagegamer9513
@averagegamer9513 Год назад
You wrote the the difference of squares wrong, it should be (2a-2b+1)(2a+2b+1) as you wrote later.
@galveston8929
@galveston8929 Год назад
thanks for noticing the obvious typo. Just fixed it.
@leif1075
@leif1075 Год назад
@@galveston8929 why would you or anyone think to multiply by 4 at all though or multiply by anything even?
@bktreesdoesmc8957
@bktreesdoesmc8957 Год назад
@@leif1075 from a^2 + a = b^2 - 7, you can complete the square in terms of a and obtain (a+1/2)^2=b^2+29/4, which motivates the multiplication by 4 to obtain a difference of integer squares.
@galveston8929
@galveston8929 Год назад
@@leif1075 that's part of completing the squre. When you do this many times, then you'll do it by heart.
@davewpearson
@davewpearson Год назад
42 the answer to life the universe and everything !!!
@normanstevens4924
@normanstevens4924 Год назад
Surely it's simpler if you notice that if 4n^2 + 29 is a perfect square, p^2 say, then p^2 - (2n)^2 = 29 and therefore (p - 2n)(p + 2n) = 29. So as p + 2n is larger of the two factors we must have p + 2n = 29 and p - 2n = 1. Thus p = 15 and n = 7.
@joshcarter1018
@joshcarter1018 Год назад
While there is nothing wrong with what you have written, and indeed (at least as far as I'm aware) it is a simpler solution, you should probably have specified that your last line is only possible because 29 is a prime (and hence irreducible).
@jacobgoldman5780
@jacobgoldman5780 Год назад
Case 3: We have 4n^2+29=(2n+3)^2 so 4n^2+29=4n^2+12n+9 so 12n=20 which does not provide another solution.
@NotoriousSRG
@NotoriousSRG Год назад
Hey folks - I edited this video. Let me know if you think the sound is better since I tried to clean it up.
@goodplacetostop2973
@goodplacetostop2973 Год назад
Oh so that’s why it wasn’t live at the usual time 😂
@NotoriousSRG
@NotoriousSRG Год назад
Nah. This was edited a couple days ago lol
@NotoriousSRG
@NotoriousSRG Год назад
I don’t control when it goes up i just edit lol
@roryisatall1
@roryisatall1 Год назад
There is a bit of a thing everytime he says "s", but other than that sounds great
@NotoriousSRG
@NotoriousSRG Год назад
@@roryisatall1 thank you for that feedback. I can try on future videos to fix that.
@AnAverageItalian
@AnAverageItalian Год назад
The 3rd case for n doesn't work out, because 4n²+29=(2n+3)² 4n²+29=4n²+12n+9 As always, the 4n² cancels out, so we get that 12n=20 n=20/12=5/3 which isn't an integer, so it doesn't count here
@ariel_haymarket
@ariel_haymarket Год назад
Came here with the same thought and glad to see someone else had come to the same conclusion
@Grassmpl
@Grassmpl Год назад
Easier just to check mod 3.
@AnAverageItalian
@AnAverageItalian Год назад
@@Grassmpl oh really? I'm not that familiar with modulo stuff, could you show me?
@afa12345
@afa12345 Год назад
@@AnAverageItalian you can substract 3 on the right equation to get 4n^2 +29 = (2n)^2 (mod 3), then eliminate the n we have 29 = 0 (mod 3) which is simply wrong
@sumongus
@sumongus Год назад
@@afa12345 subtract*
@andy-kg5fb
@andy-kg5fb Год назад
05:30 we can assume (2n)²+29=k² for natural k. So we get 29=(k+2n)(k-2n) Which as k and n are positive integers, and 29 is prime, there is only one possibility, k+2n=29 K-2n=1 so we get n=7.
@petraveryanov2572
@petraveryanov2572 Год назад
My solution: sqrt(m + 7) should be integer, so m = k*k - 7, then all we need is k*k - 7 + k to be a square. We can check all k < 7 and for all k > 7 this cannot be square since k * k < k*k - 7 + k < (k + 1)*(k + 1). So k = 7 is only solution and m = 42
@matthieubrilman9407
@matthieubrilman9407 Год назад
Another solution : Let m and q be such that m+7=q² (1) m + √(m+7) = q² - 7 + q = q² + 2q + 1 - (q+8) and hence m +√(m+7) < (q+1)² (2) Also, if q > 7 then m > 42 hence m + √(m+7) > m + 7 = q². From (1) and (2) we get that if q >7 then q² < m + √(m+7) < (q+1)² and hence √(m + √(m+7)) cannot be an integer. After that, all that is left is to check the values of q from 1 to 7.
@goodplacetostop2973
@goodplacetostop2973 Год назад
12:58
@MyOneFiftiethOfADollar
@MyOneFiftiethOfADollar Год назад
In an age of specialization, your have procured a micro-niche. "The human time stamp of a signature phrase"
@Sesquipedalia
@Sesquipedalia Год назад
guys idk what these symbols are. why do we need to find men?
@thatdude_93
@thatdude_93 Год назад
Title sounds like you’re having an existential crisis
@guidomartinez5099
@guidomartinez5099 Год назад
For 4:50 onwards, 4n^2 is already a perfect square, and the consecutive squares are always some odd number away, so 4n^2 and 4n^2 + 29 could be 196 and 225 (the largest possible answers), giving n=7; or smaller squares separated by an (odd) number of these "steps". But since 29 is prime, there are no others. (Then find m as you did.)
@jursamaj
@jursamaj Год назад
I don't think 29 being prime gives the result you think it does. The 'step' between squares wouldn't be 29 divided by the step size. Instead, for a single step difference, you look for the smaller square to be (29-1^2)/(2*1)=7. For the next odd step, it would be (29-3^2)/(2*3), then (29-5^2)/(2*5), etc.
@guidomartinez5099
@guidomartinez5099 Год назад
@@jursamaj My reasoning is that if they are 3 odd numbers away, then call them k-2, k, and k+2, so the difference is 3k, which cannot be since 29 is prime. Same for any other odd number.
@lewsouth1539
@lewsouth1539 Год назад
@@guidomartinez5099 Exactly right. If p is prime, p = h^2 - k^2 = (h + k)(h - k) gives h + k = p & h - k = 1 as the only possible factors.
@criskity
@criskity Год назад
Finally found the question to the answer to life, the universe, and everything!
@DavesMathVideos
@DavesMathVideos Год назад
Once again it would seem that one can find a solution, m=42 by inspection but the difficulty lies in proving it's the only solution.
@DavidGuild
@DavidGuild Год назад
Yes, I saw that solution immediately by thinking "what if the inner sqrt is also 7" but it's not obvious that's the only solution.
@MrTrollo2
@MrTrollo2 Год назад
But that also wasn't the question in the video title
@dugong369
@dugong369 Год назад
Or, let y=sqrt(m+7). Then m=y^2 -7. Then the original expression converts to sqrt(y^2-7+y). Therefore y^2+y-7 must be a perfect square. But this is always less than (y+1)^2=y^2+2y+1, and for y>7, it is greater than y^2 (therefore in between 2 consecutive squares and not a perfect square). So we only have to check seven values of y in y^2+y-7 to see if any is a perfect square, and get y=7. We know m=y^2-7, so m=42.
@thbb1
@thbb1 Год назад
found m=42 by noticing that: m+7 must be a perfect square, otherwise m+sqrt(m+7) can't be a perfect square. Thus, m must be divisible by 7 and adding 7 to it has to be a perfect square too, which leaves 6*7=42 as the only possible solution. This gives me m=42 and n=7 as the only possible solution.
@CRGreathouse
@CRGreathouse Год назад
You need m + sqrt(m+7) to be a square, so in particular it has to be a natural number, so m+7 is a square. Call it m+7 = s^2 so m = s^2 - 7 and the goal is for s^2 + s - 7 to be a square. This is between (s+1)^2 and s^2 unless s is small; in particular either s^2 + s - 7 = s^2 or s^2 + s - 7
@marcushendriksen8415
@marcushendriksen8415 Год назад
What a fun problem and solution! I couldn't help modifying the problem and giving it a go myself!
@sameerk7151
@sameerk7151 Год назад
Just came here to see if my solution is right I solved it in 20 secs just by THUMBNAIL 💀 Proud to be an Aisan
@theartisticactuary
@theartisticactuary Год назад
Have you just discovered the ultimate question of life, the universe and everything? We've had the answer for a while but have been struggling to work out what the question was.
@stereodude016
@stereodude016 Год назад
Nice reference to the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy saga.
@Terence3184
@Terence3184 Год назад
set sqrt(m+7)=n and m=n^2-7 then sqrt(m+sqrt(m+7))=sqrt(n^2+n-7) between n and n+1
@0114mercury
@0114mercury Год назад
If you say that m = n^2-7 (which is must be), the algebra becomes much simpler.
@rialtho_the_magnificent
@rialtho_the_magnificent Год назад
42, always a good 'guess' I guess......
@s4623
@s4623 Год назад
7:27 it's much easier to move the square term to the right and factor because after you factor the difference of square it has to be even [ (2n+2-2n)(2n+2+2n) = 2(4n+2) ] and you have an odd number on the left. Same applies to the (2n+3) case; (2n+3-2n)(2n+3+2n) = 3(4n+3) which is divisible by 3 but 29 is not divisible by 3. Also slightly easier for (2n+1) because you don't have to multiply it out as one of the factor becomes one when you do the difference of squares: (2n+1-2n)(2n+1+2n) = 1(4n+1) = 29 so n = 7
@speedsterh
@speedsterh Год назад
Super easy to follow explanations, thank you Michael
@EternalLoveAnkh
@EternalLoveAnkh Год назад
If we replace 7 with an arbitrary x, then m = x^2 - x. RJ
@demenion3521
@demenion3521 Год назад
my intuition at the start told me that it's unlikely for there to be 2 perfect squares that fit into the radicals in the presented form, so my guess was that the inner root must be the same as the outer root and hence sqrt(m+7)=7 which directly gives the solution m=42. of course it's not a prove that there are no other solutions, but it felt unlikely to me
@filippochi143
@filippochi143 Год назад
The actual answer to the title is: “Dude what are you talking about, i is always imaginary”.
@lewsouth1539
@lewsouth1539 Год назад
Exactly what I thought-of course; it's only logical.
@filippochi143
@filippochi143 Год назад
@@lewsouth1539 LLAP, other Nimoy.
@johnyjohnjohnson1317
@johnyjohnjohnson1317 Год назад
thanks for explaining why the "+" case goes wrong
@MrJdcirbo
@MrJdcirbo Год назад
We now have the question to the answer...
@CTJ2619
@CTJ2619 Год назад
haha 42 “pretty popular number on the internet”
@pseudo_goose
@pseudo_goose Год назад
You can find the 42 solution pretty quickly, by making the substitution sqrt(m+7)=7. That makes the outer radical equal to the inner radical, and since the inner is a perfect square from that equation, the outer is also. From there it is easy to solve for m=42
@honourabledoctoredwinmoria3126
Yes. All the math is only needed to prove there is never another solution. It's pretty trivial to guess that m = 42 is a solution.
@moonshine8233
@moonshine8233 Год назад
I read the title and really thought this was going to be about something other than math.
@robonthecob5092
@robonthecob5092 Год назад
Can someone please explain to me how he got 4n^2+16n+16 from 4n^2+32? at 5:45
@DavidGuild
@DavidGuild Год назад
That part is a little odd, I agree. What he's trying to do is find a perfect square that's just slightly bigger than 4n² + 29 to be the upper bound. That square is (4n² + 4)² or 4n²+16n+16. The +32 value is just an intermediate step which establishes the inequality (assuming n>=1, which it is). It's confusing because he works through it in the "equality" order, so the +16 value seems to just appear out of nowhere. It makes more sense if you start with that and go backwards.
@truejeffanderson
@truejeffanderson Год назад
If x = √(m+√(m+c)), then is it always true that natural x = c? Update: there's some recursion. Can we use: if x = √(m+x) then x = √(m+√(m+x)) if we knew that the initial condition in the first sentence was always true, then the problem can be reduced to: 7 = √(m+7) Where then m is easy
@marcushendriksen8415
@marcushendriksen8415 Год назад
This problem inspired me to try another problem: given a natural number c, find natural numbers m and n such that root(m + root(m + c)) = n. Following the same basic method that Michael showed us, I worked out a really quick way to do it: find the odd factors of (4c+1); these will be called "k values". For each value of k, calculate (4c+1-k^2)/4k; each natural number that results will be a possible "n value" (note that if 4k is greater than half the value of 4c+1-k^2, the result cannot be natural). For each possible n value you can get up to 2 possible m values, which are calculated using m = 1/2×(2n^2+1±root(4n^2+4c+1)). In the case where you end up with more than 1 ordered pair, you have to check them manually.
@ЕшгинРамильоглыМагеррамов
Привет, я сейчас в 11 классе и мы считаем интегралы в уме(не шутка). Очень интересное видео, спасибо. Вы решали сборник задач Демидовича по матанализу?
@Valkonymous
@Valkonymous Год назад
My solution: square both sides gets: n^2 = m + sqrt(m+c) (1). Set b=sqrt(m+c) (2) solve (2) for m gets b^2 - c = m. (3) Substitute (2) and (3) into (1) gets n^2 = b^2 - c + b. Two solutions for n to be natural: First b=c (4) gets n^2 = c^2. Substituting (4) into (3) gets m=c^2 - c. Second b=-c-1 (5) gets n^2 = c^2. Substituting (5) into (3) gets m=c^2 + c + 1. Thus at c = 7, m=42 or 57. Check sqrt(42+7) = +/- 7 => 42 +7 = 49 or 42 - 7 = 35. 49 is a perfect square so n is a natural number. sqrt(57+7) = +/- 8 => 57 + 8 = 65, 57-8 = 49. 49 is a perfect square so n is a natural number. Edit, I guess that was supposed to only be a principle root so 42 is the only solution since b must be positive. So the full solution for m is m = {c^2 - c, if c>=0; c^2 + c + 1, if c < 0}
@truejeffanderson
@truejeffanderson Год назад
Find m for y: y = √(m+√(m+7)) Let x be natural where: x = √(m+x) Substitute right side into itself: x = √(m+√(m+x)) If we let x be 7 we have the equation: 7 = √(m+√(m+7)) Depending on the existence of natural: 7 = √(m+7) 49 = m + 7 m = 42 Verify y is natural when m = 42: y = √(m+√(m+7)) y = √(42+√(42+7)) y = √(42+7) y = 7 A solution for m = 42
@carlosdaniellamasbarcenas7244
Let u= sqrt(m+7). u must be a natural because m is a natural number too. Then m=u^2-7. So the problem will turn into sqrt(u^2+u-7) = x, where x belongs to N. Then x^2=u^2+u-7. But this implies that: x^2-u^2=u-7 or (x+u)(x-u)=u-7 If x>= u, then u >=7, but x+u>u-7 , So equality must be satisfied and u=7=> m=42. If x
@youtubenutzer4028
@youtubenutzer4028 Год назад
You can also prove it simpler: Let b = sqrt(m+7) => m = b^2-7 and for sqrt(m+sqrt(m+7)) to be natural we need sqrt(m+7) to be natural. So if m is a solution to our problem then b = sqrt(m+7) is natural and we have sqrt(b^2-7+b) is a natural number in other words b^2+b-7 is a square. But for all b > 7 we know that b^2 < b^2+b-7 < b^2+2b+1 = (b+1)^2. So that we must have b 2 since b = sqrt(m+7). So we check for b = 3,4,5,6,7 and find that b^2+b-7 is only a square if b = 7. Lastly we have to check if m = b^2-7 = 42 is really a solution of our problem and indeed sqrt(42+sqrt(42+7)) =7. Thus m = 42 is the only solution.
@johnny_eth
@johnny_eth Год назад
I just sat the thumbnail and immediately recognized the common sub expression a=sqrt(m+7) and b=sqrt(m+a), and hence assumed a=b and thus m+7=49, just like in the power tower n=x^x^x^...^n. To be more strict, and don't assume anything, just expand further a^2=m+b => a^2-b=m b^2=m+7 => b^2-7=m Then match both a^2-b=b^2-7 And the symmetry is evident, hence a=b=7
@chaosredefined3834
@chaosredefined3834 8 месяцев назад
As another approach... We manage to get that we need 4m^2 + 29 to be a perfect square. Therefore, we have some k such that 4m^2 + 29 = k^2. Let p = k - 2m. Therefore, k = 2m + p. So we have 4m^2 + 29 = (2m + p)^2. Expanding the RHS, we get 4m^2 + 29 = 4m^2 + 4mp + p^2. This means that 29 = 4mp + p^2. But the right hand side is clearly divisible by p. So, 29 has to be divisible by p. That means that p is either -29, -1, 1 or 29. Using an argument similar to what Michael did, we can eliminate -29, -1 and 29. Therefore, the only candidate is p = 1, so we have 4m^2 + 29 = (2m + 1)^2. Solve as Michael did.
@ZekeRaiden
@ZekeRaiden Год назад
Perhaps less elegant, but a convenient process I went through: We know that if (m+7) is not a perfect square, then the whole equation cannot be a natural number. Hence, the possibility space for m is restricted to m = q^2-7 for nonnegative integers q. We can exclude q=0,1,2 because those values would make sqrt(m+7) negative and thus make n imaginary. The first handful of valid m values are 2, 9, 18, 29, 42, 57, 74, which we can use to show both that a solution exists, and that that solution is unique. These are associated with the q values 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. We get the following results from these options, simplifying the sqrt(m+7) parts to just the associated q value. sqrt(2+3) = sqrt(5), invalid (4 shy of 3^2=9) sqrt(9+4) = sqrt(13), invalid (3 shy of 4^2=16) sqrt(18+5) = sqrt(23), invalid (2 shy of 5^2=25) sqrt(29+6) = sqrt(35), invalid (1 shy of 6^2=36) sqrt(42+7) = sqrt(49) = 7, valid! sqrt(57+8) = sqrt(65), invalid (1 above 8^2=64) sqrt(74+9) = sqrt(83), invalid (2 above 9^2=81) Each time, you add 1 to the difference between m+sqrt(m+7) and q^2. This gap grows linearly. However, in order for there to be at least two solutions, there would need to be _quadratic_ growth in that gap. As a result, 7 is the only q value that works, and thus m=42 is the only valid integer solution.
@RexxSchneider
@RexxSchneider Год назад
That's a lot of case checking, and I hate case checking if I don't have to. Let n = √(m + √(m+7)), and note that only the square root of a perfect square can be a natural. If m is a natural, then for m+√(m+7) to be natural, we must have √(m+7) is natural, so (m+7) is a perfect square, call it a^2 (where a ∈ ℕ). So m = a^2 - 7. Substitute for m: n = √(m + √(m+7)) = √(a^2-7 + a). Square both sides: n^2 = a^2 + a - 7. Now rearrange to a quadratic in a: a^2 + a - 7 - n^2 = 0 a = (-1 ± √(1 + 28 + 4n^2))/2 = (√(4n^2 + 29) - 1) / 2. For a to be natural, 4n^2+29 must be a perfect square, call it b^2 (where b ∈ ℕ). So a = (b-1)/2. So b^2 - 4n^2 = 29 or (b+2n)(b-2n) = 29. That has one solution among the naturals, where (b+2n) = 29 and (b-2n) = 1, since 29 has only one positive factorisation, and (b+2n) > (b-2n). That sole solution yields b = 15 and n = 7. Hence a = (b - 1)/2 = 7 and therefore m = a^2 - 7 = 49 - 7 = 42. Check: √(42 + √(42+7)) = √(42 + √49) = √(42 + 7) = √49 = 7 = n, as calculated. There are no more solutions and no cases to check.
@luisisaurio
@luisisaurio Год назад
Sqrt (m+7) must be rational. If not m+sqrt(m+7) is irrational and therefore non squared, so m+7=n^2. n^2+n-7=k^2 -> n^2+n-(7+k^2)=0. We can finish from here just like the video or using the DOQ=Prime argument.
@jeffcieslak5115
@jeffcieslak5115 Год назад
If you generalize it "backwards" - for any Natural n such that root(m + root(m + c)) = n, there are infinitely many integer pairs (m,c) that can satisfy the equation, and for each value of m, c=(n^2-1)^2-m. And (0,n^4) is always a solution, as well. The maximum value of m is n^2. When c=7, there is precisely one m (42) producing one n (7), as demonstrated - but for, say, c=17, there are two pairs that produce different n values: (19,17]) = 5 and (272,17) = 17. c=8 is the lowest positive integer with multiple m and n solutions.
@abrahammekonnen
@abrahammekonnen Год назад
I really liked the discussion on the extraneous solutions, and that 3rd case shouldn't give you a solution.
@danpost5651
@danpost5651 Год назад
I came up with 42 as a valid solution just by thinking about what was under the radicals. If m+7 was a perfect square, then if I can make the inner radical, sqrt(m+7), equal to "7", then the outer radical would be the same thing -- sqrt(m+"7"). Therefore, m+7 should be 49, which makes m equal to 42.
@paca5507
@paca5507 Год назад
11.33 "...42. A pretty popular number on the internet..." Just beautiful.
@lool8421
@lool8421 Год назад
just by looking at it, i just figured out that sqrt(m+7) could be literally the same as sqrt(m+sqrt(m+7)) and therefore sqrt(m+7) = 7 sometimes you might have some weird math intuition, but it's better to always check stuff regardless
@alxjones
@alxjones Год назад
We can get m = 42 pretty much by inspection. After all, if m + 7 is a perfect square, then sqrt( m + 7 ) = k and we ask which k makes m + k a perfect square, which we already know 7 is an answer. To make k = 7 we just need m + 7 = 7^2, or m = 42. Of course, this doesn't prove it's the only solution!
@properlol1340
@properlol1340 Год назад
You can also simply notice 29 is odd, so it is the sum of 2 consective numbers, which means it is thr difference of their squares, namely 14 and 15. From their, since 14=7x2, its square id 4×7^2, which lends 7.
@pietergeerkens6324
@pietergeerkens6324 Год назад
Surely it's basic number theory that the sum of successive gnomons between two perfect squares is divisible by the number of gnomons being summed! It's just an arithmetic series of consecutive odd numbers and: case 1) If of an odd number of terms, then equal to the middle term times the number of terms; and case 2) if of an even number, say 2k, of terms, then equal to the 4k/2 times average term and again divisible by 2k. Thus 29 being prime, the only perfect squares that it can separate are 14^2 and 15^2.
@juandesalgado
@juandesalgado Год назад
42 was easier to find by taking m+7=n^2 and m+n=q^2, then equating n=7=q to satisfy both equations. Of course that says nothing about finding all solutions.
@datguiser
@datguiser Год назад
I just thought: what if we get sqrt (m+7) to equal 7, that way you know the outside sqrt will also be 7. Therefore, 7^2 - 7 = 42. Answer is 42.
@noahdavis3663
@noahdavis3663 Год назад
the answer seems so obvious once you find it out. it could work for any number. if the problem was sqrt(m + sqrt(m + 6)) then it would be 30 since 6^2 - 6 is 30
@Axacqk
@Axacqk Год назад
5:31 "Rewriting" something as something entirely different just because the inequality will still hold is probably the most confusing trick in the entirety of algebra.
@kostasch5686
@kostasch5686 Год назад
At the start you squared the quantity n^2-m. After that you should have kept in mind that m
@middletech
@middletech Год назад
I’m getting lazy. I would of put that equation in to an excell spread sheet and run a bunch of numbers. Yes , I have an engineering degree. Fell free to joke about me.
@paca5507
@paca5507 Год назад
MPenn is just David Lynch of mathematics; the only distinction is MPenn gives solutions...
@Decoffeinato
@Decoffeinato Год назад
I was just like: "If square root of m + 7 is 7, then we have the same problem again and an easy solution". I just looked at the thumbnail, if all values are asked it is naturally harder
@kennethvalbjoern
@kennethvalbjoern Месяц назад
Cool. Nice trick with the bounding inequalities.
@Sfx654
@Sfx654 9 месяцев назад
i saw the video title and ran a python script checking every number. can you imagine my face when i saw the answer? of all the numbers in the universe...
@iyadgaber6780
@iyadgaber6780 8 месяцев назад
sure a nice way to get the day started, talking for myself here. I got a friend to hop on discord and we watched it together first thing in the morning. Keep up the good work!
@kamilnalikowski3186
@kamilnalikowski3186 Год назад
11:04 . There should not be any self checking if you were cautious enough to see that n^2 - m >=0 before squaring at 1:27.
@MeNowDealWIthIt
@MeNowDealWIthIt Год назад
Case 3: 4n^2+29=(2n+3)^2 =4n^2+12n+9 20=12n n is not natural, so no solution there.
@Dalton1294
@Dalton1294 Год назад
Both case 2 and case 3 have solutions if m is allowed to be a rational number and that √(m+√(m+7)) is also allowed to be rational
@end41r53
@end41r53 Год назад
well basically you square the 7 from the equation and substract it and get 42
@XanderOwen24
@XanderOwen24 Год назад
I cant prove it, but it seems for natural numbers A, where A > 0,the only natural number solution to sqrt(m+sqrt(m+A)) is A(A-1). So it generalizes real nicely I think
@ArnaldoMandel
@ArnaldoMandel Год назад
See my reply above.
@joaozin003
@joaozin003 Год назад
I already guessed 42 at the start, because sqrt(42+7)=7, which repeats!
@Terence3184
@Terence3184 Год назад
sqrt(n^2+n-7)=n to get the only solution n=7 m=7^2-7=42
@methodiconion8523
@methodiconion8523 Год назад
I'm sure this video goes into something interesting and important, but 42 jumped at me as an obvious hypothesis.
@Erik-in8fh
@Erik-in8fh Год назад
I just wrote down every square number, its root and itself minus his root and then you see that there is an interception at and only at 7 with m equals 42.
@KingGisInDaHouse
@KingGisInDaHouse Год назад
I just guessed x=42 by looking at the inner radical and seeing what can make it a square.
@Hazelpy
@Hazelpy Год назад
I find this problem very fascinating. I observed that the answer can be found very simply, actually If √(m + √(m + 7)) has to be a natural number, and m also has to be natural, then (m + 7) has to be equal to 7^2. √(m + 7) has to result in 7 so that the following √(m + 7) can be a perfect square. Thus, 7^2 - 7 = m, which also happens to give us our neat little 42 answer. :D
@heartache5742
@heartache5742 Год назад
of course it's that number the answer to life and the universe and everything
@salkabalani1482
@salkabalani1482 Год назад
nice job michael (who needs capital letters anyway?)
@SmartWorkingSmartWorker
@SmartWorkingSmartWorker Год назад
Plugging a^2-7 into m could be much faster.
@andresmartinezcarcel1637
@andresmartinezcarcel1637 Год назад
Shouldn't it be 2n^2 instead of -2n^2 in de quadratic equation?
@krisbrandenberger544
@krisbrandenberger544 Год назад
For the 3rd case, you get n=5/3 which does not give a solution.
@renatomagretti7938
@renatomagretti7938 Год назад
I immediately said 42 from the top of my head, but i didn't know how to prove it
@sababugs1125
@sababugs1125 Год назад
Why didn't you consider the case of 2n+3
@TomJones-tx7pb
@TomJones-tx7pb Год назад
You seem to really like brute forcing problems.
@steve2817
@steve2817 Год назад
m = n^2-7 (n >0) m+sqrt(m+7) = n^2+n-7 = (n+k)^2 If 3 = 7, k >= 0 n = (k^2+7)/(1-2k) k = 0 because n > 0 n = 7, m = 42 (Is there an error in this proof?)
@benleysen
@benleysen Год назад
42 is a popular number? why?
@b33blebrox
@b33blebrox Год назад
Obvious solution - sqrt(m+7) = 7
@abrahammekonnen
@abrahammekonnen Год назад
Very true 42 is a very popular number on the internet.
@FTR0225
@FTR0225 Год назад
You can be whatever you want if you set your mind to it
@pinguino55h40
@pinguino55h40 Год назад
Assume m + 7 is a square n^2, then m = n^2 - 7. So the expression becomes sqrt(n^2 + n - 7), thus n^2 + n - 7 needs to be a perfect square. Notice the distance between two squares (n + k)^2 - n^2 is exactly 2kn + k^2 for any integer k. Since n^2 is a square, then n - 7 needs to be a number of the form 2kn + k^2 so that n^2 + n - 7 is a square => n = (k^2 + 7)/1 - 2k, which we need to be an integer. Notice we have a trivial solution when k = 0. We can simplify with the substitution k = (1 - j)/2 => n = (j^2 - 2j + 29)/4j. Since n is an integer, 4j divides j^2 - 2j + 29. Now, j^2 - 2j + 29 = 0 (mod j) => 29 = 0 (mod j), thus j = 29 because it is prime, which works and yields k = -14 => n = 7 => m = 42.
@ahmadawlagi6481
@ahmadawlagi6481 Год назад
I liked the solution, especially the end when we had 49 twice it felt so elegant but there was something that I didn't understand when he chose 4n^2+32 as the second perfect square, couldn't there be solutions bigger than 4n^2+32 ?
@RexxSchneider
@RexxSchneider Год назад
He was looking for _expressions_ that were bigger than 4n^2 + 29 that he could make into perfect squares. Since (2n+4)^2 = 4n^2 + 16n + 16, and we know that n >= 1, he knew that (2n+4)^2 >= 4n^2 + 16 + 16 = 4n^2 + 32, which is > 4n^2 + 29. So it's clear that (2n+4)^2 is a perfect square which is bigger than 4n^2 + 29. That means there can't be any solutions to "4n^2 + 29 is a perfect square" that are as big as 2n+4. The rest should follow. Did that make it any clearer?
@konraddapper7764
@konraddapper7764 Год назад
Great to see different aproaches giving the Same result My solution was the Same Up to the Point where you calculate m = 1/2( 2*n^2 +1 +- squrt(4n^2 +29) Than used the Data that only Numbers i
@HershO.
@HershO. Год назад
Don't worry Michael you're always a natural
@speedsterh
@speedsterh Год назад
Expect possibly when he makes a flip over
@justmarvin4926
@justmarvin4926 Год назад
Extending on the solution, for any integer k, k * (k - 1) is a solution to m where sqrt(m + sqrt(m + k)) has to be a natural number. So if k = 7, we get 42 as the value of m. If k = 8, we get 56...
@oscarbizard2411
@oscarbizard2411 Год назад
Me instantly trying 42 out and going yessssss
@jagmarz
@jagmarz Год назад
But isn't -7 a legitimate square root of 49? Is it just implicit from the notation that we only want the positive square root? I mean, it's clear from the problem statement that we need the positive root from the outer expression, since we're asking for a natural number. But I don't see why we don't have to account for -7 as a proper square root of the inner one.
@schweinmachtbree1013
@schweinmachtbree1013 Год назад
yes the notation √ means the non-negative square root (also called the "principal square root")
Далее
Учёные из Тринидад и Тобаго
00:23
OYUNCAK DİREKSİYON İLE ARABAYI SÜRDÜ 😱
00:16
Researchers thought this was a bug (Borwein integrals)
17:26
Absolute Primes - Numberphile
14:27
Просмотров 143 тыс.
A deceivingly difficult differential equation
16:52
Просмотров 248 тыс.
Why can't you multiply vectors?
51:16
Просмотров 426 тыс.
An Exact Formula for the Primes: Willans' Formula
14:47
find the missing angle!!
10:34
Просмотров 30 тыс.
Always even.
12:13
Просмотров 72 тыс.
An interesting infinite sum
13:24
Просмотров 47 тыс.
"infinite" arithmetic is strange
27:37
Просмотров 13 тыс.