Huan's Perfect Squares

How many integers x x satisfy the condition that both 2 x 2x and 3 x 3x are perfect squares?

This problem is posed by Qi Huan T .


The answer is 1.

This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and, finally, (c) loading the non-javascript version of this page . We're sorry about the hassle.

7 solutions

Eduardo Neo
Jun 21, 2015

Let's take A and B as two integers so that

A 2 = 2 x B 2 = 3 x { A }^{ 2 }\quad =\quad 2x\\ { B }^{ 2 }\quad =\quad 3x

Now, looking at this equation, we can clearly state that there is one solution, wich is

x = 0 x\quad =\quad 0

Now, in order to look for other solutions : A = 2 x B = 3 x A\quad =\quad \sqrt { 2x } \\ B\quad =\quad \sqrt { 3x }

wich leads to :

A B = 2 3 \frac { A }{ B } \quad =\quad \sqrt { \frac { 2 }{ 3 } }

and since the ratio of two integers can't be an irrational number, we can clearly see that 0 is the only solution for the problem.

Josh Banister
Aug 4, 2015

Let A 2 = 2 x A^2 = 2x and B 2 = 3 x B^2 = 3x . If we multiply them together then we have ( A B ) 2 = 6 x 2 (AB)^2 = 6x^2 . Therefore 6 x 2 6x^2 is a square number too but when x 1 x\geq 1 , it can't exist.

This can be shown by writing x x as it's prime factorisation like x = 2 p 1 × 3 p 2 × 5 p 3 × x = 2^{p_1} \times 3^{p_2} \times 5^{p_3} \times \dots where p 1 , p 2 , p 3 , p_1, p_2, p_3, \dots , are positive integers. This means 6 x 2 = 2 2 p 1 + 1 × 3 2 p 2 + 1 × 5 2 p 2 × 6x^2 = 2^{2p_1 + 1} \times 3^{2p_2 + 1} \times 5^{2p_2} \times \dots . The problem now arises that for this to be a square number, all of the indices have to be even but the indices in 2 and 3 are odd. Therefore x x doesn't exist for x 1 x\geq1 .

It also doesn't work for x 1 x \leq -1 because 2 x 2x and 3 x 3x won't be positive and therefore not a perfect square. That only leaves x = 0 x = 0 which works.

1 i think. I couldnt think of any number which i could multiply to 2 and 3 and would be a square. Just 0.

Leonardo Vannini
Mar 3, 2016

For all n N n\in N , n 0 n\neq 0 we have a prime factorization n = p 1 α 1 p 2 α 2 p 3 α 3 . . . p k α k { n }={ p }_{ 1 }^{ { \alpha }_{ 1 } }{ p }_{ 2 }^{ { \alpha }_{ 2 } }{ p }_{ 3 }^{ { \alpha }_{ 3 } }...{ p }_{ k }^{ { \alpha }_{ k } } . Is true that n 2 = p 1 2 α 1 p 2 2 α 2 p 3 2 α 3 . . . p k 2 α k { { n }^{ 2 } }={ p }_{ 1 }^{ { 2\alpha }_{ 1 } }{ p }_{ 2 }^{ { 2\alpha }_{ 2 } }{ p }_{ 3 }^{ { 2\alpha }_{ 3 } }...{ p }_{ k }^{ { 2\alpha }_{ k } } . In the prime factorization of a perfect square we have all the exponents pair. If 2x is a perfect square than 2 2 h + 1 x { 2 }^{ 2h+1 }|x . If 3x is a perfect square than 3 3 t + 1 x { 3 }^{ 3t+1 }|x so x = 2 2 h + 1 3 2 t + 1 x={ 2 }^{ 2h+1 }\cdot { 3 }^{ 2t+1 } (because x musts contains only 2 and 3 prime factors) and we have

{ 2 x = 2 2 h + 1 3 2 t + 1 3 x = 2 2 h + 1 3 2 t + 1 { x = 2 2 h 3 2 t + 1 x = 2 2 h + 1 3 2 t 2 2 h + 1 3 2 t = 2 2 h 3 2 t + 1 2 = 3 \begin{cases} 2x={ 2 }^{ 2h+1 }\cdot { 3 }^{ 2t+1 } \\ 3x={ 2 }^{ 2h+1 }\cdot { 3 }^{ 2t+1 } \end{cases}\rightarrow \begin{cases} x={ 2 }^{ 2h }\cdot { 3 }^{ 2t+1 } \\ x={ 2 }^{ 2h+1 }\cdot { 3 }^{ 2t } \end{cases}\rightarrow { 2 }^{ 2h+1 }\cdot { 3 }^{ 2t }={ 2 }^{ 2h }\cdot { 3 }^{ 2t+1 }\rightarrow 2=3 . That is absurd so x could be only 0: 2 0 = 3 0 = 0 2 2\cdot 0=3\cdot 0={ 0 }^{ 2 } .

Sifat Shishir
Jun 22, 2015

There isn't any number that can be multiplied to 2 and 3 at the same time and be a perfect square except the number ZERO ( 0 ) . So the answer is ONE ( 1 )

Siddharth Iyer
Jun 21, 2015

2x=u^2,3x=b^2. (u^2)/2=(b^2)/3.u^2=2(b^2)/3. setting u = b =0 we have a trivial solution. Suppose there existed another solution. We know that b^2 is a multiple of 3. hence b has the prime factor 3 an even number of times. 2(b^2)/3 has the prime factor 3 an odd number of times hence it is not a perfect square which is a contradiction

Axelrod Polaris
Jun 21, 2015

There is one solution: x = 0.

Concept: for this to work, both 2x and 3x have to be perfect squares. Now, redefine 2x as "y." Then 3x is (3/2) y. But this means both have a rational square root; respectively, sqrt(y) and sqrt(3y/2). But this would give sqrt(3)/2 times sqrt(y); even if sqrt(y) is an integer, sqrt(3)/2 times that integer would remain irrational. Ergo, y and (3/2)y cannot both be perfect squares.

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...