13
$\begingroup$

I would like prove that the following diophantine equation is unsolvable: $m!+27=n^3$.

Thanks in advance.

$\endgroup$
8
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Whe does this question arise? $\endgroup$
    – Yemon Choi
    May 8, 2012 at 5:28
  • 10
    $\begingroup$ Strictly speaking, I don't think that's a Diophantine equation. . . $\endgroup$ May 8, 2012 at 7:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ But the more interesting so... $\endgroup$ May 8, 2012 at 8:28
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I think the question is interesting especially in view of GH's answer, and should stay open. $\endgroup$
    – user6976
    May 9, 2012 at 2:14
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ There's an excellent paper of Berend and Harmse [Trans. AMS 358 (2005)] which treats equations of the shape $m!=p(x)$ for various polynomials $p(x)$ (generalizing an old problem of Brocard). The (very nice) argument of GH is evident in section 4, applied to, for example, to $p(x)=x (x^2+1)$. $\endgroup$ May 10, 2012 at 3:53

1 Answer 1

34
$\begingroup$

I am happy to report that the equation has no solution. I kept my original response, and put the remaining arguments in the "EDIT" section below.

Here is a quick proof that there are only finitely many solutions.

We use $m!=(n-3)(n^2+3n+9)$. Here $n$ is divisible by $3$, hence $n^2+3n+9$ is not divisible by any prime $p\equiv 2\pmod{3}$. In other words, all the prime divisors $p\equiv 2\pmod{3}$ of $m!$ are contained in $n-3$ with multiplicity. It follows, with the usual notations, that

$$ \frac{\log m!}{3}>\log(n-3)\geq\sum_{p\equiv 2 \ (3), \ p\leq m}v_p(m!)\log p> \sum_{p\equiv 2\ (3), \ p\leq m} \left(\frac{m}{p}-1\right)\log p.$$

The left hand side is $\sim (m\log m)/3$, while the right hand side is $\sim (m\log m)/2$ by Dirichlet's theorem. Hence for large $m$ the inequality must fail.

EDIT. Assume that $m\geq 1000$, and denote by $\chi$ the nontrivial character modulo $3$. Then $$ \sum_{p\leq m}\frac{\chi(p)\log p}{p}<\sum_{n\leq m}\frac{\chi(n)\Lambda(n)}{n}-\sum_{p\leq m,\ p\neq 3}\frac{\log p}{p^2+p}. $$ This implies, in combination with some ideas of Bordelles (cf. the proof of (4.2) here), that $$ \sum_{p\leq m}\frac{\chi(p)\log p}{p}<3\left|\frac{L'(1,\chi)}{L(1,\chi)}\right|+1.53<2.64\ .$$ By including the contribution of the prime $p=3$ to $n-3$ in the original inequality, and using also some classical bounds by Rosser and Schoenfeld (cf. (3.15) and (3.21) here), it follows that $$\frac{m(\log m-0.9)}{3}>\frac{m(\log m-6.1)}{2}\quad\text{for}\quad m>e^{16.5}.$$ Hence $m < e^{16.5}$. I checked with SAGE that in fact $$\sum_{p\leq m}\frac{\chi(p)\log p}{p}<-0.63\quad\text{for}\quad e^{16.5}>m>e^{7}.$$ This can be used to improve the previous bound to $$\frac{m(\log m-0.99)}{3}>\frac{m(\log m-2.92)}{2}\quad\text{for}\quad e^{16.5}>m>e^{7},$$ which in turn forces $m < 1000$. The above shows that all solutions of the original equation satisfy $m < 1000$. However, I checked with SAGE that in this range the equation has no solution.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you so much GH, now it is interesting find an upper bound for $m$ such that we can begin a computer search. $\endgroup$ May 8, 2012 at 14:51
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This problem arise (it is the hard part) when we try to solve the equation: $x!+y!+3=Z^3$ which was proposed as $J198$ in Mathematical Reflections. I think that the solution can be found in (1) renyi.hu/~p_erdos/1937-09.pdf (2) ams.org/journals/tran/2006-358-04/S0002-9947-05-03780-3/… but I'm not sure. I'm trying to find an "elementary" solution. $\endgroup$ May 8, 2012 at 15:14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It seems that Erdős's paper contains everything needed for a solution. Namely, we are dealing with (8), where $p=3$ and $y=3$. Hence (10) needs to be adjusted slightly: $B_2\leq 27 T(n,6)$. From here it should be easy to finish the solution. At the heart of the argument is (Va), which is a clever explicit substitute of Dirichlet's theorem. $\endgroup$
    – GH from MO
    May 8, 2012 at 16:06
  • $\begingroup$ @GH: Thank you for your new Edit proving that $m<10^{12}$. $\endgroup$ May 8, 2012 at 23:24

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.