A Problem WolframAlpha Didn't Solve, But You Can (615 + x^2 = 2^y)

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 24 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 2 тис.

  • @MindYourDecisions
    @MindYourDecisions  6 років тому +1009

    Apologies for the re-upload. In the previous version I only solved for positive integers. It is straightforward to then find the other solution. But I uploaded this corrected video presenting both because not everyone reads the comments. Also these videos are getting shared in a lot of places so I'm doing my best to present accurate mathematical results. I thank Aniket Gupta and Ryan Wilson for pointing out the oversight!

    • @PraneshPyaraShrestha
      @PraneshPyaraShrestha 6 років тому +5

      What is your email?

    • @MindYourDecisions
      @MindYourDecisions  6 років тому +75

      So where did I go wrong in the original video? I often get emails where people ask me to look for mistakes in their work, if they did not find the correct solution in one of my videos. One important skill in mathematics is reviewing your own work. It's not always fun, but it's really important to learn where you might make errors. So where did I go wrong? In my self-review, there are three places I could have realized my mistake. Place #1: I said the difference of factors is (2^n + x) - (2^n - x) = 2x. Then I solved 2x = 118 to get x = 59. The thing is the difference of factors can also be (2^n - x) - (2^n + x) = -2x. Setting that equal to 118 would have given x = -59. Place #2: When I solved y = 12, I could have then solved 615 + x^2 = 2^12 where I could have seen x = 59 or -59. Place #3: In checking my work, I should have seen there was an x^2 term, and it's a common mistake to overlook a negative solution. This is the kind of self-criticism I do for my math homework. I have noticed people don't like to admit if they are wrong. But I have found self-reviews and honesty are big strengths to improving math skills. So I thank all the legitimate criticism (if accompanied with legitimate honesty) for these videos--you're helping us all get better at math.

    • @PraneshPyaraShrestha
      @PraneshPyaraShrestha 6 років тому +12

      @@MindYourDecisions your email please. I have an important question that no one in Nepal has solved.

    • @Lqtan16
      @Lqtan16 6 років тому +7

      Pranesh Pyara Shrestha his email is at every end of his video

    • @PraneshPyaraShrestha
      @PraneshPyaraShrestha 6 років тому +3

      @@Lqtan16 oh I found it

  • @Rimtay
    @Rimtay 5 років тому +1015

    Can you imagine solving all the question and forgetting to include -59 to the equation get 0 because of it.

    • @sxz452
      @sxz452 4 роки тому +9

      That's sooooo sad

    • @Goku_is_my_idol
      @Goku_is_my_idol 4 роки тому +7

      Lol i did same😂

    • @namanlakhotia6393
      @namanlakhotia6393 4 роки тому +16

      @@Vegan_PhysicsEnthusiast u definitely dont have these questions

    • @funni111
      @funni111 4 роки тому +9

      @@namanlakhotia6393 if you do prmo training you will definitely get this type of questions

    • @namanlakhotia6393
      @namanlakhotia6393 4 роки тому +14

      @@funni111 prmo is not comp in schools though

  • @arnavraut9691
    @arnavraut9691 5 років тому +1001

    literally a week after every video criticizing wolfram alpha's capabilities is posted, they end up fixing it

    • @ashyourresidentenby5916
      @ashyourresidentenby5916 5 років тому +29

      www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=solve+615+%2B+x%5E2+%3D+2%5Ey+over+the+integers

    • @tgdhsuk3589
      @tgdhsuk3589 5 років тому +15

      @@ashyourresidentenby5916 solve 604 + x^3 = 3^y over the integers lmao still cant solve these types of questions

    • @ashyourresidentenby5916
      @ashyourresidentenby5916 5 років тому +16

      @@tgdhsuk3589 x is 5 and y is 6 HA solved it in like 15 seconds

    • @pdpgrgn
      @pdpgrgn 5 років тому +13

      @@tgdhsuk3589 WolframAlpha solves this

    • @quantumsoul3495
      @quantumsoul3495 5 років тому

      Ethical hacking..

  • @roshandon3157
    @roshandon3157 5 років тому +1880

    *99% of the people who clicked the video underestimated this problem*

    • @radekvecerka1115
      @radekvecerka1115 5 років тому +25

      @BlazePlayz YT of course you can just blindly type in numbers, that´s easy, but what if the answer was smth like y=22
      i think you would have some troubles then

    • @rishijai
      @rishijai 5 років тому +19

      @BlazePlayz YT Yep the key is to spot 3481 as a square

    • @Martin-zr2tb
      @Martin-zr2tb 5 років тому +2

      Rishi Jai is there a certain trick to spotting a high number with a square root?
      Cus I did the blindly squaring numbers on my calculator around the sums + 615 being a power of 2 thing...

    • @nonidhgupta9405
      @nonidhgupta9405 5 років тому +2

      I did but I solved it too

    • @ReenaKumari-vq2rk
      @ReenaKumari-vq2rk 5 років тому +1

      @UA-cam Watcher i also did the same😁

  • @antilogis6204
    @antilogis6204 5 років тому +119

    7:27 "All we did was use of principles of number theories."
    Right, very simple...

  • @rcnayak_58
    @rcnayak_58 6 років тому +1614

    It is easier to solve this problem with little logical way than to follow Presh`s complicated method. Look at the problem once. 2^y is always an even number irrespective of whether y is even or odd. Now we can write the equation as 615 =2^y - x^2. Here 615 is an odd number. Therefore, x^2 will have to be an odd number. Because, the difference between two even numbers is always even and the difference between an even number and an odd number is always odd. Since x^2 is an odd number, x must be an odd number too as the square of an odd number is always an odd number and the vice-versa is also true. Let x = 2n+1 for any value of n, odd or even. Now we have 2^y - (2n+1)^2 = 615. This can be written as (2^(y/2))^2 - (2n+1)^2 = 615. This now becomes the difference between two squares form. That means the left hand side will be the product of [(2^(y/2)) + (2n+1)][2^(y/2) - (2n+1)]. Putting, 2^(y/2) = a, and 2n+1 = b for simplification, we have (a+b)(a-b) = 615. Now 615 has to be the product of two numbers. The number 615 = 1 x 3 x 5 x 41. Therefore, we have four alternative pair of numbers whose product will be 615. They are (i) a+b = 615 and a - b = 1 or (ii) a + b = 205 and a - b = 3 or (iii) a + b =123 and a - b = 5 or (iv) a + b = 41 and a - b = 15. Solving (i) we have a = 308, b = 307 (ii) a =104, b = 101 (iii) a = 64, b = 59 and (iv) a = 28, b = 13. Here note that 'a' = 2^(y/2) that is a number power of 2. If we check the values of 'a' in all thee alternatives, only (iii) which is 64,satisfies our condition and the others are not.Therefore 2^(y/2) = 64 = 2^6. That is y/2 =6, That is y = 12 and b = 2n+1 = x =59.

    • @xmarteo
      @xmarteo 6 років тому +133

      You assumed a to be an integer without proving that y is even.

    • @rcnayak_58
      @rcnayak_58 6 років тому +46

      @@xmarteo I have simplified it in a better way in my next explanation. Pl look at it again.

    • @raphaelmillion
      @raphaelmillion 6 років тому +75

      @@rcnayak_58 you don't even have to set b = 2n+1 because you don't use it again.
      Also, xmarteo's comment raises a valid concern, because then you would have to check for more divisors (divisors on Z[sqrt(2)] ). Or you could show that y is even, resulting in the same proof as MindYourDecisions.
      Ultimately, your proof is not shorter than MindYourDecisions'.

    • @ChristopherNight
      @ChristopherNight 6 років тому +95

      ​@@rcnayak_58 Try your logic with 23 + x^2 = 2^y. You'll get that (a+b)(a-b) = 23, which only has one integer solution: (a, b) = (12, 11), and since 12 is not a power of 2, you would conclude that there's no solution with integer x and y. But (x, y) = (3, 5) is a solution, corresponding to (a, b) = (4sqrt(2), 3).

    • @TejvirJogani
      @TejvirJogani 6 років тому +23

      @@xmarteo 2^y is always even because it's a multiple of 2 and an even number is defined as multiple to, so by definition 2^y is even. The problem though, is that this solution is almost as complex as Presh's, because it practically requires the same methodology of thinking. While I agree it might be efficient, you've to keep in mind that he was send this solution as well.

  • @AYUSHGAMEROFFICIAL
    @AYUSHGAMEROFFICIAL 5 років тому +435

    He:this is presh talwalkar
    Captions:this is fresh lakewater

  • @ethanfrommer7772
    @ethanfrommer7772 6 років тому +218

    Hey presh. Just wanted to thank you... we had a really difficult math test that was more about thinking than calculating. It was really hard but everytime i started a new question, I thought about what Presh will do and how he will solve that, and that helped solving most of the problems. Thanks for improving and sharpening the thinking for me, and for other hundreds of thousands people

    • @HueHanaejistla
      @HueHanaejistla 5 років тому +2

      ethan frommer ok boomer

    • @Seekingpatience19
      @Seekingpatience19 4 роки тому +4

      @@sahaj9810 wait how did u get the 2^10 , 2^11, and 2^12 are the only possibilities? im a little confused.

    • @suryakalawasnik6204
      @suryakalawasnik6204 3 роки тому +4

      @@sahaj9810 he wanted to say what about 2¹³ .. 2¹⁴..2^15 and so on

  • @lukkash
    @lukkash 5 років тому +42

    You can solve it beautifully in Excel by solving (with parameters) an equation as 615+x^2 - 2^y = 0
    Alternatively you can calculate y=log(615+x^2)/log(2) and then an integer value of y should be found. All to be solved in Excel :)

    • @btf_flotsam478
      @btf_flotsam478 2 роки тому +3

      I'd give you a cookie, but you only really deserve it if you use SQL. (By the way, good luck brute-forcing the proof that there are no other solutions.)

  • @notwildcard377
    @notwildcard377 3 роки тому +41

    UPDATE : Wolfram Alpha can now solve this problem. I loved your approach.

  • @jerrygundecker743
    @jerrygundecker743 6 років тому +306

    I was with you right up to "You're watching Mind Your Decisions"....After that I said, "Huh?"

  • @harshitagoyal7134
    @harshitagoyal7134 4 роки тому +9

    After spotting that n > 9, I just used trial and error with n = 10, 11... to check which values would give a perfect square for 2^n - 615. Eventhough, trial and error isnt the 'best' way to solve problems, I think this would be a quicker approach :)
    THOUGH I ABSOLUTELY LOVED THE WAY YOU DID IT, IT IS ALWAYS FUN TO KNOW HOW THE OTHER PERSON SOLVED IT. I LOVE MULTIPLE APPROACHES

  • @Super_Smash_Dude
    @Super_Smash_Dude 6 років тому +31

    That's interesting!
    I tried taking the log base 2 on both sides in order to isolate y.

  • @EduardvanKleef
    @EduardvanKleef 3 роки тому +1

    This solution is so brilliant, I'm stunned...

  • @spacefertilizer
    @spacefertilizer 5 років тому

    Great and imaginative solution!
    Lots of people commenting on these problems don’t understand mathematics though. They believe one only has to do trial and error to find one solution, but forget all about finding every possible solution while also showing that there can be no other. This is the core thinking that should be taught. Wonder what they actually teach people in school nowadays.

  • @quahntasy
    @quahntasy 6 років тому +92

    I always depend on Wolfram Alpha for solving Equations in Physics. But this new information blows my mind. Now I have to go back and do all those tedious exercises from Goldstein.

    • @folf
      @folf 6 років тому +1

      It works now 🧐

    • @spacefertilizer
      @spacefertilizer 5 років тому +4

      For mathematics, only use wolfram for getting hints toward a solution. Often wolfram does not give you all possible solutions or even managed to find them (this has happened to me a lot in calculus and even combinatorics). Try to understand the problem and the theory behind it and solve it from there. There are lots of mathematics that are not implemented yet in wolfram either.

  • @Pepa14pig
    @Pepa14pig 4 роки тому +14

    I feel proud for solving this problem not only alone but also with different thinking :))

    • @kwcy92
      @kwcy92 3 роки тому

      Can you share your way?

    • @Pepa14pig
      @Pepa14pig 3 роки тому +1

      @@kwcy92
      Of course! It was a guessing game with math background 😂😂😂
      We can rewrite the problem as 615=2^y-x^2
      I know x will be an odd number (because 615 is odd and 2^y is always even). Because we know powers of two, we want a “bigger” number for y because difference needs to be 615
      From there on I played a bit with numbers to see what happens when I use bigger x, smaller y... I started with x=y=9 and moved up by 5-10 for x and one for y and got there relatively fast. I know it’s not the best way to solve, but it worked 😂😂😂

  • @jasonterry1959
    @jasonterry1959 6 років тому +53

    @mindyourdecisions I took a game theory class in college this past semester (spring 2018) and you would not believe the amount of times you were listed as a source.

  • @bancodrut
    @bancodrut 6 років тому +1

    The solution to this problem really blowed my mind. The structure of it is the most imaginative and trickery of what I've encountered so far 😱
    Thanks for sharing

  • @JLvatron
    @JLvatron 3 роки тому +1

    Wolfram & Hart couldn’t solve it, but Winifred Burkle could!
    Thanks for this genius solution.

  • @indy197905
    @indy197905 4 роки тому +10

    I thought it was an algebra problem. Then I kept watching and my brain melted.

  • @willnewman9783
    @willnewman9783 6 років тому +142

    In this video, he looks mod 10 to get that y is even. But it is much easier to look mod 4 to get that fact.
    And also, a lot of people are saying they solved this by guessing and checking. While that does find a solution, it does not find a proof of the only solutions, which this video does.

    • @sapien153
      @sapien153 6 років тому +3

      Nope. The video didn't prove that this is the only solution

    • @freddiehand6551
      @freddiehand6551 6 років тому +31

      @Bragadeesh S yes it did

    • @sapien153
      @sapien153 6 років тому +5

      My bad. Agreed

    • @Theo0x89
      @Theo0x89 6 років тому +7

      I'll see your mod 4 and raise you mod 3. In fact, modulo 3 you get 615 ≡ 0, x² ≡ 0 or 1 and 2^y ≡ (-1)^y, so y must be even.

    • @danmerget
      @danmerget 6 років тому +3

      Neat. I used the mod 10 solution myself, which seemed more obvious to me since I count in base 10 and tend to notice base-10 patterns before considering other bases. (OK, I lie. I did briefly look at mod 2 first, but that only got me as far as "x must be odd" before I abandoned that approach and jumped to base 10. Mod 3 and 4 never occurred to me.)

  • @Acid31337
    @Acid31337 6 років тому +182

    It's easy, wolframalpha cannot make a sandwitch, but I can!

    • @ffggddss
      @ffggddss 6 років тому +10

      What, make a witch out of sand? Well, it is nearly Halloween, after all. So I guess all you need is to go to the beach!!
      Fred

    • @yerr234
      @yerr234 6 років тому +7

      but can you tho?

    • @silkyfirst3097
      @silkyfirst3097 5 років тому +4

      Dont provoke them wolfram alpha is listening

    • @TAT4guitar
      @TAT4guitar 4 роки тому +5

      Did you try "sudo make a sandwich"? That usually does the trick

  • @sandrastrilakos9962
    @sandrastrilakos9962 6 років тому

    I solved it partly using logic and finished it using trial and error, but your method is so much better because it demonstrates the logic required to prove it is the only solution. I look forward to sharing this with my senior students.

  • @srimatresri
    @srimatresri 5 років тому +244

    2^y - 615 must be a square. Went on substituting y > 9

    • @bharatnotindia.6296
      @bharatnotindia.6296 5 років тому +13

      That's cool.

    • @oskarjung6738
      @oskarjung6738 5 років тому +14

      One more analysis, that 2^y is always even so sum of of 615 and x^2 should also be even, which is possible when x^2 is odd.
      x^2 is odd when x is odd integer.
      Hence odd integral solutions of X is only possible.

    • @critisizerr245
      @critisizerr245 5 років тому +5

      I also wwnt on substituting y value but soon after I though that this will not help me for IIT JEE
      I am in 10
      Going go attempt jee in 2022

    • @critisizerr245
      @critisizerr245 5 років тому +2

      But i got the answer by putting 12

    • @SuperLabelPerson
      @SuperLabelPerson 5 років тому +5

      I did the same thing. Once he started looking at digit repetition, I was like "y tho?"

  • @nonesuch27
    @nonesuch27 6 років тому +338

    As always with these videos, a lot of people don't grasp the concept of PROOF.

    • @arolimarcellinus8541
      @arolimarcellinus8541 6 років тому +20

      Well how do you say? There is no any proper explanation about proof. It's so abstract and we never realized we need to use inequalities for this kind of problem. You know in HS we always use regular method, but not with this long and tiring explanation only to find y=2n. How come common people realized that? Me as a Master degree student even cannot realize this

    • @heronimousbrapson863
      @heronimousbrapson863 6 років тому +34

      nonesuch27 Most people don't grasp the concept of proof. Proof is really only needed in the study of pure mathematics. For everyday applications of mathematics, you don't need proofs, just like you don't need a degree in automotive engineering to be an auto mechanic.

    • @qc1okay
      @qc1okay 6 років тому +11

      What? What does proof have to do with anything? The problem as worded says nothing about proof. It asks you to find x and y, only allowing integers. Period.

    • @dariobarisic3502
      @dariobarisic3502 6 років тому +62

      @@qc1okay If it asks to SOLVE the problem then it means you have to find ALL the solutions. If you find only ONE solution, you have to prove its the only solution. Otherwise you didn't solve the problem. Many people just say "easy, i guesed it in 3 tries", while that worked in this case because there's only one solution, it won't always work.

    • @qc1okay
      @qc1okay 6 років тому +1

      @@dariobarisic3502 No it doesn't. Just that simple. Solve does not mean all. This UA-cam channel isn't a formal math class, and even if it were, its instructions must be clear to its viewers. If "all" were wanted, "all" had to be stated. Incidentally, I went thru the full process Presh used, and it both leaves out steps and overcomplicates others.

  • @sjoerdwiesmeijer7231
    @sjoerdwiesmeijer7231 6 років тому +13

    Am I the only one who always gets depressed when he says:'Did you figure it out'? . 'cause I am already happy when I can follow his explanation.

    • @mirawenya
      @mirawenya 4 роки тому

      Yep, I’m with you. Don’t usually even understand the explanation it seems.

    • @ihopeicanchangethisnamelat7108
      @ihopeicanchangethisnamelat7108 3 роки тому

      the first thing i did when i saw this problem was google ‘what does solve over the integers mean?’. i promise you’re not alone.

  • @TamaraTkacova
    @TamaraTkacova 5 років тому +14

    I‘ve been taking some number theory classes in my free time and we‘ve just started with modular arithmetics, and I was so happy when I got the solution before watching the video haha :) I did it mod 3 tho

  • @l.w.paradis2108
    @l.w.paradis2108 3 роки тому

    This is so cool. I've just been casually watching, and got up to the 3-minute mark on my own. I thought of the first steps without watching. So, these videos are putting me on the right path to figuring out cool problems. THANK YOU.

  • @tamirerez2547
    @tamirerez2547 4 роки тому

    The approach of checking the last digits, as all simple thinking, is genius!!
    Great way to solve such a problem.

  • @TheGeneralThings
    @TheGeneralThings 6 років тому +6

    Brilliant! This is the content I can't get enough of.

  • @GinoTC
    @GinoTC 6 років тому +75

    Holy crap the captions got your name right. Well, there's a space between tal and walker but damn, I'm glad I've been checking every video haha

  • @АртёмЗайчик-д3в
    @АртёмЗайчик-д3в 5 років тому +6

    When I first started to solve it, i gave up. But then I decided to try it again and got it, using (x-1)^2 = x^2 - (2x-1)

  • @marcoantonioreyessantos9977
    @marcoantonioreyessantos9977 4 роки тому

    I also started as Nayak's solution: x has to be odd, then x=2n+1. Then, we have that 4n(n+1)=2^y-616, or n(n+1)=2^(y-2)-154. Now I went with y-2>=8, and found y-2=10 and n=29, which give x=59 and y=12. Cheers, Marco.

  • @bearloscuro
    @bearloscuro 4 роки тому

    Here's how I solved this with paper and pencil. Rewrote expression as x^2 -2^y=-615. X^2 will always be a positive integer value, so 2^y must be some power of 2 greater than 615 where the difference between the two expressions has a (positive) integer square root. 2^10 = 1024 & square root of the difference (409) is not an integer, 2^11=2048 and square root of the difference (1433) is not an integer, 2^12=4096, subtracting 615 yields 3481. Since the last two digits of 3481 are 81, there is a good chance that 59 could be the square root. I tried that and it worked. Thus, x=59, y=12.Yes, I know intuition and trail and error aren't proper 'solutions.' Thanks for this channel!

  • @prerakcontractor6609
    @prerakcontractor6609 6 років тому +13

    Be honest and confess; how many of you guys checked whether wolfram alpha could solve this or not? Well, I did

  • @thephysicistcuber175
    @thephysicistcuber175 6 років тому +17

    3:52 it was even easier to establish this by looking at the equation mod 3

    • @TechToppers
      @TechToppers 4 роки тому +1

      That's bit advances.
      Presh Talwakar makes things intuitive.

    • @d4slaimless
      @d4slaimless 4 роки тому

      @@TechToppers not realy that hard. Every square is 0 or 1 mod 3, every even power of 2 is 1 mod 3, but every odd power of 2 is 2 mod 3. So the y is even. You would need to prove the initial statements though (but it's very simple).

    • @TechToppers
      @TechToppers 4 роки тому

      @@d4slaimless I know it is simple. But if you can avoid technicalities, then why not!

    • @d4slaimless
      @d4slaimless 4 роки тому

      @@TechToppers I am not arguing that the solution in the video is very demonstrative. Just saying that going for the reminder of a division is not that hard either.

    • @ericzhu6620
      @ericzhu6620 3 роки тому

      wow i found a cuber under a maths video!

  • @UniqueNCS
    @UniqueNCS 5 років тому +43

    Literaly just had this in a test yesterday and couldnt answer, cmon universe

  • @merveilmeok2416
    @merveilmeok2416 5 років тому +1

    Sometimes you come across a map problem and you think “I get it” and you “solve” the problem under a couple of minutes only to realize later the problem was above your “pay grade” and a much more complicated problem that you anticipated. This has happened to me back to back today ;)

  • @TorBruheim
    @TorBruheim 5 років тому

    Who on earth came up with this awesome solution? This is more a way of thinking and a method instead of traditional math. I have learned a lot from your videos, and I have expanded the way of seeing math solutions. Especially those solutions involving geometry. Thank you very much.

    • @SpaghettiToaster
      @SpaghettiToaster 4 роки тому

      It is traditional math, a branch called number theory.

  • @kienha9036
    @kienha9036 5 років тому +5

    615 is divisible by 3, hence 2^y-x^2 is divisible by 3. Easily checking out we could see that 2-x^2 is not divisible by 3, then 2^y-0 or 2^y-1 is divisible by 3. Since 2^y-0 isn't, we can conclude that 2^y-1 is, then y is even

  • @anubis_05
    @anubis_05 6 років тому +60

    hello please look into integrals by the Feynman technique

  • @SamerShennar
    @SamerShennar 6 років тому +7

    Way simpler: x=sqrt(2^y-615)
    So 2^y has to be > 615
    By trial and error starting from 1024 we can quickly reach x an integer (59) at 4096.

    • @t_kon
      @t_kon 6 років тому +1

      Ye prove it that that's the only answer

  • @johnconway8070
    @johnconway8070 5 років тому

    One of the most enjoyable problems I have seen for quite a while . Finding the solution as explained by Presh is not easy but it *is* very satisfying . Me, I simply used the trial and error method! Noting that 2^y had the be *at least* 2^10, I only had to try 1024 minus 615 , 2048 minus 615 and 4096 minus 615 to find which of these three differences gives a perfect square . Not a whole lot of work !

  • @curiousscientist6077
    @curiousscientist6077 4 роки тому

    This channel is very amazing!
    I loved it! Knowing this fact about Wolfram is very motivating!

  • @kasperjoonatan6014
    @kasperjoonatan6014 6 років тому +5

    This was a very fine problem! It was good that 615 is quite easy to divide into prime factors, otherwise it wouldn't have been so easy without a calculator :)

  • @mcovaleda
    @mcovaleda 5 років тому +3

    Wolframalpha: isolate y on 615+x^2=2^y solves the problem

  • @PraneshPyaraShrestha
    @PraneshPyaraShrestha 6 років тому +16

    Your videos are awesome

  • @musicsubicandcebu1774
    @musicsubicandcebu1774 3 роки тому

    Yeah, that was amazing. Thanks for taking the time to post these.

  • @tomashertl8895
    @tomashertl8895 6 місяців тому

    So beautiful, so nice and so clear! Thanks Presh.

  • @vladpetre5674
    @vladpetre5674 6 років тому +9

    @Presh, had you constructed the proof the other way around, it would have been a lot closer to how people/ students think. Start with observing x^2 and that if y is even then you can do a^2 - b^2 = 615 which is easy to solve. Then prove that y cannot be odd, thus the only solutions are the ones where y is even (x = +/- 59, y = 12).
    The way you started it by observing y has to be even and then stating ("This will be a key in our finding the solution") makes you look insightful, but does not help people develop thinking patterns in math problem solving (especially Diophantine equations)

    • @akaRicoSanchez
      @akaRicoSanchez 6 років тому

      Well... I solved the problem the exact same way and in the exact same order. It's not really about being insightful but about using the fact integers are a strong constraint on the solutions.

    • @vladpetre5674
      @vladpetre5674 6 років тому +1

      ​@Dan It's the same with last digit analysis. How do you know it is we need in this specific question? You don't know, but i bet factoring leads to results more often than last digit analysis.

  • @nellvincervantes3223
    @nellvincervantes3223 5 років тому +4

    Explain the Difference between Quasi-Static and Non Quasi-Static
    @Mindyourdecisions

  • @user-uc1hf8zm6k
    @user-uc1hf8zm6k 5 років тому +7

    2^y , which means it could only be2,4,8,16,32...
    Therefore,just to find out which 2^y number can be square rooted after minus 615.There is 615, so we can start with 1024,2048,4096... then find out that the answer is x=59,y=12

    • @user-zb8tq5pr4x
      @user-zb8tq5pr4x 5 років тому

      Thats a numeric solution, not analitic. Prove that that is the only solution.

  • @knk0112
    @knk0112 5 років тому

    Thanks Presh for making such videos.. observing the way these solutions work out their way to the answer really helps in thinking laterally.. it sharpens the thinking skills for sure.. thanks a lot!!

  • @invincibleflesh4526
    @invincibleflesh4526 4 роки тому

    Came for the problem and found the solution on my own, actually watched the video to see if there were others.

  • @whiploadchannel2047
    @whiploadchannel2047 6 років тому +4

    You can also find that y is even using mod 3. A little faster than mod 10

    • @whiploadchannel2047
      @whiploadchannel2047 6 років тому +1

      Tom Domenge sure, (mod 3) 615 = 0, x^2 = 1 or 0, and 2^y = (-1)^y. So 615 + x^2 = 0 or 1. If y is odd, 2^y=(-1)^y = -1 which is impossible. So y is even

  • @Akash-qy1gf
    @Akash-qy1gf 6 років тому +15

    I did trial and error method and solved it in 2mins.....2^9=512 & 2^10=1024, 2^y has toh be greater than 615, so consider 2^10 =1024, so 1024-615=409 which is not a Perfect Square, 2^11=2048, so 2048-615=1433 which is also not a Perfect Square, and then 2^12=4096, so 4096-615=3481 which is Square of 59. Thus x=59 and y=12

    • @MatchaLatte360
      @MatchaLatte360 5 років тому +1

      Rahul Chhabaria sameee hahaha i tried 1024,2048, then finally 4096 and it worked!!

    • @samsonpl1110
      @samsonpl1110 5 років тому

      -59 is second matching X :D

    • @ceegers
      @ceegers 5 років тому

      This is what I did. No need to make it more complicated than it is :P

    • @Cohnan13
      @Cohnan13 5 років тому +1

      @@ceegers Actually, it is needed to prove that no other solutions exist

    • @speedsterh
      @speedsterh 5 років тому

      @@Cohnan13 Some people here don't what "solving" means

  • @hsman6614
    @hsman6614 5 років тому +4

    Why did WolframAlfha give up when it reach x = 3?

  • @TitusObbayi
    @TitusObbayi 3 роки тому

    I have to admit, when I first saw this problem I completely did not think it would be very complicated. Then I tried it and got stuck but I was still convinced there some basic algebra trick that I'm missing. Then after watching this solution, I realize there was no chance I was solving this without the explanation

  • @nickh1798
    @nickh1798 2 роки тому +2

    WolframAlpha can now solve this exercise. Try "2^y= 615 + x^2 over integers", minus the quotes.

  • @Tailspin80
    @Tailspin80 4 роки тому +4

    I solved this in about 60 seconds from the thumbnail. The right hand side has to be 1024 ... 2048 ... 4096 etc. So just keep trying until you find one which has an integer square root. Bingo - square root of 4096 - 615 is 59 (and -59). A familiarity with well known binary numbers helps. Because I solved it before I opened the video the no calculator rule didn’t apply. 🙂

  • @Oswald_Anthony
    @Oswald_Anthony 5 років тому +11

    Take the logarithm base 2 of both sides:
    Answer: y = log(x^2 + 615)/log(2) + ((2 i) π n)/log(2) for n element Z
    x = ± 59, y = 12
    (that's a Wolfram's answer)

    • @kookoo275
      @kookoo275 3 роки тому +1

      This is the first thing I thought, surprised I had to go so low to find this comment

  • @jameskelly745
    @jameskelly745 5 років тому +4

    I did it completely differentlymin my head in a third the amount of time it took to explain that solution

  • @montsaintleondr7491
    @montsaintleondr7491 4 роки тому +2

    Holy cow, I am spaghettified by this elegant solution! Thank you!

  • @ozanoruc3796
    @ozanoruc3796 5 років тому +2

    If you look at the equation in mod 3 it is clear that y is even which means that you can move x^2 to right side of the equation and do difference of two squares. And then try for positive divisors of 615

  • @anuragmishra3282
    @anuragmishra3282 4 роки тому +4

    I solved the equation in seconds using a chart containing square of numbers upto 100
    It was easier than the method in the video

  • @silverbladeii
    @silverbladeii 5 років тому +4

    Minha solução:
    Se "==" representa congruência, temos:
    615+x²==x² (mod 3).
    2ⁿ=/=0 (mod 3)
    →x²=/=0 (mod 3)
    →x²==1 (mod 3).
    2ⁿ==1 (mod 3)
    →n=2a
    615=2²ª-x²→
    615=(2ª+x)(2ª-x).
    Edit: ok, vamos testar todos os pouquíssimos casos: 615=3•5•41, além disso, 2ª+x>2ª-x. As únicas possibilidades são (supondo x≥0):
    2ª+x=615 e 2ª-x=1→2•2ª=616. Abs
    2ª+x=205, 2ª-x=3→2•2ª=208. Abs
    2ª+x=41 e 2ª-x=15→ 2•2ª=56. Abs
    E
    2ª+x=123 e 2ª-x=5
    2ª=64, de onde segue que a única
    solução é a=6→n=y=12 e x=±59

    • @Gutagi
      @Gutagi 5 років тому

      parabens cara

    • @Gutagi
      @Gutagi 5 років тому

      Translation for english:
      My solution is:
      If "==" represents congruence then we have:
      ....
      Testing all the possible cases (which are just a few) , we have that the only solution is...

    • @silverbladeii
      @silverbladeii 5 років тому

      @@Gutagi macho, são bem poucos casos

    • @Gutagi
      @Gutagi 5 років тому

      SilverBlade como assim ???

    • @silverbladeii
      @silverbladeii 5 років тому

      @@Gutagi taí. Resolvido completo (mas é tão trivial que eu nem devia ter perdido meu tempo editando)

  • @ronmadan8003
    @ronmadan8003 5 років тому +6

    Who else used a different strategy, but found a much faster way to do it? My strategy was to try different powers of 2 (greater than 9). For example: 615 + x^2 = 2^11 (2048). This implies that x^2 = 1433. That isn't a square value (for a positive even integer), so I tried 615 + x^2 = 2^12 (4096). That meant x^2 was equal to 3481. Since 3481 is a square, I was able to solve for x and y.

    • @chaitanyasingh1565
      @chaitanyasingh1565 5 років тому

      Wish you could see my raised hand ✋ ✋

    • @thiantromp6607
      @thiantromp6607 5 років тому +1

      Ron Madan but you never proved or showed that was the only solution. That is the challenge with these problems.

    • @zoetropo1
      @zoetropo1 5 років тому

      Try or not try, that is not the question. Use the force of logic, Luke!

  • @sumit3735
    @sumit3735 4 роки тому

    Mind your decision is best Chanel for students

  • @steveholman5978
    @steveholman5978 5 років тому +2

    I solved this in about 3 minutes by simply listing the powers of two, subtracting 615, and looking for an integer square root. The first one even possible had to be more than 615, so I only had to check three powers of two before finding one with an integer square root.

  • @t_kon
    @t_kon 6 років тому +14

    Dont do trial and error it's bad.
    First apply mod 3. 615 mod 3 = 0, and 2 mod 3 = -1, however x^2 mod 3 = 1 for x relatively prime than 3. Hence y must be even. Apply y = 2k and factorize it (2^k +x)(2^k-x) = 615. This is how you prove the only integer solution is (59, 12), (-59, 12)

    • @snuffeldjuret
      @snuffeldjuret 6 років тому +2

      trial and error isn't bad, it is an extremely valuable tool in figuring things out. When applying math on the real world, trial and error is crucial.

    • @t_kon
      @t_kon 6 років тому +1

      @@snuffeldjuret not really. Trial and error is useful in trying to solve any problems, but is never good to apply it directly. Why? Because you dont know if this trial and error pattern will continue on or not. There is not enough conclusion from just trial and error. It can gives you some valuable information but is never the way to go directly.

    • @snuffeldjuret
      @snuffeldjuret 6 років тому +3

      @@t_kon I have no idea what you mean with "apply it directly" and "the way to go directly". I am merely pointing out that "Dont do trial and error it's bad." is a blanket statement that is not always true. You can argue that it is for this task, but it is not true for all possible tasks.

    • @albertmcchan
      @albertmcchan 6 років тому

      Is doing mod 3 also trial and error ?

    • @SaiKiran-fd3gq
      @SaiKiran-fd3gq 5 років тому

      Take mod 16 on both sides we end with x = +3 or -3 mod 16 .But 59 is neither .Where am i going wrong.

  • @leo17921
    @leo17921 6 років тому +4

    7:36 so now you say this every time. ok.

  • @xVitOSx
    @xVitOSx 6 років тому +6

    Thanks macOS for "Grapher"

  • @tatane79
    @tatane79 4 роки тому

    This is really a brilliant, simple and elegant affordable solution! Thanks!

  • @user-bl4zj6wt9v
    @user-bl4zj6wt9v 4 роки тому +1

    Now WolframAlpha can solve it. I just checked it, LOL.

  • @TheTck90
    @TheTck90 5 років тому +5

    Don’t use calculator but count 2^9 and factor out 615 :D

    • @minghaoliang4311
      @minghaoliang4311 5 років тому

      That wasn't that hard, was it?

    • @washizukanorico
      @washizukanorico 5 років тому +2

      You need a calculator for the first few powers of two? Like really?

    • @AvelinoTiago
      @AvelinoTiago 5 років тому

      The worst students know 2 powers from 0 to 20

    • @SpaghettiToaster
      @SpaghettiToaster 4 роки тому

      @@AvelinoTiago No.

  • @goodjob822
    @goodjob822 6 років тому +12

    WolframAlpha solve it for now

  • @harold351
    @harold351 5 років тому +8

    If you do trial and improve it's easier I got it in less than 5 minutes

    • @jujujulost1232
      @jujujulost1232 5 років тому +2

      Thing is finding a solution by trial and error doesn't prove there's no other solution

  • @paparazzi.worldwide
    @paparazzi.worldwide Рік тому +2

    Well if there is a single solution then no doubt primary methods are way less complicated than other methods
    We have,
    615 + x² = 2ʸ
    x² must be a +ve integer
    => 615 + x² > 615
    ∴ possible values of 2ʸ are
    1024, 2048, 4096 or greater.
    => 2ʸ - 615 = x²
    2ʸ - 615 must be a square no.
    (i) 1024 - 615 = 409 (not a square no.)
    (ii) 2048 - 615 = 1433 (not a square no.)
    (iii) 4096 - 615 = 3481 (is a square no.
    ∴ possible value of 2ʸ can be 4096
    => 2ʸ = 4096
    => 2ʸ = 2¹²
    => 𝘆 = 𝟭𝟮
    And,
    =>x² = 3481 ....[ by (iii) ]
    =>x² = ∓ 59²
    =>𝘅 = ∓ 𝟱𝟵
    Thus,
    x= +59 or x = -59
    And y = 12
    No complications..

  • @diedoktor
    @diedoktor 3 роки тому +2

    I just did guess and check and found 59 as a solution for x. Obviously 2^y has to be greater than 615, so I started with 1024-615, which wasn't a perfect square, so I did 2048-615, then 4096-615. I found the square root to be 59. So -59 and 59 are solutions when y=12. I imagine there are infinite solutions.
    EDIT: The solution in the video is much more elegant, and also shows there is only one solution. Very cool.

  • @markcross109
    @markcross109 5 років тому +6

    Apply simultaenous equation and it's done in a second.

  • @paulhofman3032
    @paulhofman3032 6 років тому +8

    Im gonna be honest with yall. I didnt managed to do it.

  • @RajeshYadav-md9eh
    @RajeshYadav-md9eh 6 років тому +4

    Really very imaginary method....
    Interesting....

    • @AlexanderBukh
      @AlexanderBukh 6 років тому +1

      imaginative? (i'm not native english speaker)

  • @italixgaming915
    @italixgaming915 3 роки тому

    We can eliminate all values of y

  • @tianyuema4797
    @tianyuema4797 10 місяців тому

    Audacious! WolframAlpha solved it in seconds!

  • @abhinavchauhangujjar6456
    @abhinavchauhangujjar6456 5 років тому +5

    I solved for x
    X=√2y−615

  • @satyaprakashg1890
    @satyaprakashg1890 5 років тому +7

    Solved it in 1 minute...by substitution method!!!😊😅😅

  • @m.3lalli491
    @m.3lalli491 5 років тому +3

    If a scientist couldnt solve it,
    Why would I

    • @y.z.6517
      @y.z.6517 5 років тому

      All competent scientists can solve that. It's easy.

  • @sarthakgupta4323
    @sarthakgupta4323 5 років тому

    To chekc whether y is even or odd we can simply use 3 as x^2 gives remainder 0 or 1 when diveded by 3 and 2^y gives remainder 2 when y is odd and 1 when is even therefore y must be even

  • @minhazulislam4682
    @minhazulislam4682 4 роки тому

    Video is at 0:01 second in my laptop right now and solved it. Finally I am starting to do these problems.
    I used some properties of square numbers, took some 3 and 4 digits number like(512, 1024, 2048...) you get the idea. Reverse calculation for a square number and viola, 4096 was just that.

  • @redthorne1129
    @redthorne1129 4 роки тому +1

    I just started at 1024 and subtracted 615 from each power of 2 from there on. 3rd try, 4096. Obviously if it was something like 2^2000, that would take far too long, but for this one...worked in like 20 seconds.
    1024 - 615 = 409 (not a square)
    2048 - 615 = 1433 (not a square)
    4096 - 615 = 3481 (59^2)
    I think this is why I hate traditional math problems, they make them simple enough that you can brute force an answer instead of doing the work. Got me through all my trig/calc classes in high school :D

  • @teambellavsteamalice
    @teambellavsteamalice 3 роки тому

    Nice problem!
    I didn't think of looking at end digits so didn't find y was even. Clever find!
    Btw, Wolfram alpha can solve with substituting y=2n:
    solve 615+x^2=2^(2n) over the integers

  • @giama5442
    @giama5442 3 роки тому

    It turns out that using similar principles, we can also prove that x = ±59, y = 12 is the only solution. (I thought of this before watching the video.)
    Because 2^y is even for any positive y, 2^y - 615 = x^2 must be odd, and so x must be odd. It also follows, using a similar digit analysis (or modular arithmetic), that y must be even, and consequently that 2^y is itself a perfect square.
    Since any perfect square, x^2, can be expressed as the sum 1 + 3 + 5 + ... + (2x - 1), we can set an upper bound of x = 307 because 308^2 - 307^2 = 615. For any larger x, it is impossible for x^2 + 615 to also be a perfect square (the gap between consecutive squares becomes too large), ruling out any even power of 2 as a possible sum, in addition to all odd (non-perfect square) powers of 2 previously ruled out.
    That said, the largest even power of 2 less than 307^2 + 615 is 256^2 = 65536, which has y = 16. And since x^2 cannot be negative for integer x, giving a lower bound of y = 10, we are left with only four possibilities of y: 10, 12, 14, and 16. Any solution thus necessarily includes one of these values of y, and by exhaustion, we find that y = 12 (corresponding to x = ±59) works and none of the others do. Conversely, if none of these values of y gave a solution, we would prove that the problem has no integer solutions.

  • @fantiscious
    @fantiscious 3 роки тому +1

    *I SOLVED THIS IN MY HEAD* . I barely know how and I can't show proof, but for the sake of it I'll show my thought process;
    - 2^y is observably a power of 2
    - Because x² should always be greater than or equal to 0, we can tell that 615 + x² should be greater than or equal to 615
    - recall the sequence of the powers of 2 starting from 2^0 (1, 2, 4, 8, 16...
    - 32, 64, 128...
    - 262144, 524288, 1048576 (seriously, i know them all up until that lol)
    - 2^y should then be greater than 615, so we can start checking for values of x when 2^y starts at 2^10 (a.k.a 1024)
    615 + x² = 1024
    x² = 409
    - 409 is not a square, so x isn't an integer there
    - Check for when y = 11 (2^11 = 2048)
    615 + x² = 2048
    x² = 1433
    - 1433 is not a square (I guessed that, I could've been wrong lol), so x isn't an integer here either
    - Check for when y = 12 (2^12 = 4096)
    615 + x² = 4096
    x² = 3481
    - It came to my head that because of the "1" in "3481", x could POSSIBLY end with the digit 1 or 9
    - I go through the squares of multiples of 10 (10² = 100, 20² = 400... 40² = 1600, *50² is 2500, 60² = 3600* )
    - I notice that 3481 is between 50² and 60², so therefore 50

  • @rudra-thandavam
    @rudra-thandavam 3 роки тому

    Y has to be even. There is no other way to solve the problem. Only if this ruled out, then we can check for Y as odd. But most cases such problems will come out easily when Y is considered as even. But good insights from you to check the combination of factors. I admit that I learned something new today. Thanks.

  • @PhotonicJerk
    @PhotonicJerk 9 місяців тому

    2:03 why both sides need to have same last digit?

  • @anonym-yj2qk
    @anonym-yj2qk 2 роки тому

    this is how i found that y is even
    so 615 is divisible by 5,but 2^y can never be because its always even
    so y can be 2k or 2k+1.if y is 2k,then we can write it as (5-1)^k.the remainders when its divided by 5 can be 1 or 4.because 5^k is divisible by 5 so it doesnt give us a remainder.and -1^k can be -1 or 1.
    then we look at y=2k+1.we can write it as (5-1)^k times 2. 5^k is divisible by 5,-1^k times 2 can give us the remainders 3 or 2.
    then we can take a look at what remainders we can get when we divide a square number by 5:
    (5a)^2=0
    (5a+1)^2=1
    (5a+2)^2=4
    (5a+3)^2=4
    (5a+4)^2=1
    so therefore y=2k.
    as a 7th grader whos preparing for international olympiads,this is an easier method in my opinion.

  • @maaifoediedelarey4335
    @maaifoediedelarey4335 5 років тому

    @ 02:05 Why do you assume both sides must have the same last digit ?

    • @eigilhysvr2292
      @eigilhysvr2292 5 років тому

      the = sign, I guess. Both sides are equal and must have the same any digit

    • @maaifoediedelarey4335
      @maaifoediedelarey4335 5 років тому +2

      @@eigilhysvr2292 ....... oh yeah ...... o_0 ..... I guess that wasn't my brightest moment ! Thank you.

  • @techedzee
    @techedzee 5 років тому

    The pattern matching is confusing. Just look at 2^y and that already tells you that for any n, it will be even. So move straight to using the difference of two squares straight away. So, the explanation up to timeline 3:55 is not needed to make that observation.

  • @missperfect4in
    @missperfect4in 5 років тому

    Hi
    I'm sorry if my question is silly.
    The question is
    @04:27, ¿don't you think the difference of squares will be aplicable if the equation was
    "615 = 4^2n - x^2"?