Then the problem is reduced to 3q^2 and p/4 -- p/4 can't have any different factors from p, nor can q^2 from q, so the only way 3q^2 and p/4 can have any factors in common is if p is divisible by 3. Yes?
Do you mean that since we get (p²+3q²)/(p/4)=4p+12q²/p and the first term, 4p, is obviously a multiplication of p, we have to show that the second term, 12q²/p is prime with p? Because if that's what you mean, then you show it quite clearly, IMNotMathyHO. The only thing that can connect between p/4 and 3q² is the 3, for exactly the reason you stated.
Though I suppose, for completeness, I should figure out how to write it in Hebrew?
I'm going to find a way to visually show you that, then. I'm thrilled that you prefer to use that!
Oh, if we're all going to meet in London, I can show you there, I guess.
I vote for a F2F in Bruxelles. At the chocolate shop! ::totally giddy::
We know a great chocolate shop in Philipsburg, St. Maarten.
IJS.
you show it quite clearly, IMNotMathyHO.
Yay! Then I managed to show that you can set up that product to be the product of coprime numbers even if p is a multiple of 3. So that's all good. But then... things get murky. I'm trying to work out part of Euler's proof that there's no integer solution to x^3 + y^3 = z^3, in case you were wondering. I know it's just elementary algebra and number theory, but it's totally beating me into the ground.
Math is hard.
If you're all going to be in London, will you come and visit me for lunch if I'm in Paris? My father's been promising to take me for about ten years now (since we saw Sabrina, I think).
would love to go to London. Y'all be my alibi with the folks at the bank, hmm?
Anne, glad somebody got that...it's a small crowd, you know. I still hate that the painted the squad...it's supposed to be dirty and beige. That's it. You're supposed to be able to imagine all the bored, pissed-off witnesses scratching curses for the po-lice in the walls with their keys and what-not. It could be possible I thought about it too much.
Hec, it could be Rowlf took on his Waitsliness over time...
it's just elementary algebra and number theory, but it's totally beating me into the ground.
Everything is/can be difficult when you learn it for the first time (I've never learned number theory, for the record). Or as my mom likes to say "nobody was born with the knowledge".
Math is hard.
You seem to be beating it well enough, step by step. And I'm totally not saying that because I like you!
If you're all going to be in London, will you come and visit me for lunch if I'm in Paris?
A Europe tour!
ETA: Okay what LA-istas aren't up at this point?
Hey!
I was up entirely too late writing. I ignored the phone and internets and wrote and wrote and I AM SO STUCK.
And the apartment is disgusting and needs to be cleaned, and I have to clear out my trunk for Catalina luggage.
And I suck.
Be one with the primes, Emily.
I'm beginning to formulate a theory about Rowlf, Tom Waits and parallel evolution. Or, possibly, a really good test case for Intelligent Design.
I was up entirely too late writing.
Yay for writing! Is it OK to ask what about? Because if not, then ignore the question.
I AM SO STUCK
And I suck
No, you missed the "t" in the second sentence. Because I can believe the first verb, but not the second.
Everything is/can be difficult when you learn it for the first time
This is true. The problem is, since it's a History of Math course, I'm learning something for the first time every single homework (that is to say, they're not building on each other). This is very frustrating. Also, I'm stuck. Again. Maybe another failed attempt to see Harry Potter will put things right.
