Mathematics of Computation Volume 00, Number 0, Pages 000-000 S 0025-5718 (XX) 0000-0
Mathematics of Computation Volume 00, Number 0, Pages 000-000 S 0025-5718 (XX) 0000-0
Mathematics of Computation Volume 00, Number 0, Pages 000-000 S 0025-5718 (XX) 0000-0
ij
= 1 + (x
i
+x
j
)
2
. (2.2)
Now, consider the following lemma:
Lemma 2.1. The (ane) rational solutions to
2
= 1 +
2
(2.3)
can be parameterized by =
m
2
+ 1
2m
, =
m
2
1
2m
, m Q, m ,= 0.
Proof. Dividing the equation
2
= 1 +
2
by
2
and making the substitution
= 1/,
)
2
+ (
)
2
. (2.4)
(Observe that equations (2.3) and (2.4) are dierent ane pieces to the same pro-
jective curve X
2
= Z
2
+Y
2
.) The point (
) = (
2m
m
2
+ 1
,
m
2
1
m
2
+ 1
).
Taking = 1/
and =
is a rational distance set if and only if for each 1 i < j 4, we can nd a nonzero
rational value m
ij
such that
x
i
+x
j
= g(m
ij
). (2.5)
In subsequent sections, it will be convenient to speak of m
ij
even when i > j.
Therefore, we set m
ij
equal to m
ji
whenever i > j.
We point out that g(m) has the following properties:
g(m) = g(1/m)
g(m) = g(m)
g(
m1
m+1
) = 1/g(m) which implies
g(g(
m1
m+1
)) = g(1/g(m)) = g(g(m)).
These properties will prove to be relevant later in the discussion.
A reduced echelon form of a matrix representing the system (2.5) is:
M =
1 0 0 0
1
2
(g(m
12
) +g(m
13
) g(m
23
))
0 1 0 0
1
2
(g(m
12
) g(m
13
) +g(m
23
))
0 0 1 0
1
2
(g(m
12
) +g(m
13
) +g(m
23
))
0 0 0 1
1
2
(g(m
12
) g(m
13
) +g(m
23
) + 2g(m
14
))
0 0 0 0 g(m
13
) +g(m
24
) g(m
23
) g(m
14
)
0 0 0 0 g(m
12
) +g(m
34
) g(m
23
) g(m
14
)
.
Now we have:
Theorem 2.4. Suppose P
1
, P
2
, P
3
and P
4
are rational points on y = x
2
. The set
P
1
, P
2
, P
3
, P
4
is a rational distance set if and only if there are rational values
m
ij
, 1 i < j 4 such that
x
1
=
g(m
12
) +g(m
13
) g(m
23
)
2
x
2
=
g(m
12
) g(m
13
) +g(m
23
)
2
(2.6)
x
3
=
g(m
12
) +g(m
13
) +g(m
23
)
2
x
4
=
g(m
12
) g(m
13
) +g(m
23
) + 2g(m
14
)
2
and
g(m
13
) +g(m
24
) = g(m
23
) +g(m
14
) = g(m
12
) +g(m
34
). (2.7)
We are now ready to divide the problem into two cases. First, we consider the
case in which the four points are concyclic.
3. Concyclic Subsets of Four Points.
The proposition below describes precisely when four points on the parabola are
concyclic:
Proposition 3.1. The four rational points P
i
= (x
i
, x
2
i
), i = 1, 2, 3, 4 are concyclic
if and only if x
1
+x
2
+x
3
+x
4
= 0.
POINTS ON y = x
2
AT RATIONAL DISTANCE 5
Proof. Let C
,,
be the circle (x )
2
+ (y )
2
=
2
, where , , R. This
circle intersects y = x
2
at the points whose x-coordinates are the roots of (x)
2
+
(x
2
)
2
2
or equivalently x
4
(2 1)x
2
2x (
2
2
2
). Since the
coecient of x
3
in this polynomial is 0, the roots must sum to 0.
Conversely, given four values, x
i
, i = 1, 2, 3, 4, such that x
1
+x
2
+x
3
+x
4
= 0,
one can solve
4
i=1
(x x
i
) = x
4
(2 1)x
2
2x (
2
2
)
for , , and .
Theorem 3.2. Suppose P
1
, P
2
, P
3
and P
4
are rational and concyclic. These points
are at rational distance if and only if there are nonzero rational values m
12
, m
13
and m
23
such that the rst three equations of (2.6) hold. When this is the case,
x
4
must equal
g(m
12
) g(m
13
) g(m
23
)
2
. Furthermore, the points are distinct if
and only if the g(m
ij
) are distinct.
Proof. By proposition 3.1, x
4
= x
1
x
2
x
3
. Therefore, for each i = 1, 2, 3,
x
i
+ x
4
= g(m
i4
) can be rewritten as x
j
+ x
k
= g(m
i4
), where i, j, k and 4 are
distinct. Since g(m) is an odd function, this is equivalent to requiring m
i4
= m
jk
.
Plugging this into the equations of theorem 2.4 gives us the rst part of the theorem.
If x
i
= x
j
for some i ,= j, then we are equating two of the equations in (2.6).
Solving the resulting equation proves the last statement of this theorem.
Remark 3.3. Observe that if precisely one of the values g(m
ij
) is 0, then the points
are symmetric across the y-axis. In this case, we need not assume the points are
rational. It is easy to show that when the points are symmetric about the y-axis,
four points on y = x
2
at rational distance must be rational points.
Remark 3.4. We also point out that theorem 3.2 implies that given any three
rational points on the parabola y = x
2
at rational distance, the point whose x-
coordinate is the negative of the sum of the x-coordinates of the other three points
is necessarily at rational distance to those three. This implies that one strategy for
attempting to get ve points at rational distance is to rst nd four non-concyclic
points at rational distance and take the fth point to be concyclic with some three of
them. This would immediately give ve points with all but one of the ten distances
rational.
One example of ve points on y = x
2
at rational distance was found while
producing non-concyclic sets of 4 points the set of points with x-coordinates
0, 91/60, 209/120. It may be possible to extend this to an innite family
of examples, but we have not yet been able to do so.
Our inability to completely describe the situation for ve points (even if we allow
some four of them to be concyclic) suggests that removing the concyclic condition
from question 1.3 does not render it trivial.
We now turn our attention to nding 4 non-concyclic points on y = x
2
at rational
distance.
6 GARIKAI CAMPBELL
4. Non-concyclic Subsets of Four Points.
Recall that theorem 2.4, and equations (2.7) in particular, describe a necessary
and sucient condition for points to be at rational distance. The equations (2.7)
determine a variety. In order to better understand this condition, we projectivize
the variety and characterize the set of points in the projective variety that corre-
spond to points at rational distance.
We begin by letting c be the sub-variety of P
2
P
1
dened by:
c : T
1
( Y (X
2
Z
2
) + X(Y
2
Z
2
) ) = 2T
0
XY Z.
Observe that c is simply the projective version of g(x) +g(y) = t. Let be the
projection map
: c P
1
dened by ( ([X, Y, Z] , [T
0
, T
1
]) ) = [T
0
, T
1
].
This projection is a morphism of varieties such that
1
(T) is a curve. If
1
(T)
is a non-singular, smooth curve of genus 1, then we call the curve a good ber.
Otherwise, we call the curve a bad ber. With these denitions, we have
Proposition 4.1. The only bad bers of c are
1
([1, 0]) and
1
([0, 1]) and all
good bers are elliptic curves.
Proof. We dene c
to be the variety:
c
: Y
2
Z = X (X
2
+ (T
4
0
+ 2T
2
0
T
2
1
) XZ + T
4
0
T
4
1
Z
2
).
The map : c c
which sends
X
Y
Z
T
0
T
1
T
2
0
T
3
1
T
2
0
T
3
1
0 0 0
T
4
0
T
3
1
T
4
0
T
3
1
0 0 0
T
1
T
1
2T
0
0 0
0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 1
X
Y
Z
T
0
T
1
X
Y
Z
T
0
T
1
T
2
0
1 0 0 0
T
2
0
1 0 0 0
T
0
T
1
0 T
3
0
T
3
1
0 0
0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 1
X
Y
Z
T
0
T
1
.
If we similarly dene
: c
P
1
to be the projection onto its second factor, then
the bers (
)
1
([T
0
, T
1
]) are clearly elliptic curves except when the discriminant
= T
14
0
T
8
1
(T
2
0
+4T
2
1
) is zero. Since the curves
1
([T
0
, T
1
]) and (
)
1
([T
0
, T
1
])
are isomorphic, this proves the theorem.
Remark 4.2. We will refer to the curve
1
([t, 1]) as E
t
and the curve
1
([1, 0])
as E
. Likewise, we let E
t
denote the curve (
)
1
([t, 1]) and E
)
1
([1, 0]). With this notation, we have:
(1) E
, E
t
is an elliptic curve dened over Q in Weierstrass form
isomorphic to E
t
and maps E
t
to E
t
.
(4) The point [1, 1, 0] is on E
t
for every t and ([1, 1, 0]) = [0, 1, 0].
POINTS ON y = x
2
AT RATIONAL DISTANCE 7
Given the remark above, we take O = [1, 1, 0] to be the identity of the group
of (rational) points on E
t
. We note that the statements in the remark can be
summarized by saying that c, together with and the zero section
0
: P
1
c dened by
0
(T) = ([1, 1, 0], T), is an elliptic surface. (See [12] for precise
denitions.)
Now, we dene H to be
c
P
1 c
P
1 c = (U, V, W) c c c [ (U) = (V ) = (W).
(We say that His a ber product over P
1
. We again refer the reader to [12] for precise
denitions.) Just as we can think of c as the projective version of g(x) +g(y) = t,
H is the projective version of (2.7).
We let H(Q) be the set of rational points in H and let be the set of 4-tuples of
rational points on y = x
2
at rational distance. Theorem 2.4 then gives a correspon-
dence between elements of and sets of points in H(Q). The correspondence is
between and sets of points in H(Q) because there are many 6-tuples of rational
values m
ij
, 1 i < j 4, that give rise to the same element of . If we let, H
0
be the set of points in H(Q) that correspond to some element of , then we can
dene a relation on H
0
as follows: for A, B H
0
, we will say A B if they each
correspond to the same four tuple of points on y = x
2
at rational distance. This is
clearly an equivalence relation and we can let H
0
/ denote the set of equivalence
classes. Much of theorem 2.4 can then be restated as:
Theorem 4.3. There is a well-dened, one-to-one map : H
0
/ .
Proof. Suppose P
1
, P
2
, P
3
, P
4
. By theorem 2.4, there are rational values
m
ij
, 1 i < j 4 such that
A = (([m
13
, m
24
, 1], [t, 1]), ([m
23
, m
14
, 1], [t, 1]), ([m
12
, m
34
, 1], [t, 1])), (4.1)
where t = g(m
13
) + g(m
24
) and m
ij
,= 0. We dene the map by taking
P
1
, P
2
, P
3
, P
4
to the equivalence class of the point A. is clearly well-dened
and one-to-one.
Remark 4.4. When A is a point in H
0
, we will often write
A = ((m
13
, m
24
), (m
23
, m
14
), (m
12
, m
34
))
to mean (4.1) with the understanding that t = g(m
13
) +g(m
24
). Moreover, we use
the convention of letting (X/Z, Y/Z) denote the point in projective space [X, Y, Z]
whenever Z ,= 0.
This theorem says that if we can describe the elements of H
0
/(and in particular
those equivalence classes coming from distinct, non-concyclic points on y = x
2
),
then we can characterize all 4 tuples of rational points on y = x
2
at rational
distance.The remainder of this section is dedicated to laying out this description.
We begin by re-characterizing the equivalence relation as the equivalence relation
induced by a particular group action.
Let S
n
denote the group of permutations on n letters. For any
A = ((m
13
, m
24
), (m
23
, m
14
), (m
12
, m
34
)) H
0
and any S
4
, dene A as follows:
A = ((m
(1)(3)
, m
(2)(4)
), (m
(2)(3)
, m
(1)(4)
), (m
(1)(2)
, m
(3)(4)
])).
We now have:
8 GARIKAI CAMPBELL
Table 1. Correspondence between changes to A and changes to P.
The change in coordinates: Corresponds to interchanging:
(U, V, W) (V, U, W)
or equivalently
(m
13
, m
24
) (m
23
, m
14
)
(m
23
, m
14
) (m
13
, m
24
)
(m
12
, m
34
) (m
12
, m
34
)
P
1
and P
2
.
(U, V, W) (U, W, V )
or equivalently
(m
13
, m
24
) (m
13
, m
24
)
(m
23
, m
14
) (m
12
, m
34
)
(m
12
, m
34
) (m
23
, m
14
)
P
1
and P
3
.
(U, V, W) (W, V, U)
or equivalently
(m
13
, m
24
) (m
34
, m
12
)
(m
23
, m
14
) (m
23
, m
14
)
(m
12
, m
34
) (m
24
, m
13
)
P
1
and P
4
.
(U, V, W) (W, V, U)
or equivalently
(m
13
, m
24
) (m
12
, m
34
)
(m
23
, m
14
) (m
23
, m
14
)
(m
12
, m
34
) (m
13
, m
24
)
P
2
and P
3
.
Theorem 4.5. S
4
acts on H
0
by . Furthermore, suppose
A = ((m
13
, m
24
), (m
23
, m
14
), (m
12
, m
34
)) H
0
.
Let P
1
, P
2
, P
3
, P
4
) be the ordered set of four points at rational distance given by
theorem 2.4 (determined by the m
ij
). Then A corresponds to the ordered set
P
(1)
, P
(2)
, P
(3)
, P
(4)
).
Proof. First we note that if i, j, k and l are distinct in 1, 2, 3, 4, then for any
S
4
, (i), (j), (k) and (l) are distinct as well. This implies that A H
0
whenever A H
0
. Since it is clear that () A = ( A), we have that
denes a group action.
It remains to show that A corresponds to permuting the points according to .
Since the transpositions (1 2), (1 3), (1 4), and (2 3) generate S
4
, this correspondence
follows from the information given in table 1. The table illustrates the association
between changes in the coordinates of A and changes in the P
i
as determined by
theorem 2.4. A is written as (U, V, W) with U = (m
13
, m
24
), V = (m
23
, m
14
) and
W = (m
12
, m
34
) to make things clearer.
Corollary 4.6. If A H
0
and S
4
, then A A.
Furthermore, suppose we let n = (n
13
, n
24
, n
23
, n
14
, n
12
, n
34
) (Z/2Z)
6
and
again let
A = ((m
13
, m
24
), (m
23
, m
14
), (m
12
, m
34
)) H
0
.
POINTS ON y = x
2
AT RATIONAL DISTANCE 9
Let A
n
be A with m
ij
replaced by 1/m
ij
whenever n
ij
= 1 (and m
ij
unchanged
otherwise). Then since g(m) = g(1/m), (Z/2Z)
6
acts on H
0
by n A = A
n
. To
be concise, below we use (n
ij
) to denote n.
We now combine the two individual group actions of S
4
and (Z/2Z)
6
together
into one action. In the theorem below, let be the homomorphism : S
4
Aut((Z/2Z)
6
) dened by ()(n
ij
) = (n
(i)(j)
) and let
= (Z/2Z)
6
> S
4
, the semidirect product relative to .
(As in the case of m
ij
, we set n
ij
to n
ji
whenever i > j.)
Theorem 4.7. acts on H
0
by (n, ) A = n ( A) and the equivalence
relation induced by this group action is . Equivalently, two points, A and B, in
H
0
correspond to the same set of four rational points on y = x
2
at rational distance
if and only if there is a such that A = B.
Proof. Let (m, ) and (n, ) be elements of . We need to verify that
(m, ) ((n, ) A) = (m()(n), ) A. (4.2)
Since (Z/2Z)
6
and S
4
act on H
0
individually, verifying (4.2) is equivalent to showing
(n B) = ()(n) ( B),
where B = A. But the homomorphism is constructed precisely so that this
works.
The action of (Z/2Z)
6
corresponds to choosing positive or negative values for
ij
in equations (2.1). (To see this, observe how the value of in Lemma 2.1 changes
when m is replaced by 1/m.) This and theorem 4.5 verify that for any A, B H
0
,
if there exists a such that A = B, then A B. The converse is clear
from (2.5).
Let [A] denote the orbit of a point A H
0
under this group action and H
=
H
0
/ denote the set of orbits. The theorem above says that H
= H
0
/ . Let
us also dene [A] H
3
= 1. (4.3)
No two of these are equal if only if u
i
,= u
j
for all i ,= j or U
i
is of the form (m, m)
for precisely one i. Since 1/x ,= x for any rational value x, when we consider the
action of the entire group , we get the conditions of the theorem.
10 GARIKAI CAMPBELL
Remark 4.9. There are two group actions on H
0
not covered by . First, there
is the action of Z/2Z on H
0
corresponding to reecting 4 points on the parabola
across the y-axis. Since g(m) is an odd function, this action is dened by
1 ((m
13
, m
24
), (m
23
, m
14
), (m
12
, m
34
)) =
((m
13
, m
24
), (m
23
, m
14
), (m
12
, m
34
)).
We will for the most part ignore this action since it is present in both and H
0
.
More interesting is the action of Z/2Z on H
0
dened by:
1 (U, V, W) = (U, V, W). (4.4)
The existence of this last action means that one element of H
0
may correspond
to two distinct elements of . Before we can be more precise, we rst observe
that theorem 4.8 (and the description (4.3) in particular) implies the following
propositions.
Proposition 4.10. Suppose A H
0
such that [A] is a free orbit. The Z/2Z action
described by (4.4) is trivial on [A] (i.e. [1 A] = [A]) if and only if [A] is of the
second form in theorem 4.8.
Proposition 4.11. If A H
0
such that [A] is not a free orbit, then the Z/2Z
action described by (4.4) is trivial on [A].
The former of the propositions above justies dening a free orbit [A] to be
doubly free if A is of the rst form in theorem 4.8 and to be singularly free if A if
of the second form in the theorem. We are now ready to prove:
Proposition 4.12.
1
([(U, V, W)]) ,=
1
([(U, V, W)]) if and only if [(U, V, W)]
is a doubly free orbit.
Proof. is one-to-one and so
1
([(U, V, W)]) =
1
([(U, V, W)]) if and only if
[(U, V, W)] = [(U, V, W)]. But then this occurs if and only if [(U, V, W)] is not a
doubly free orbit.
The propositions and theorems below give the necessary and sucient conditions
for an element of H
. P is
a set of non-concyclic points if and only if (U) ,= [0, 1].
Proof. First, note that is well dened in this context. More precisely, if (U, V, W)
(U
, V
, W
), then (U) = (U
).
Suppose the x-coordinate of P
i
is x
i
. Theorem 4.3 and proposition 2.3 say that
(P) = [(U, V, W)], where U can be taken to be ([m
13
, m
24
, 1], [g(m
13
)+g(m
24
), 1])
with g(m
13
) = x
1
+ x
3
and g(m
24
) = x
2
+ x
4
. Therefore, (U) = [g(m
13
) +
g(m
24
), 1] = [x
1
+x
2
+x
3
+x
4
, 1]. Hence, by proposition 3.1, the points are concyclic
if and only if (U) = [0, 1].
We may now turn our attention to the last piece of the puzzle of understanding
the set H
, if P = (x, y) E
t
(Q) with xy ,= 0, then we have
the following group law formulas:
P = (y, x) (4.6)
P +Q = (y, 1/x) (4.7)
2P = (
y(x
2
+ 1)(xy + 1)
x(y
2
+ 1)(x y)
,
x(y
2
+ 1)(xy + 1)
y(x
2
+ 1)(x y)
). (4.8)
Proof. The points P, O and (y, x) are collinear. Likewise for the points P, Q and
(1/x, y). The nal formula is attained by calculating the third point of intersection
of the tangent line at P.
Corollary 4.17. For all t Q
, if P = (x, y) E
t
(Q) with xy ,= 0, then
(1) P is a point of order 2 if and only if x = y. If this is the case, the torsion
subgroup of E
t
(Q) is either Z/2Z Z/4Z or Z/2Z Z/8Z.
(2) P is a point of order 4 if and only if x = 1/y. If this is the case, we
again have that the torsion subgroup of E
t
(Q) is either Z/2Z Z/4Z or
Z/2Z Z/8Z.
12 GARIKAI CAMPBELL
(3) P is a point of order 8 if and only if y = (x + 1)/(x 1) or y = (x
1)/(x + 1), x ,= 1. If this is the case, the torsion subgroup of E
t
(Q) must
be Z/2Z Z/8Z.
Furthermore, the subgroups above are the only possibilities for the torsion subgroups.
Proof. If P is a point of order 2, then P = P. By formula (4.6), this means that
(x, y) = (y, x).
If P is a point of order 4, then 2P = (x
, y
= y
, y
, z
= z
= 0, y
= z
= 0 or z
= 1 and x
= 1/y
,
1
x
), (
1
x
, x
, x
), (
1
x
,
1
x
), (0, 0)
0 [1, 1, 0]
where x
0
13/6 [(
3
10
,
15
2
), (
1
2
, 6), (
4
3
, 4)] (
307
240
,
19
80
,
127
240
,
757
240
)
[(
3
10
,
15
2
), (
1
2
, 6), (4,
4
3
)] (
497
240
,
133
240
,
317
240
,
189
80
)
16/15 [(
1
3
, 5), (
6
7
,
14
5
), (
5
3
,
5
3
)] (
283
280
,
271
840
,
719
840
,
1297
840
)
19/12 [(
1
3
, 6), (
3
4
, 4), (
5
3
,
5
2
)] (
259
240
,
61
240
,
63
80
,
511
240
)
[(
1
3
, 6), (
3
4
, 4), (
5
2
,
5
3
)] (
107
80
,
1
240
,
251
240
,
449
240
)
21/8 [(
3
4
, 6), (
5
4
, 5), (2, 4)] (
49
120
,
7
60
,
19
30
,
137
60
)
[(
3
4
, 6), (
5
4
, 5), (4, 2)] (
233
240
,
163
240
,
287
240
,
413
240
)
[(
1
4
, 6), (
7
12
,
7
2
), (2,
4
3
)] (
67
42
,
47
168
,
173
168
,
317
168
)
25/24 [(
1
4
, 6), (
7
12
,
7
2
), (3,
3
4
)] (
317
168
,
1
84
,
37
28
,
67
42
)
[(
7
12
,
7
2
), (
3
4
, 3), (2,
4
3
)] (
45
56
,
5
21
,
43
84
,
23
21
)
[(
7
12
,
7
2
), (
3
4
, 3), (
4
3
, 2)] (
193
336
,
1
112
,
95
336
,
445
336
)
33/56 [(
3
28
,
21
2
), (1,
7
4
), (
5
4
,
10
7
)] (
254
105
,
1843
840
,
254
105
,
167
60
)
[(
1
5
, 6), (
11
30
,
11
3
), (
5
2
,
3
5
)] (
382
165
,
14
165
,
749
660
,
98
55
)
[(
1
5
, 6), (
9
10
,
9
5
), (
5
4
,
4
3
)] (
983
720
,
149
144
,
907
720
,
1193
720
)
31/60 [(
3
5
,
5
2
), (
9
10
,
9
5
), (
5
4
,
4
3
)] (
311
720
,
73
720
,
47
144
,
521
720
)
[(
3
5
,
5
2
), (
9
10
,
9
5
), (
4
3
,
5
4
)] (
67
144
,
49
720
,
259
720
,
497
720
)
[(
1
5
, 6), (
9
10
,
9
5
), (
4
3
,
5
4
)] (
1007
720
,
721
720
,
931
720
,
1169
720
)
[(
4
15
,
20
3
), (
5
9
,
9
2
), (3,
6
5
)] (
1331
720
,
77
720
,
883
720
,
1463
720
)
[(
5
9
,
9
2
), (
4
5
,
15
4
), (
10
3
, 1)] (
851
720
,
403
720
,
689
720
,
851
720
)
91/60 [(
5
9
,
9
2
), (
4
5
,
15
4
), (3,
6
5
)] (
157
144
,
337
720
,
623
720
,
917
720
)
[(
4
15
,
20
3
), (
5
9
,
9
2
), (
6
5
, 3)] (
917
720
,
337
720
,
469
720
,
1877
720
)
[(
4
15
,
20
3
), (
5
9
,
9
2
), (1,
10
3
)] (
851
720
,
403
720
,
403
720
,
1943
720
)
133/30 [(2,
15
2
), (
9
4
,
36
5
), (6,
10
3
)] (
91
144
,
199
144
,
221
144
,
1547
720
)
[(2,
15
2
), (
9
4
,
36
5
), (
10
3
, 6)] (
49
720
,
491
720
,
601
720
,
2051
720
)
[(
3
10
,
20
3
), (1,
15
4
), (
10
3
,
5
4
)] (
91
60
, 0,
91
60
,
209
120
)
209/120 [(
3
10
,
20
3
), (
5
4
,
10
3
), (
12
5
, 2)] (
137
120
,
3
8
,
41
30
,
227
120
)
[(
3
10
,
20
3
), (1,
15
4
), (
12
5
, 2)] (
301
240
,
21
80
,
301
240
,
481
240
)
[(
2
5
, 8), (
8
5
, 5), (
15
4
,
8
3
)] (
553
480
,
49
480
,
787
480
,
1103
480
)
231/80 [(
2
5
, 8), (
8
3
,
15
4
), (
16
5
,
16
5
)] (
647
960
,
361
960
,
1747
960
,
2033
960
)
[(
8
5
, 5), (
8
3
,
15
4
), (
16
5
,
16
5
)] (
91
960
,
377
960
,
1009
960
,
259
192
)
Question 6.1. For which smooth conics are there 4 points at rational distance with
no four concyclic?
Note that the collinearity condition is unnecessary here as well since no line can
intersect any conic in more than 2 points. Clearly the conic cannot be a circle, but
what can we say beyond this trivial exclusion? As an immediate consequence of
the work above, we have the following
Theorem 6.2. Let C be a parabola and let d be the distance from the focus of C to
its directrix. If d is rational, then there are innitely many 4 tuples of non-concyclic
points on C at rational distance.
Proof. If C and d are dened as in the statement of the theorem, then C is a trans-
lation and rotation of the parabola C
: y =
1
2d
x
2
. Now suppose P
1
, P
2
, P
3
, P
4
is
POINTS ON y = x
2
AT RATIONAL DISTANCE 15
a set of points at rational distance on y = x
2
and let x
i
denote the x-coordinate
of P
i
. If x
i
= 2d x
i
and P
i
= (x
i
,
1
2d
(x
i
)
2
), then P
1
, P
2
, P
3
, P
4
is a set of ra-
tional distance points on C
. Furthermore, P
1
, P
2
, P
3
, P
4
is a concyclic set if and
only if P
1
, P
2
, P
3
, P
4
is a concyclic set. Therefore, corollary 4.23 gives us the
theorem.
Furthermore, we believe that we can take d =
c, c Q and get the same
conclusion. The details of this have not been completely worked out, but the idea
would be to parallel the work done here. We include the example of points on
y =
5x
2
with x-coordinates
840837
2306524
,
941477
2306524
,
2618949
2306524
,
1675371
2306524
to give some hint as to how one might proceed. We found this example by rst
parameterizing solutions to
2
= 1 + 5
2
using the chord and tangent method
described in section 2. The parameterization can be dened by = g
5
(m) =
(2m)/(m
2
5). To produce the example above, we randomly set t = g
5
(3)+g
5
(7)
and searched for other points on the elliptic curve g
5
(x) + g
5
(y) = t. We found
that (3, 7), (4, 3/2), and (37/340, 1234/435) were points on this curve. Now, by
assuming that the theorems of the previous sections all hold with g
5
in place of g, we
arrive at the example above. We believe more generally that all the theorems hold
with g
(m) = (2m)/(m
2
) in place of g. Since g
2
= 1 +
2
, this would give us the result.
Finally, observe that the focus of the parabola C
forms a
rational distance set in the plane. This in turn may lead to new congurations
of six points in the plane at rational distance with no three collinear and no four
concyclic. More generally, this leads very naturally back to the unsolved problem
mentioned in the opening section namely:
Question 6.3. Can you nd more than 6 points in the plane at rational distance
with no four concyclic and no three collinear?
Acknowledgements
Unless stated otherwise, calculations were performed using GP/Pari [2].
We would like to thank Allan MacLeod for sharing a preprint [9] of his which
bettered some earlier results of mine on this problem. As mentioned earlier, he
found a number of examples of 4 non-concyclic, rational points on y = x
2
at rational
distance. and that in turn inspired much of the work here. We also thank Tom
Hunter for his many thoughtful comments throughout the writing of this paper.
Finally, we owe particular gratitude to Edray Goins for his meticulous reading of a
draft of this paper and his signicant suggestions.
References
1. William Anderson and William Simons and J. G. Mauldon and James C. Smith. Elementary
Problems and Solutions: A Dense Subset of the Unit Circle (E 2697). American Mathematical
Monthly. 86(3):225, Mar. 1979.
16 GARIKAI CAMPBELL
2. C. Batut and K. Belabas and D. Benardi and H. Cohen and M. Olivier.
Users Guide to PARI-GP. ftp://megrez.math.u-bordeaux.fr/pub/pari, 1998. (See also
http://pari.home.ml.org.)
3. Andrew Bremner and Richard K. Guy. A Dozen Dicult Diophantine Dilemmas. American
Mathematical Monthly, 95(1):31-36,Jan. 1998.
4. Andrew Bremner, Arizona State University. Rational Points on y = x
2
. Personal communi-
cation. Dec., 2001.
5. John Cremona. mwrank. http://www.maths.nottingham.ac.uk/personal/jec/ftp/progs/,
2002.
6. Nathaniel Dean, Rice University. Personal communication. Oct., 2000.
7. Guy, Richard K. Unsolved Problems in Number Theory, Second Edition. Springer-Verlag,
1994.
8. J. Lagrange and J. Leech. Two Triads of Squares. Mathematics of Computation. 46(174):751-
758, Apr. 1986.
9. Allan J. MacLeod, University of Paisley. Rational Distance Sets on y = x
2
. Personal com-
munication. Jun., 2002.
10. Landon Curt Noll and David I. Bell. n-clusters for 1 < n < 7. Mathematics of Computation.
53(187):439-444, Jul. 1989.
11. Joseph Silverman. The Arithmetic of Elliptic Curves. Springer-Verlag, 1986.
12. Joseph Silverman. Advanced Topics in the Arithmetic of Elliptic Curves. Springer-Verlag,
1994.
13. W. D. Peeples, Jr. Elliptic Curves and Rational Distance Sets. Proceedings of the American
Mathematical Society. 5(1):29-33, Feb. 1954.
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, PA
19081
Current address: Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Swarthmore College, Swarth-
more, PA 19081
E-mail address: kai@swarthmore.edu