Let's say that I have a working Pythagorean triple generator for all integers greater or equal to 3. It generates primitive and non primitive pairs, and it's a one variable equation having to do with elements of the a term in a right triangle, not a case by case problem. I would post it here, but I would like to get credit for making it, and am afraid someone will take it. If I have something like this, would others consider it useful, and if so, what should I do with it?
Asked
Active
Viewed 234 times
1
-
2+1 for having the drive to work it out yourself. That said, I don't think there is much new credit left to claim about Pythagorean triples. See for example Pythagorean Right-Angled Triangles for a quite extensive collection of Pythagorean calculators. – dxiv Jul 06 '17 at 04:29
-
1Wow... that is, indeed, a rather exhaustive collection D: – Eric Stucky Jul 06 '17 at 04:33
-
Should I just publish what I have come up with, and see if someone has already found this? – Jul 06 '17 at 06:30
-
Barely related, you can generate a primitive Pythagorean triple for any given ratio $R=\frac{area}{perimeter}$ using Euclid's formula where $(m,n)=(2R+1,2R)$. – poetasis Jul 20 '19 at 18:39
1 Answers
1
The short answer: knowledge in mathematics is formally shared with the community through publications. You may be interested in this question; and this one, to a lesser extent.
Regarding credit: Unfortunately (for you), generating pythagorean triples— primitive or otherwise— is a very well-studied problem, and it's unlikely that what you have is new. [It maybe goes without saying, but for completeness: the Wikipedia page does not represent a comprehensive list of methods known for generating triples.]
At best, you may have an algorithmic improvement; that is, your method may be able to generate the first $n$ triples (ordered by norm or something) faster than other methods. But I couldn't find the state of the art on this kind of problem with a simple google result, and so you're not going to know if this is the case for your method without (1) a serious analysis of your own method, and (2) a nontrivial literature search.
[ Or, of course, you could outsource that work (e.g. to MSE), but for that you would need to provide at least a technical description of your method, and it seems like you are not willing to do this. ]
Eric Stucky
- 12,758
- 3
- 38
- 69
-
FWIW: The set of pythagorean triples naturally forms a two-parameter family. But it is possible to write any two-parameter family as a one-parameter family, so this is not necessarily a guarantee of novelty. – Eric Stucky Jul 06 '17 at 04:23