1

This is in continuance to my earlier post : Deriving expression for general cubic equation solution. Also, the links are repeated for the first four pages of the book by Dickson, titled "Introduction to Theory of Algebraic Equations" are given as : page #1,$\,$page #2,$\,$ page #3, $\,$page #4

In the case of general cubic equation of the form $x^3 -c_1x +c_2x^2 -c_4$, am trying to find the significance of the substitutions involved.

a) Page#1 has the first substitution (i) $x = y + \frac{c_1}{3}$,
The original equation has $3$ roots $x_1,x_2,x_3$, with equation as $(x-x_1)(x-x_2)(x-x_3)$ : $$(x^2 -xx_2-xx_1+x_1x_2)(x-x_3)$$$$= x^3 -x^2(x_1+x_2+x_3)+x(x_1x_3+x_1x_2+x_2x_3)-x_1x_2x_3$$

As, the transformation is linear, i.e. a horizontal shift is involved towards the left by $\frac{c_1}{3}$; so there will be still the same ($3$) number of roots with shift involved on the horizontal axis. Need eliminate the second order term, with coefficient as the sum of roots. Also, by vieta's theorem get from the given cubic $\sum_{i=1}^3 x_i = c_1$. So, the transformed equation (after substitution) has eliminated the needed term: $$x_i = y_i + \frac{c_1}{3}\implies \sum_{i=1}^3 x_i = c_1+\sum_{i=1}^3 y_i\implies c_1 = c_1 + \sum_{i=1}^3 y_i\implies \sum_{i=1}^3 y_i = 0$$



b) Page#2 has the second substitution (i) $y = z - \frac{p}{3z}$, with the two parts making up the root $y$. So, there will be a total of $6$ roots for $3$ values. Also, the substitution can be viewed as : $p= 3z^2 - 3zy\implies p=p_1+p_2$ with $\frac{p_1}{3} =z^2, -\frac{p_2}{3}= zy$. The first is an equation of a circle with radius $\sqrt{\frac{p_1}{3}}$, while the second is that of an hyperbola.
I am unable to make any further logic out of the above.


*Update - * The substitution of (a) is not new, but is also used in quadratic equations by removing the coefficient of $x$ term by substituting in the general quadratic eqn. $ax^2+bx+c=0\implies x^2 +\frac{b}{a}x+\frac{c}{a}=0,$ the value $y = x +\frac{b}{2a}$ to get $y^2 +p =0$, with $p = \frac c a -\frac {b^2}{4a^2}$.

Eqn. of concern for (b) is depressed cubic, with $y$ being the horizontally shifted root. Here, $p$ is the coefficient of the $y$ term, i.e. $p = y_1y_2+y_2y_3+ y_3y_1$. Also, $y_i$ is split into two parts $u_i,v_i$ with product of $3$ valid combinations (out of $1*3+1*3+1*3=3+3+3=9$ possible) of two roots ($u_i, v_j, i,j \in \{1,2,3\}$) leading to $-\frac{p}{3}$. There is logic behind it that concerns restraining by conditions the possible values taken by the roots $u_i, v_j, i,j \in \{1,2,3\}$. The conditions are imposed after grouping the roots $u_i, v_j$ or simply $u,v$, as follows:
$y^3 +py +q =0$ with $p = c_2-\frac{c_1^2}{3}, q= -c_3+\frac13c_1c_2-\frac2{27}c_1^3$
$$(u+v)^3+py +q\implies (u^3+v^3+3u^2v+3uv^2)+p(u+v)+q$$ $\implies u^3+v^3+(3uv+p)(u+v)+q$ with addtl. condn. $3uv + p=0$
Although (on page #41 of the thesis stated below) arbitrary choice is ascribed to the choice of factoring & the addtln. condn. of the last eqn., but logic can be found as follows:
(i) The system of linear equations given by the substitution always yields a solution in $C$, i.e.: $$u+v=y$$$$3uv + p = 0$$ This is as given on footnote on page #41 of the thesis freely available here (that also is the context of the book 'The Unattainable Attempt to Avoid the Casus Irreducibilis for Cubic Equations') by 'Sara Confalonieri', with image here.
As $p = c_2 -\frac{c_1^2}{3}\implies p = \frac{3(x_1x_2+x_2x_3+x_3x_1) -(x_1+x_2+x_3)^2}{3}\implies \frac{-(x_1(x_1+x_2) +x_2(x_2 +x_3)+x_3(x_3+x_1))}{3}.$
Also, $y = x-\frac{c_1}{3}\implies y = x-\frac{x_1+x_2+x_3}{3}.$

Although, still not explored the link between $u,v$ and $p$, but a substitution by an actual value set is done :
For example, the equation set with $y=10, p=-120\implies \frac{-p}{3} = 40$ leads to: $$u + v = 10$$$$uv = 40$$ is equivalent to the equation $u(10-u) =40 \implies u^2 -10u +40 =0$.

(ii) The restriction $3uv + p=0$ leads to further elimination of the first order terms, hence enabling finding the principal cube roots from which the other two cube roots have to be found out.

To continue ...

jiten
  • 4,524
  • Have tool based solution based on historical approaches taken at : https://www.maa.org/book/export/html/743812, https://www.maa.org/book/export/html/654006. Other detailed (but no tool used) explanation based on histl. apprs. taken is at : http://www.math.cornell.edu/~dwh/papers/geomsolu/geomsolu.html. A useful (but not directly related) youtube video on intersection of cubic and parabola is at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzopLtbLgb8, although such content is found easily in coordinate (analytical) geo. books as by S. L. Loney, on archive. Also, www.geogebra.org/m/JUtXYScU, /ghEE8aev. – jiten Apr 30 '18 at 01:21
  • Actual approach used by Khayyam and its shortcomings at: https://math.stackexchange.com/q/11865/424260. 2. Found content: " Khayyam found through geometry and proportions solution to the problem was the same as an intersection of a parabola and a circle" at : (a) desmos (https://www.desmos.com/calculator/w2bqwvzkvy), (b) at Jstor (http://www.jstor.org/stable/2688197?read-now=1&loggedin=true&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents), (c) Earlier comments' MAA links' ((2), given first) text version: http://people.math.sfu.ca/~muraki/cubic/KentMuraki2015MAA.pdf.
  • – jiten May 01 '18 at 02:28
  • 1
    I just happened to come across this, which was recently bumped to the front page (I had not seen your two questions before now), and although I don't have time now to dig through all that you've written, on the off-chance it might be of help with geometric intuition behind the horizontal shift substitution, see my answers to Proving a quadratic polynomial has no real roots without using derivatives or any formulas (continued) – Dave L. Renfro May 12 '18 at 10:10
  • 2
    and The sum - product problem (see near the bottom, where "(comments not included in my original post)" appears). Also, "Section 3. Quadratic Factors of $;x^4 + 10x^2 - ; 96x - 71$" of the first part of my answer to How to integrate $ \int \frac{x}{\sqrt{x^4+10x^2-96x-71}}dx$? might be of interest. – Dave L. Renfro May 12 '18 at 10:16
  • 1
    Sorry to blow my own trumpet a bit, but you may want to look at this. That explanation can be found in probably all books on Galois theory, but I do try to explain where those $u$ and $v$ come from. Granted, familiarity with Kummer theory makes that a lot easier. – Jyrki Lahtonen May 12 '18 at 21:08
  • @JyrkiLahtonen Thanks for that. But, still if there could be an expln. for the above issue (i) (in 'Update' section), i.e. linking $y, p$ & $u,v$. I mean that the expansions given for $p,y$ in terms of $x_i$ could be used in conjugation with $u,v$ to show that (i) always has a solution in the complex domain $C$. I have read your answer in the link given but seems that need some Galois theory or quadratic field understanding to possibly get the answer to the issue raised in (i). I feel that being nil in both Galois theory & quadratic field extensions, need a more down-to-earth approach. – jiten May 13 '18 at 01:08