7

In this interesting post, it quotes a paper that to write down the complete solution (not in radicals) of the general quintic, one would need "a piece of paper as big as a large asteroid". Probably an exaggeration, but perhaps we can reduce the size.

The quartic transformation that result in the Bring-Jerrard form can apply to any equation of deg $n>4$, and to undo everything later is a mess. But there is a transformation unique to the quintic which exploits its connection to the icosahedron and require only square roots, hence is much tidier.


I. From general to principal quintic

One first transforms the general quintic $P(x) = 0$ to principal form $P(y) = 0$ using a quadratic Tschirnhausen transformation $x^2+mx+n = y$. Thus, to recover the roots $x$ from $y$ need only solving a quadratic.


II. Solution of the principal quintic

Now that we have the principal form,

$$P(y)=y^5+5ay^2+5by+c = 0$$

then, like the Bring quintic, we can solve it using the Dedekind eta function $\eta(\tau)$ and hypergeometric function $_2F_1$ but without solving any cubic or quartic at all. Instead, the Rogers-Ramanujan continued fraction $R(q)$ appears. It can be done in just $9$ steps.

First, solve the quadratic for any root $\lambda$,

$$(a^4 + a b c - b^3)\lambda^2 - (11a^3b - a c^2 + 2b^2 c)\lambda + (64a^2b^2 - 27a^3c - b c^2) = 0\tag1$$

then define $e,f$ as,

$$e = \frac{-8a \lambda^3 - 72b \lambda^2 - 72c \lambda + g a^2}{a \lambda^2 + b \lambda + c} \tag2$$

$$f = \frac{1}{1728 - g} \tag3$$

$$g = \frac{(a \lambda^2 - 3b \lambda - 3c)^3}{a^2(a c \lambda - b^2\lambda - b c)} \tag4$$

Let $q = e^{2\pi i\tau}$ and the principal quintic roots $y$ are,

$$y = \frac{ez+\lambda}{f^{-1}z^2-3}\tag5$$

$$z = \pm\sqrt{\frac{-f(u^2 + 4)(u^2 - 2u - 4)^2}{u^5 + 5 u^3 + 5u - 11}}\tag{6a}$$

Or alternatively,

$$\quad z = \pm\left(\frac{1}{R(q)}+R(q)\right)\sqrt{\frac{-f(u^2 - 2u - 4)^2}{v - 11}}\tag{6b}$$

$$u = \frac{1}{R(q)}-R(q) = \frac{\eta(\tau/5)}{\eta(5\tau)}+1\tag{7a}$$

$$\quad v = \frac{1}{R^5(q)}-R^5(q) = \left(\frac{\eta(\tau)}{\eta(5\tau)}\right)^6+11\tag{7b}$$

$$\qquad\qquad \tau=\tau_k = k+ \frac{_2F_1\big(\tfrac16,\tfrac56,1,1-\beta\big)}{_2F_1\big(\tfrac16,\tfrac56,1,\beta\big)}\sqrt{-1}, \quad (k = 0,1,2,3,4) \tag8$$

$$\qquad\qquad 4\beta^2-4\beta+\frac{1728f}{1728f-1} = 0\quad(\text{any root}\;\beta)\\ \tag9$$

Steps $1-5$ transform the principal quintic into the Brioschi as described in this post and can be found in Duke's and Tóth's "The Splitting of Primes in Division Fields of Elliptic Curves" in page 10. (Note: There is a stumbling block in Step 4 when $a=0$, but one can get around that by redefining the first four steps.) The steps afterwards are mine and a more efficient version of this 2015 post.

Thus, by passing through the Brioschi quintic, it seems one may not need an asteroid-sized piece of paper after all.


III. Example

Given,

$$y^5+5y^2+10y+2=0$$

so $a,b,c = 1,2,2.\,$ Solving $(1)$, we choose $v = \tfrac{1}{3}\big({-17} + \sqrt{871}\big)$ and get,

$$e = \tfrac{16}{27}\big(5071 - 179\sqrt{871}\big)$$

$$f = \tfrac{1}{43312^2}\big(615193 + 20894 \sqrt{871}\big)$$

Substituting those into Steps $5$-$9$, and choosing the correct sign of $z$, we find the five roots $y$.


IV. Question

Note that Step $6\text{a}$ solves the Brioschi quintic,

$$z^5-10fz^3+45f^2z-f^2 = 0$$

$$z = \pm\sqrt{\frac{-f(u^2 + 4)(u^2 - 2u - 4)^2}{u^5 + 5 u^3 + 5u - 11}}\tag{6a}$$

Q. But is there a way to simplify the expression in $u$ under the square root sign? Or solve for $z$ without square roots at all? (The polynomials are so familiar I feel the solution must already have been tackled by Brioschi, Klein, or their contemporaries.)

Update: As pointed out by @dxiv and @ParamanandSingh in the comments, we can indeed simplify the root $z$ as,

$$\quad z = \pm\sqrt{-f\;}\,(u^2 - 2u - 4)\left(\frac{1}{R(q)}+R(q)\right) \left(\frac{\eta(5\tau)}{\eta(\tau)}\right)^{3}\tag{6b}$$

where $u = \frac{1}{R(q)}-R(q) = \frac{\eta(\tau/5)}{\eta(5\tau)}+1,$ so only $f$ remains under the square root, confirming my belief that $z$ must have a simpler form. (But this can't be the solution found by Brioschi or his contemporaries since they lived before Ramanujan.)

  • Even the formulas for cubics and quartics are so complicated that they are usually not used in practice. This will be the case even more for a quintic. And since it cannot be generally solved by radicals anyway , it is barely worth the effort to establish a procedure. – Peter Jun 25 '23 at 15:30
  • I once heard of Bring radicals (claimed to allow to solve a general quintic) , maybe this approach is easier. – Peter Jun 25 '23 at 15:31
  • @Peter From principal to Bring quintic needs a quartic transformation, so to undo it would be a complicated mess. But this method needs only square roots so it’s doable. I guess it is just the desire to know if something can be done. And this method also implies the quintic is solvable by the Rogers-Ramanujan cfrac, so that in itself is notable. – Tito Piezas III Jun 25 '23 at 16:14
  • Does Thomae’s formula apply? It does not require any transformations – Тyma Gaidash Jun 25 '23 at 21:25
  • @TitoPiezasIII In terms of $R=R(q)$ the first factor in the numerator turns into a square $u^2+4 = \left(R + \dfrac{1}{R}\right)^2$. But the denominator $u^5 + 5 u^3 + 5u - 11 = R^5 - \dfrac{1}{R^5} - 11$ looks no nicer. – dxiv Jun 26 '23 at 00:28
  • 1
    @dxiv: the last expression involving $R^5$ is well known and has a nice form in terms of Dedekind eta function. – Paramanand Singh Jun 26 '23 at 02:36
  • @ParamanandSingh Thank you for the nudge (which also made me realize that I got a couple of signs wrong in the very last expression). If I am not mistaken, eq. $(3)$ in your post here shows that the denominator is a perfect square in terms of $\eta$, then. – dxiv Jun 26 '23 at 03:29
  • @TitoPiezasIII That was the low-hanging fruit, I guess ;-) because, to be honest, I have not followed all the deeper steps. I know that's no news to you, but for reference 1, 2 look to be related, too. – dxiv Jun 26 '23 at 03:36
  • 1
    @dxiv I just tested your relations. Yes, it's, \begin{align}u^2+4 &= \left(\frac{1}{R}+R\right)^2\ u^5+5u^3+5u-11 &= \left(\frac{1}{R^5}-R^5-11\right) = \left(\frac{\eta(\tau)}{\eta(5\tau)}\right)^6\end{align} (correcting your signs for the second) so both are squares. – Tito Piezas III Jun 26 '23 at 05:44
  • @TymaGaidash Thomae's formula is too complicated and exotic that I can't even find an example for the quintic. Maybe one can start with one-parameter or two-parameter functions, for the latter like the Appell or Kampé de Fériet functions. I see you have posts for the second. Do you have an example of an Appell or Kampé that is a root of a 4-term sextic? – Tito Piezas III Jun 26 '23 at 07:03
  • @ParamanandSingh I have updated the post with yours and dxiv's insights. I should have guessed that both $R(q)$ and $R^5(q)$ would appear. – Tito Piezas III Jun 26 '23 at 07:23
  • @Peter: I believe the formulae "grow" at a slightly exponential-ish rate; i.e. each one is a few times as "big" as the previous. The jump from "fits on a page when wrapped, but at still-legible font" (Ferrari's quartic formula, IIRC) to now "needs so much paper it covers a big asteroid" (billions? trillions? of pages) seems extraordinary. Hence to ask if we can soften it, without say just getting overly "generous" in the kind of non-radical solution functions we admit (otherwise you can just define a function $\mathrm{Root}$ and...). – The_Sympathizer Jun 27 '23 at 15:24

1 Answers1

-1

Too long for a comment :

We can play with mixing nested radicals and continued fraction :

Example

Let :

$$x=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\cdot\cdot\cdot}}}}+\frac{1}{1+\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\cdot\cdot\cdot}}}}}+\frac{1}{1+\frac{1}{1+\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\cdot\cdot\cdot}}}}}}}}$$

Then $x$ is near from the solution of :

$$x^{2}\left(1+x+\frac{1}{x+1}+\frac{1}{1+\frac{1}{x+1}}\right)-1\simeq 0$$

Or :

$$x^{5}+5x^{4}+8x^{3}+4x^{2}-3x-2\simeq 0$$

Then use Newton's method and the general solution of the quartic .

Hope it helps .

Edit : I misread the question here there is no square roots but square :

we have :

$$\frac{1}{\left(1+\frac{1}{\left(1+\frac{1}{\left(1+\frac{1}{\left(1+1\right)^{2}}\right)^{2}}\right)^{2}}\right)^{2}+\frac{1}{\left(1+\frac{1}{\left(1+\frac{1}{\left(1+\frac{1}{\left(1+1\right)}\right)^{2}}\right)^{2}}\right)^{2}}}=x$$

Then we have :

$$x\left(\left(1+x\right)^{2}+\frac{1}{\left(1+x\right)^{2}}\right)-1\simeq 0$$

Or :

$$x^{5}+4x^{4}+7x^{3}+5x^{2}+x-2=0$$

Then use Newton's method and quartic general formula .