3

Recall that given,

$$x^3+y^3+z^3 = (z+1)^3$$

we do the substitution $z = 3 n^2x + (3 n^2 + 1)(y - 1)$ like Adam Bailey in this post to get the ellipse,

$$x^2 - x y + y^2 - (27 n^4 - 1) x - (27n^4 + 18 n^2 + 2 ) y + (27n^4 + 9 n^2 + 1 ) = 0$$

after removing a trivial factor. I found two triples of polynomial solutions to this. The first triple $(x,y) = (a_j,a_k)$,

\begin{align} (a_1,\, a_2) &= (3n + 3n^2 + 9n^3,\, 1 + 6n^2 - 9n^3)\\ (a_3,\, a_4) &= (-3n + 3n^2 - 18n^3 + 27n^4,\, 1 - 3n + 15n^2 - 9n^3 + 54n^4)\\ (a_5,\, a_6) &= (12n^2 + 9n^3 + 54n^4,\, 1 + 3n + 15n^2 + 18n^3 + 27n^4)\end{align}

These three lattice points are the vertices of the first triangle. And the second triple $(x,y) = (b_j,b_k)$ ,

\begin{align} (b_1,\, b_2) &= (-9n^3,\, 1 - 3n + 9n^2 - 18n^3 + 27n^4)\\ (b_3,\, b_4) &= (-3n + 9n^2 - 9n^3 + 54n^4,\, 1 + 18n^2 + 9n^3 + 54n^4)\\ (b_5,\, b_5) &= (3n + 9n^2 + 18n^3 + 27n^4,\, 1 + 3n + 9n^2 + 9n^3)\qquad\qquad\end{align}

are the vertices of the second triangle. Naturally, these satisfy,

$$(a_j)^3+(a_{j+1})^3+(u_j)^3 = (u_j+1)^3$$ $$(b_j)^3+(b_{j+1})^3+(v_j)^3 = (v_j+1)^3$$

for integer polynomials $u_j,\,v_j.$ I found these empirically, but the natural question to ask is: can we derive one triangle from the other? Note the curious relationships,

\begin{align} \alpha &= a_1 + a_3 + a_5 = b_1 + b_3 + b_5 = 3(27n^4+6n^2)\\ \beta &= a_2 + a_4 + a_6 = b_2 + b_4 + b_6 = 3(27n^4+12n^2+1)\end{align}

\begin{align} \frac23(\alpha+\beta)\, &= a_1 + a_2 + b_3 + b_4\\ &= a_3 + a_4 + b_5 + b_6\\ &= a_5 + a_6 + b_1 + b_2 \,=\, 2(54n^4+18n^2+1)\end{align}

In a previous post, I asked if $(\alpha,\beta)$ had a geometric interpretation and Jan-Magnus Økland answered that $\big(\dfrac{\alpha}3,\dfrac{\beta}3\big)$ in fact is the center of the ellipse. And this post, it is stated that "if the center is known, then 3 points are enough to uniquely define an ellipse". A triangle, in other words.


To illustrate, let $n=\pm2$ and we get the same ellipse,

$$x^2 - x y + y^2 - 431 x - 506 y + 469 = 0$$

graphed below by the Desmos calculator with relevant lattice points,

enter image description here

The 3 blue points determine the first triangle, while the 3 green points determine the second triangle. By reflecting these $6$ points along the semi-major and semi-minor axes, then one will get $6\times4 = 24$ points. (However, the Alpertron calculator says this has a total of $48$.)


Question: Is there a general way to derive the second triangle from the first triangle using some basic principles of conic sections?

P.S. The reason I ask is I found three families of ellipses for $x^3+y^3+z^3=(z+1)^3$, each with a pair of triangles with polynomial vertices. It can't be coincidence they come in pairs.

  • How did you find the solutions $(a_i,a_j), (b_i,b_j)$? If you choose one pair of integral points $x:=(a,b)$ - can you say anything about the subgroup generated by this point? – hm2020 Jan 16 '24 at 09:39
  • Translated to the center it becomes this. – Jan-Magnus Økland Jan 16 '24 at 09:55
  • @hm2020 I will edit the post re its origins. The cyclic nature of these points is also apparent in the first linked post. – Tito Piezas III Jan 16 '24 at 10:54
  • @Jan-MagnusØkland Hmm, that makes it simpler! I will give that more thought. – Tito Piezas III Jan 16 '24 at 10:59
  • @hm2020 The six integer points $a_i$ for $i =1\to6$ are solutions to the sextuple system, $$a_1^3+a_2^3+z_1^3 = (z_1+1)^3\ a_2^3+a_3^3+z_2^3 = (z_2+1)^3\ a_3^3+a_4^3+z_3^3 = (z_3+1)^3\ \vdots\ a_6^3+a_1^3+z_6^3 = (z_6+1)^3$$ where the last equation goes back to $a_1$ again discussed in this post. Regarding the group theoretic properties of these, I'm hoping you can shed more light. I'm more familiar with the Diophantine aspect. – Tito Piezas III Jan 16 '24 at 11:15
  • 1
    I note that the center of the ellipse bisects each of the three choices of line segment between one green point and the antipodal blue point. That is, the green triangle is moved to the blue triangle by pi radians rotation about the center of the ellipse. So from the center and one triangle, the other triangle can be found by simple arithmetic or simple construction. – Eric Towers Jan 17 '24 at 19:49
  • @EricTowers This is interesting! By reflection along the semi-major and semi-minor axis, these six points can generate $6\times4 = 24$ of the known lattice points. So I assume just by appropriate rotation, the vertices of the green triangle can generate all these $24$? But this ellipse actually has $24+24=48$ lattice points. Kindly see this post. Would it be possible for the green triangle to generate the other $24$ as well? – Tito Piezas III Jan 17 '24 at 23:54
  • @TitoPiezasIII : You might try translating the center of the ellipse to the origin. This will give you an equation like $x^2 - xy + y^2 ={}$ some number. Then apply, https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1836578/find-the-sides-of-the-triangle/1837085#1837085 to the factorization of that number. – Eric Towers Jan 19 '24 at 00:12
  • @EricTowers I actually have moved it to the origin, though I prefer the form $p^2+3q^2 =,$ some number. The ellipse for $n=1,2,3,$ etc has lattice points $12, 48, 24, 36, 72, 24,$ etc and the parametrizations I found yield $6 \times 4 = 24$ lattice points and is thus complete for $n = 3, 6, 22$ etc. That's why I chose $n = 2$ since it has $48$ points and has "extras". That link you gave was very informative since it suggests the number of points is determined by factoring over the Eisenstein integers. This new post might also be informative. – Tito Piezas III Jan 20 '24 at 05:49
  • I wanted to try to reverse engineer, given three points with centroid the center and the factor $(x+y-1)$: xA:9*n^3+3*n^2+3*n;yA:(-9*n^3)+6*n^2+1;xB:-3*n+3*n^2-18*n^3+27*n^4;yB:1-3*n+15*n^2-9*n^3+54*n^4;xC:12*n^2+9*n^3+54*n^4;yC:1+3*n+15*n^2+18*n^3+27*n^4; xO:(xA+xB+xC)/3;yO:(yA+yB+yC)/3; solve([a*(xA-xO)^2+2*b*(xA-xO)*(yA-yO)+c*(yA-yO)^2-1,a*(xB-xO)^2+2*b*(xB-xO)*(yB-yO)+c*(yB-yO)^2-1,a*(xC-xO)^2+2*b*(xC-xO)*(yC-yO)+c*(yC-yO)^2-1],[a,b,c]); # [[a = 1/(729*n^8+486*n^6+108*n^4+9*n^2), b = -1/(1458*n^8+972*n^6+216*n^4+18*n^2), c = 1/(729*n^8+486*n^6+108*n^4+9*n^2)]] – Jan-Magnus Økland Jan 21 '24 at 20:45
  • R=QQ[n][a,b,c][x,y,z] (mons, cofs)=coefficients(x^3+y^3+(a*x+b*y+c)^3-(a*x+b*y+c+1)^3-(x+y-1)*(y^2-x*y-27*n^4*y-18*n^2*y-2*y+x^2-27*n^4*x+x+27*n^4+9*n^2+1)) primaryDecomposition ideal cofs -- {ideal(b+c+1,a+c,c-3*n^2), ideal(b+c,a+c+1,c+3*n^2+1)} solve([b+c+1,a+c,c-3*n^2],[a,b,c]); # [[a = -3*n^2,b = (-3*n^2)-1,c = 3*n^2]] solve([b+c,a+c+1,c+3*n^2+1],[a,b,c]); # [[a = 3*n^2,b = 3*n^2+1,c = (-3*n^2)-1]] So, from the first, we recover $z=3n^2x+(3n^2+1)y-3n^2-1$ or $-3n^2(x+y-1)-(y-z-1)=0.$ – Jan-Magnus Økland Jan 21 '24 at 20:46
  • @Jan-MagnusØkland I recognize the denominators of (a,b,c). For example, a = 1/(729n^8+486n^6+108n^4+9n^2), then the denominator is 9n^2(3n^2 + 1)(27n^4+9n^2+1) which is (multiplied by 2) what you used in the Smith normal form in your answer. I believe that for this family of ellipses, the number of lattice points is always divisible by 3, correct? Because given one point, it seems two other points can be found. – Tito Piezas III Jan 22 '24 at 03:18
  • @Jan-MagnusØkland As a second comment, that's a nice alternative relationship $3n^2(x+y−1)+(y−z−1)=0.$ More generally, then $n(x+y−m)+(y−z−m)=0$ will cause the equation $x^3+y^3+z^3 = (z+m)^3$ to factor into an ellipse and a trivial factor $(x+y-m)$ as I did in this recent post. – Tito Piezas III Jan 22 '24 at 03:43
  • @Jan-MagnusØkland (Originally the first comment.) I recognize the denominators. For example, a = 1/(729n^8+486n^6+108n^4+9n^2), then the denominator factors as 9n^2(3n^2 + 1)(27n^4+9n^2+1) which when multiplied by 2 appears in the Smith normal form in your answer. I believe that for this family of ellipses, the number of lattice points is always divisible by 3, correct? Since $$p^2+3q^2 = (\tfrac{p+3q}2)^2+3(\tfrac{p-q}2)^2 = (\tfrac{p-3q}2)^2+3(\tfrac{p+q}2)^2$$ thus given one point $(p,q)$, two other points can always be found. – Tito Piezas III Jan 22 '24 at 04:18
  • The line we focus on on the cubic surface $x^3+y^3+z^3-(z+w)^3=0$ is $(x:y:z:w)=(s:-t:-s:s-t), s^3+(-t)^3+(-s)^3-(-s+(s-t))^3=0$ or $x+y-w=y-z-w=0.$ And the way we get the factorization with the ellipse can be thought of as using a special pencil of planes through this line: $\lambda\cdot (x+y-w)+\mu\cdot (y-z-w)=0.$ – Jan-Magnus Økland Jan 22 '24 at 04:50
  • When it comes to the reverse engineering procedure, using maxima CAS and M2, it was intended to recover the ansatz substitution ($z=…$) from three points (from a first triple or a second triple, as you call them). I ran it only on the first, but one could recover the other two families of ellipses, which from previous work we know come with the factor $(x+y-1)$. Or more ellipses if you have more points not on the first three families of ellipses, that may happen to follow this pattern? – Jan-Magnus Økland Jan 22 '24 at 04:52
  • @Jan-MagnusØkland So far, I only found three families of ellipses with parametric solutions. The original motivation was to find $x^3+y^3+z^3 = (z+1)^3$ where $z$ is a polynomial with only even exponents (as can be seen in the initial solutions) thus immune to sign changes. Also, so your results won't be lost in the comments, perhaps you can summarize them as a second answer and can be upvoted? – Tito Piezas III Jan 22 '24 at 05:07

1 Answers1

2

(I made a tentative answer last night which helped in coalescing the complete answer. This is the revised version. There are three families of ellipses.)


Ellipse 1: Factoring $\,x^3+y^3+z^3 = (z+1)^3,\,$ where $z = 3 n^2x + (1 + 3 n^2)(y - 1).$

After removing a trivial factor, we get the ellipse in the post. An initial lattice point is:

$$(x,\,y) = (a_1,\;a_2) = (3n + 3n^2 + 9n^3,\; 1 + 6n^2 - 9n^3)$$

Starting with the single polynomial $a_1$, and the method described by Adam Bailey in this answer, one can find six $a_k$ (given in the post above) yielding the three lattice points,

\begin{align} (x_1,\,y_1) &= (a_1,\;a_2)\\ (x_2,\,y_2) &= (a_3,\;a_4)\\ (x_3,\,y_3) &= (a_5,\;a_6)\end{align}

which determine the vertices of the first triangle and,

\begin{align} \alpha &= a_1 + a_3 + a_5 = 3(27n^4+6n^2)\\ \beta &= a_2 + a_4 + a_6 = 3(27n^4+12n^2+1)\end{align}

which determine the center of the ellipse. But how to find the second triangle from basic principles? My first clue was Jan-Magnus Økland's moving the center of the ellipse to the point of origin $(0,0)$ using the transformation, $$x = p+q+\dfrac{\alpha}3,\quad y = p-q+\dfrac{\beta}3$$

to go from the long, $$x^2 - x y + y^2 - (27 n^4 - 1) x - (27n^4 + 18 n^2 + 2 ) y + (27n^4 + 9 n^2 + 1 ) = 0$$

to the much simpler, $$\color{blue}{p^2+3q^2} = 9n^2(3n^2 + 1)(27n^4 + 9n^2 + 1)$$

The form $p^2+3q^2$ is well-known, was my second clue, and is also discussed in Bailey's post here. If we can express $M$ by the form, then it can be done so in three ways,

$$M = p^2+3q^2 = \left(\frac{p+3q}2\right)^2+3\left(\frac{p-q}2\right)^2 = \left(\frac{p-3q}2\right)^2+3\left(\frac{p+q}2\right)^2$$

Since we know an initial point $(x_1, y_1)$, it is trivial to solve for $(p,q)$ from,

$$x_1 = p+q+\dfrac{\alpha}3,\quad y_1 = p-q+\dfrac{\beta}3$$

to get,

$$p = \frac32(n - 3n^2 - 18n^4),\quad q= \frac32(n + n^2 + 6n^3)$$

and we can get one vertex $(b_1, b_2)$ of the second triangle,

\begin{align} b_1 &= \left(\frac{p-3q}2\right)+\left(\frac{p+q}2\right)+\frac{\alpha}3 = -9n^3\\ b_2 &= \left(\frac{p-3q}2\right)-\left(\frac{p+q}2\right)+\frac{\beta}3 = 1 - 3n + 9n^2 - 18n^3 + 27n^4\end{align}

Using for the same process for the $a_i$, all three vertices of the second triangle can be found,

\begin{align} (x_4,\,y_4) &= (b_1,\;b_2)\\ (x_5,\,y_5) &= (b_3,\;b_4)\\ (x_6,\,y_6) &= (b_5,\;b_6)\end{align}

hence the second triangle was derived from the first, and we have answered our question. Incidentally,

$$a_1^3+a_2^3+z^3 = (z+1)^3$$

where $z=6n^2 + 27n^4,$ so this $z$ is immune to sign changes of $n$.


Ellipse 2: Factoring $\,x^3+y^3+z^3 = (z+1)^3,\,$ where $z = 36n^4x + (1 + 36n^4)(y - 1).$

Initial lattice points:

\begin{align}(x,\,y) = (c_1,\;c_2) =\; &(6n^2 - 36n^3 + 36n^4 + 648n^6 - 1296n^7,\\ & 1 + 12n^2 + 72n^4 + 648n^6 + 1296n^7)\\ (x,\,y) = (d_1,\;d_2) =\; &(12n^2 + 648n^6 + 1296n^7,\\ & 1 + 6n^2 + 36n^3 + 108n^4 + 2592n^7 + 3888n^8)\end{align}

Starting with the single polynomial $c_1$, we can again find six $c_k$. Likewise for the $d_k$. And we used $(c_1, c_2)$ to find $(d_1, d_2)$ by the process described in Ellipse 1. Incidentally, $$c_1^3+c_2^3+z^3 = (z+1)^3$$

where $z=12n^2 + 72n^4 + 1296n^6 + 3888n^8 + 46656n^{10},$ so this $z$ is immune to sign changes too.


Ellipse 3: Factoring $\,x^3+y^3+z^3 = (z+1)^3,\,$ where $z = (12n^2 + 324n^4)x + (1 + 12n^2 + 324n^4)(y - 1).$

Initial lattice points:

\begin{align}(x,\,y) = (e_1,\;e_2) =\; &(6n + 18n^2 + 180n^3 + 540n^4 + 3240n^5 + 5832n^6 + 34992n^7,\\ & 1 + 36n^2 - 72n^3 + 864n^4 - 3240n^5 + 5832n^6 - 34992n^7)\\ (x,\,y) = (f_1,\;f_2) =\; &(12n^2 - 72n^3 + 216n^4 - 3240n^5 + 5832n^6 - 34992n^7,\\ & 1 - 6n + 42n^2 - 252n^3 + 1404n^4 - 6480n^5 + 23328n^6 - 69984n^7 + 314928n^8)\end{align}

Yet again, starting with the single polynomial $e_1$, we can find six $e_k$. Likewise for the $f_k$. And we used $(e_1, e_2)$ to find $(f_1, f_2).$ Incidentally,

$$e_1^3+e_2^3+z^3 = (z+1)^3$$

where $z=36n^2 + 1512n^4 + 40176n^6 + 594864n^8 + 3779136n^{10}$, still immune to sign changes.


P.S. As to the question of how the pairs of initial polynomials $a_1,b_1,$ etc were originally found, it is a combination of intuition, laborious guesswork, and Mathematica's "InterpolatingPolynomial[] function". But it is nice to know we can derive one from the other.

P.S. The integer $6$ seems ubiquitous for these ellipses. Note the number N of Ellipse One's lattice points for $n=1,2,3,4\dots,36$ as calculated by the Alpertron calculator is N = (12, 48, 24, 36, 72, 24, 72, 48, 48, 96, 192, 48, 72, 288, 72, 96, 96, 96, 144, 96, 288, 24, 96, 192, 96, 144, 48, 288, 24, 384, 144, 48, 192, 48, 72, 48), all multiples of $12$.

  • 1
    Note: The polynomial is not homogeneous, hence you are studying a surface in affine or projective space. There is moreover an involution $\sigma$ on the curve sending $x$ to $y$ and $y$ to $x$. Hence there is an action of $S_2$ on the set of integral points. – hm2020 Jan 16 '24 at 17:10
  • We have the homogenized surface $x^3+y^3+z^3-(z+w)^3=0,$ in ${\Bbb P}^3.$ If we keep it in the affine $w=1$ and choose a plane carefully so that the intersection splits into the union of a line and an ellipse. Translating so the ellipse is centered on the origin, we have the ideal $$\langle (x+27 n^4+6 n^2)^3+(y+27 n^4+12 n^2+1)^3+z^3-(z+1)^3,\ z-(3 n^2 x+(3 n^2+1) y+3 n^2 (54 n^4+27 n^2+4))\rangle$$ – Jan-Magnus Økland Jan 16 '24 at 17:14
  • or $$\langle x+y+18n^2(3n^2+1), z-(3 n^2 x+(3 n^2+1) y+3 n^2 (54 n^4+27 n^2+4))\rangle \cap\ \langle x^2-xy+y^2-9n^2(3n^2+1)(27n^4+9n^2+1), z-(3 n^2 x+(3 n^2+1) y+3 n^2 (54 n^4+27 n^2+4))\rangle$$

    Slightly cheating, we look at the base of the elliptic cylinder, and not at the ellipse component above, but it doesn't matter, since we can get the $z$ coordinate easily enough from integer solutions to that. The two other plane sections behave similarly.

    – Jan-Magnus Økland Jan 16 '24 at 17:14
  • @Tito Piezas III - what is the relation between the action of $S_2$ and the two sets of integral solutions? – hm2020 Jan 16 '24 at 17:19
  • The above suggests a brute force strategy: find the 27 lines on the surface, and the five conics on the surface in the pencil of planes on each of the lines... – Jan-Magnus Økland Jan 16 '24 at 17:41
  • In the context of smooth cubic surfaces, the number is also very suggestive, in that they are blowups of ${\Bbb P}^2$ in six points. – Jan-Magnus Økland Jan 16 '24 at 17:52
  • @hm2020 I’m sorry, i do not know. But i worked with enough Diophantine equations to know those two pairs of “triangles” are connected somehow. – Tito Piezas III Jan 16 '24 at 18:04
  • @Tito Piezas III - If $(u,v):=(a_i, a_j)$ or $(b_i,b_j)$ it follows the involution $\sigma(u,v):=(v,u)$ generates new integral solutions to you equation. Hence you get two new series of solution using $\sigma$. – hm2020 Jan 16 '24 at 22:21
  • @hm2020: I finally figured out why the identities come in pairs. It has to do with the properties of the simple form $p^2+3q^2$. See revised answer for details. – Tito Piezas III Jan 17 '24 at 09:19
  • @Jan-MagnusØkland I figured out why the identities come in pairs, thanks to an insight I saw when you moved the center of the ellipse. It has to do with the properties of the simple form $p^2+3q^2$. See answer above. – Tito Piezas III Jan 17 '24 at 09:21
  • @TitoPiezasIII - note that a regular surface $S$ in $\mathbb{P}^3$ of degree $3$ has canonical bundle $\omega_S \cong \mathcal{O}_S(-1)$, hence such a surface is not an abelian surface. – hm2020 Jan 17 '24 at 13:43
  • @hm2020 Here's a new post on $x^3+y^3+z^3=t^3$ where we focus on both ellipses and elliptic curves. – Tito Piezas III Jan 19 '24 at 15:20
  • @Jan-MagnusØkland When you said "...the number is also very suggestive", I assume you mean the number $6$? In a new post, we consider a family of elliptic curves which involves the quadratic forms $x^2+3y^2$ and $x^2+72y^2$. Kindly see this post. – Tito Piezas III Jan 20 '24 at 05:32
  • I'd like to get a parametrization like for e.g. $X^3+Y^3+Z^3+W^3=0$ which can be given by X=-(x^3-2*x^2*z-x^2*y+3*x*z^2+2*x*y*z+x*y^2+y^2*z) Y=2*x^2*z+x^2*y-y^2*x-2*x*y*z-3*x*z^2+3*z^3+3*y*z^2+y^3+2*y^2*z Z=-(x^2*y-x^2*z-2*x*y*z-y^2*x+y^3+2*y^2*z+3*y*z^2) W=x^3-2*x^2*z-x^2*y+3*x*z^2+2*x*y*z+x*y^2-3*z^3-3*y*z^2-2*y^2*z defining it as a blowup of ${\Bbb P}^2$ in six points. – Jan-Magnus Økland Jan 20 '24 at 07:40
  • These are the six points $(1:\frac12(1+\sqrt3):0), (1:\frac12(1-\sqrt3):0), (1: \frac12 (1 - i \sqrt3):\frac12 (1 + i \sqrt3)), (1: \frac12 (1 + i \sqrt3):\frac12 (1 - i \sqrt3)), (1: -1:\frac12 (1 - i \sqrt3), (1: -1:\frac12 (1 + i \sqrt3),$ though. – Jan-Magnus Økland Jan 20 '24 at 08:02
  • 1
    @Jan-MagnusØkland I believe the cubic parametrization is by Elkies, correct? "Complete cubic parametrization of the Fermat cubic surface" – Tito Piezas III Jan 20 '24 at 08:05
  • Just solving x^3-x^2*y+x*y^2-2*x^2*z+2*x*y*z+y^2*z+3*x*z^2+X,-x^2*y+x*y^2-y^3-2*x^2*z+2*x*y*z-2*y^2*z+3*x*z^2-3*y*z^2-3*z^3+Y,x^2*y-x*y^2+y^3-x^2*z-2*x*y*z+2*y^2*z+3*y*z^2+Z,-x^3+x^2*y-x*y^2+2*x^2*z-2*x*y*z+2*y^2*z-3*x*z^2+3*y*z^2+3*z^3-Z-W for X,Y,Z,W, I do get X-((-3*x*z^2)+((-y^2)-2*x*y+2*x^2)*z-x*y^2+x^2*y-x^3),Y-(3*z^3+(3*y-3*x)*z^2+(2*y^2-2*x*y+2*x^2)*z+y^3-x*y^2+x^2*y),Z-((-3*y*z^2)+((-2*y^2)+2*x*y+x^2)*z-y^3+x*y^2-x^2*y),W - (3*z^3+(6*y-3*x)*z^2+(4*y^2-4*x*y+x^2)*z+y^3-2*x*y^2+2*x^2*y-x^3) which implicitizes to X^3+Y^3+Z^3-(Z+W)^3. I'll report back what this gets me. – Jan-Magnus Økland Jan 20 '24 at 09:20