[HN Gopher] A Formal Proof of Complexity Bounds on Diophantine E...
___________________________________________________________________
A Formal Proof of Complexity Bounds on Diophantine Equations
Author : badmonster
Score : 89 points
Date : 2025-05-23 20:09 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (arxiv.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (arxiv.org)
| badmonster wrote:
| impressive formalization effort that bridges deep number theory
| and formal methods
| btilly wrote:
| I found https://x.com/gm8xx8/status/1925768687618773079 to be a
| little more understandable summary of what was actually shown.
|
| Any Diophantine equation can be reduced to one of at most 11
| variables and degree at most around 10^63. No algorithm can
| decide solvability in rational numbers for this class of
| Diophantine equations.
| throwaway81523 wrote:
| That sounds like the coefficients might have to be arbitrarily
| large. Otherwise all DE's could reduce to a finite set of them,
| impossible via the MRDP theorem. So it's not so easy to call
| that bounded complexity.
| kevinventullo wrote:
| A mind-blowing consequence of the MRDP theorem is that there is a
| multi-variate polynomial which fits on a sheet of paper with the
| property that the set of values of the first variable which
| appear in integer solutions are exactly the set of prime numbers.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_for_primes#Formula_bas...
| sega_sai wrote:
| _Non-negative_ integer solutions
| colinhb wrote:
| > is a polynomial inequality in 26 variables, and the set of
| prime numbers is identical to the set of positive values taken
| on by the left-hand side as the variables a, b, ..., z range
| over the nonnegative integers.
|
| I hadn't heard of this result, and my exposure to Diophantine
| equations is limited to precisely one seminar from undergrad,
| but this feels like taking von Neumann's famous quip to its
| most fantastical extreme:
|
| > With four parameters I can fit an elephant, and with five I
| can make him wiggle his trunk.
| marcodavid wrote:
| An even crazier consequence was pointed out by J.P. Jones in
| 1982. He explained:
|
| "Via Godel numbering, the theorems of an axiomatizable theory T
| become in effect an recursively enumerable set. The search for
| proofs becomes the search for solutions of a Diophantine
| equation. [...]
|
| "Theorem. For any axiomatizable theory T and any proposition P,
| if P has a proof in T, then P has another proof consisting of
| 100 additions and multiplications of integers."
|
| See https://www.jstor.org/stable/2273588
| nine_k wrote:
| Does this have any practical consequences for cryptography?
| ogogmad wrote:
| Likely not.
| MJGrzymek wrote:
| I was just thinking about how it's an underrated open problem
| which pairs of (number of variables, degree) are undecidable for
| MRDP.
|
| Correct me if I'm wrong but I think it's guaranteed to have a
| finite answer, as a list of the minimal undecidable pairs. You
| can even throw in maximum absolute value of coefficients, though
| if you limit all three things that's decidable by being finite.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-05-24 23:02 UTC)