1
$\begingroup$

For an expression of the following form:

$\frac{f(x) + \sqrt{ g(x)}}{h(x)} = \frac{k(x) + \sqrt{ l(x)}}{m(x)} $,

where $f(x)$, $g(x)$, $h(x)$, $k(x)$, $l(x)$ and $m(x)$ are all quadratics and where the descriminants of $l(x)$ and $g(x)$ are not equal to zero in general, is it possible to simplify this expression to a quartic in x (i.e. order 4 or lower)?

My attempts so far always involve isolating a radical on one side of the equation squaring both sides and simplifying. This results in significant "order bloat", meaning the equation can no longer be solved analytically (i.e. order 5 or above). I am wondering if there is some handy trick that may be performed to avoid this.

In response to a comment asking for the whole expression:

$\frac{a_1x^2 + a_2x + a_3 + \sqrt{ a_4x^2 + a_5x + a_6}}{a_7x^2 + a_8x + a_9} = \frac{a_{10}x^2 + a_{11}x + a_{12} + \sqrt{ a_{13}x^2 + a_{14}x + a_{15}}}{a_{16}x^2 + a_{17}x + a_{18}} $

where $a_{1:18}$ are constants. I'd like to solve for $x$.

It was requested in a comment that I give some context to this question. I am solving an engineering/software problem to do with finding diffracted paths in ray-tracing simulations for radio propagation. I was trying to find a closed-form expression for the points on two arbitrary lines in 3D space, A and B, such that the path from a transmitter point T to A to B to a receiver point R is a short as possible. Writing an expression for the total length of this path and then taking partial derivatives, first with respect to a scaling variable that adjusts the position of A on its line and also with respect to another scaling variable that adjusts the position of B on its line, and setting each to zero gives two equations with two unknowns. After simplifying I ended up with an expression in the form of that posed in the question. Efficient numerical techniques already exist for multiple lines, I wanted to see if I could do a closed form for just two.

$\endgroup$
13
  • $\begingroup$ Can you write down the whole expression please? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 14:41
  • $\begingroup$ Do you mean $$\frac{ax^2+bx+c+\sqrt{dx^2+ex+f}}{gx^2+hx+i}=\frac{kx^2+lx+m+\sqrt{ox^2+px+q}}{rx^2+sx+t}$$where all numbers are real $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 14:49
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I have edited the question to indicate this. $\endgroup$
    – user189076
    Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 14:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Calum Gilhooley , both $g(x)$ and $l(x)$ are positive valued regardless of the value of x positive or negative, however, for the actual problem that I'm working on, $x$ may not be negative. If this helps then please use that fact, if it doesn't then ignore it and I can post-process solutions. I am only interested in real values of $x$. As you suggest, I am interested in any closed-form solutions (as in the title), not just those found using solutions to polynomials. I was foolish not to allow the possibility of finding closed-form solutions another way. $\endgroup$
    – user189076
    Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 9:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Correct. $g(x)$ and $l(x)$ are positive and real for any real value of $x$ and the sqrt is the non-negative square root. $x$ is real. $\endgroup$
    – user189076
    Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 10:14

2 Answers 2

0
$\begingroup$

The answer is no, on the assumption that any process of "simplification" will yield a polynomial in $x$ with rational coefficients if the coefficients of the given quadratics are rational.

Consider any case where $h(x) = m(x)$ and $f(x) = 0$.

If $x$ satisfies the given equation, then $$ \sqrt{g(x)} - \sqrt{l(x)} = k(x) $$ and therefore $$ \tag{$*$}\label{eq:1} 4g(x)l(x) = (k(x)^2 - g(x) - l(x))^2. $$ Now specialise further, to the case: \begin{align*} g(x) & = x^2 + \tfrac12, \\ l(x) & = x^2 - \tfrac12, \\ k(x) & = x^2 + 1. \end{align*} \eqref{eq:1} becomes $$ 4x^4 - 1 = (x^4 + 1)^2. $$ This can be solved explicitly in terms of nested square roots, but it is enough for our purposes to rewrite it as $$ x^8 - 2x^4 + 2 = 0, $$ and observe that by Eisenstein's criterion the polynomial on the left hand side is irreducible over the rationals, therefore $x$ does not satisfy any polynomial equation of degree less than $8$ with rational coefficients.

Update

This uses a second example to answer the question of whether reduction to a quartic equation is possible. It takes into account the clarification of the question in comments made since this answer was first posted. A further update below uses a third example to answer the more general question asked in the title of the thread: does the equation have an algebraic solution (which might not be obtained by reduction to a quartic)?

Consider the special case $$ \frac{x^2 + 1 + \sqrt{x^2 + x + \tfrac12}}{x^2 + 1} = \frac{2x^2 + \sqrt{x^2 - x + \tfrac12}}{x^2 + 1}. $$ Here we have \begin{align*} g(x) & = x^2 + x + \tfrac12 = \left(x + \tfrac12\right)^2 + \tfrac14 > 0, \\ l(x) & = x^2 - x + \tfrac12 = \left(x - \tfrac12\right)^2 + \tfrac14 > 0, \end{align*} for all real $x$, so the stated conditions are satisfied. The equation simplifies to \begin{equation} \tag{$**$}\label{3380555:eq:2} \sqrt{g(x)} - \sqrt{l(x)} = n(x), \end{equation} where $n(x) = x^2 - 1$. The four equations $$ \pm\sqrt{g(x)} \pm\sqrt{l(x)} = n(x) $$ together are equivalent to a single polynomial equation $$ 4g(x)l(x) = (n(x)^2 - g(x) - l(x))^2. $$ Because $g(x)l(x) = \left(x^2 + \tfrac12\right)^2 - x^2 = x^4 + \tfrac14$, and $g(x) + l(x) = 2x^2 + 1$, the polynomial equation reduces to $$ 4x^4 + 1 = (x^4 - 4x^2)^2, $$ i.e. $p(x) = 0$, where $$ p(x) = x^8 - 8x^6 + 12x^4 - 1. $$ Write this as $p(x) = q(x^2)$, where $q(y) = y^4 - 8y^3 + 12y^2 - 1 = y^2(y - 2)(y - 6) - 1$. $$ \begin{array}{r|rrrrrr} y & -1 & 0 & 1 & 2 & 6 & 7 \\ q(y) & 20 & -1 & 4 & -1 & -1 & 244 \end{array} $$ $p(x)$ therefore has six real roots and two imaginary roots. Corresponding to the root of $q(y)$ just below $2$, $p(x)$ has the real root $$ x \bumpeq 1.390776704210124 $$ (as calculated in Python using Newton's method).

Numerical calculation confirms that this value of $x$ is also a solution of \eqref{3380555:eq:2}. (A comment below shows that this is the only positive solution.)

I didn't have the heart to try to solve the quartic equation $q(y) = 0$ to obtain a closed-form expression for $x$ and try to use it to prove that \eqref{3380555:eq:2} is satisfied! Instead one can prove it by using inequalities. We have $1 < x^2 < 2$, therefore $0 < n(x) < 1$. Also $g(x) > l(x)$, so we cannot have $-\sqrt{g(x)} \pm\sqrt{l(x)} = n(x)$. Next, $\sqrt{g(x)} > x + \tfrac12$ and $\sqrt{l(x)} > x - \tfrac12$, so $\sqrt{g(x)} + \sqrt{l(x)} > 2x > 2 > n(x)$. Now only \eqref{3380555:eq:2} remains as a possibility.

We have $p(X) \equiv X^8 + X^6 + 2 \pmod3$, and the latter polynomial is listed as being irreducible on this web site: Irreducible trinomials over GF(3). I take this to be good evidence that $p(x)$ is irreducible, although I haven't verified the result stated on the web site. It follows as before that $x$ does not satisfy any polynomial equation of degree less than $8$ with rational coefficients.

Update 2

Consider the special case $$ \frac{x^2 + 2 + \sqrt{x^2 + x + 1}}{x^2 + 2} = \frac{x^2 + 1 + \sqrt{x^2 - x + 1}}{x^2 + 1}. $$ This is equivalent to $$ (x^2 + 1)\sqrt{x^2 + x + 1} = (x^2 + 2)\sqrt{x^2 - x + 1}. $$ Because both sides of the latter equation are positive, it is in turn equivalent, for real $x$, to the polynomial equation $$ (x^2 + 1)^2(x^2 + x + 1) = (x^2 + 2)^2(x^2 - x + 1). $$ Simplifying: $$ x[(x^2 + 1)^2 + (x^2 + 2)^2] = (x^2 + 1)[(x^2 + 2)^2 - (x^2 + 1)^2]. $$ This equation simplifies in turn to the quintic equation $p(x) = 0$, where $$ p(x) = 2x^5 - 2x^4 + 6x^3 - 5x^2 + 5x - 3. $$ $p'''(x) = 120x^2 - 48x + 36 = 120\left(x-\tfrac15\right)^2 + 31\tfrac15 > 0$ for all $x$, so the cubic $p''(x)$ is strictly increasing. Its unique zero is $x_0 \bumpeq 0.30861$. But $p'(x_0) \bumpeq 3.4838$, therefore $p'(x) > 0$ for all $x$, therefore $p(x)$ is strictly increasing, therefore it has a unique real zero: $$ x \bumpeq 0.705526664475018. $$ We have $3p(X) \equiv X^5 + 4X^4 + 3X^3 + 1 \pmod{5}$, which is listed as irreducible here, implying that $p(X)$ is irreducible in $\mathbb{Q}[X]$.

According to GAP 4.8.10:

gap> GaloisType(UnivariatePolynomial(Rationals,[-3,5,-5,6,-2,2]));
5
gap> TransitiveGroup(5,5);
S5

I think this proves that the Galois group of $p(X)$ is isomorphic to $S_5$. This group is famously not solvable. Therefore, no root of $p(X)$, including its unique real root shown above, is given by an expression involving only integer constants, field operations, and/or extractions of roots.

It follows that the general equation $$ \frac{f(x) + \sqrt{ g(x)}}{h(x)} = \frac{k(x) + \sqrt{ l(x)}}{m(x)} $$ has no general solution expressed in terms of field operations, extractions of roots, and the coefficients of $f, g, h, k, l, m$.

$\endgroup$
13
  • $\begingroup$ I'm interested in the solution using nested square roots. I'd never heard of Eisenstein. I will look him up. $\endgroup$
    – user189076
    Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 16:38
  • $\begingroup$ From $(x^4 - 1)^2 = -1$, i.e. $x^4 = 1 \pm i$, one gets $x/\sqrt[8]{2} \in \{\pm\omega, \pm\bar{\omega}, \pm i\omega, \pm i\bar{\omega}\}$, where $$ \omega = e^{\frac{i\pi}{16}} = \frac12\left( \sqrt{2 + \sqrt{2 + \sqrt{2}}} + i\sqrt{2 - \sqrt{2 + \sqrt{2}}}\right). $$ I didn't bother to check which of these eight values satisfy the original equation, nor did I bother to derive the expression for $e^{\frac{i\pi}{16}}$ myself. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 17:11
  • $\begingroup$ I have added clarification in the comments on the original question. I am interested in any closed-form expressions. $\endgroup$
    – user189076
    Commented Oct 5, 2019 at 9:32
  • $\begingroup$ In the update, I also meant to point out that $x \bumpeq 1.39$ is the only real solution of \eqref{3380555:eq:2}, because $\sqrt{g(x)} < x + \tfrac58$ and $\sqrt{l(x)} < x - \tfrac38$, therefore $\tfrac78 < n(x) < \tfrac98$, i.e. $1\tfrac78 < x^2 < 2\tfrac18$. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 7, 2019 at 0:46
  • $\begingroup$ Correction: that is the only positive solution. (If $x > 0$, then $g(x) > l(x)$, therefore $x^2 - 1 > 0$, i.e. $x > 1$, and the rest of the argument is valid, I think.) But $-0.569432366456002$ is also a solution. (It's past my bedtime again. I'll tidy these comments up tomorrow.) $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 7, 2019 at 2:22
0
$\begingroup$

I'll omit the '$(x)$' notation for brevity.

$$fm+m\sqrt q=hk+h\sqrt l$$ $$m\sqrt q=F+h\sqrt l,\text{, where }\deg F=4$$ $$m^2q=F^2+2hF\sqrt l+h^2l$$ $$G=2hF\sqrt l\text{, where }\deg G=8$$ so you can get degree $16$ at last.

This is really not a proof, because I haven't proved that that degree is actually reached, but my feeling is that it can.

If you want a real proof, you should test with random polynomials and a good software. If you get a equation with more than $4$ solutions, you are done.

Remark: You should put positive polynomials (that is, $\Delta<0$ and main coef.$>0$) under radicals to avoid complex roots. Also you should balance numerators and denominators to void thad some side is much bigger than the other.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ So this mirrors my previous attempts. The way you have phrased your answer makes it seem like you have interpreted my question as wanting as high an order expression as possible, in reality, I want one as low as possible. It might be that your answer is just what the expression is, which seems likely, in which case I have my answer, but I was hoping this wasn't the case, hence my question. $\endgroup$
    – user189076
    Commented Oct 4, 2019 at 15:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .