Geodesic
Differences between Perfect Powers
Canadian mathematical bulletin, Tome 51 (2008) no. 3, pp. 337-347

Voir la notice de l'article provenant de la source Cambridge University Press

We apply the hypergeometric method of Thue and Siegel to prove that if $a$ and $b$ are positive integers, then the inequality $0\,<\,\left| {{a}^{x}}\,-\,{{b}^{y}} \right|\,<\,\frac{1}{4}\,\max \{{{a}^{x/2}},\,{{b}^{y/2}}\}$ has at most a single solution in positive integers $x$ and $y$ . This essentially sharpens a classic result of LeVeque.
DOI : 10.4153/CMB-2008-034-8
Mots-clés : 11D61, 11D45 
Bennett, Michael A. Differences between Perfect Powers. Canadian mathematical bulletin, Tome 51 (2008) no. 3, pp. 337-347. doi: 10.4153/CMB-2008-034-8
@article{10_4153_CMB_2008_034_8,
     author = {Bennett, Michael A.},
     title = {Differences between {Perfect} {Powers}},
     journal = {Canadian mathematical bulletin},
     pages = {337--347},
     year = {2008},
     volume = {51},
     number = {3},
     doi = {10.4153/CMB-2008-034-8},
     url = {http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/articles/10.4153/CMB-2008-034-8/}
}
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Bennett, Michael A.
TI  - Differences between Perfect Powers
JO  - Canadian mathematical bulletin
PY  - 2008
SP  - 337
EP  - 347
VL  - 51
IS  - 3
UR  - http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/articles/10.4153/CMB-2008-034-8/
DO  - 10.4153/CMB-2008-034-8
ID  - 10_4153_CMB_2008_034_8
ER  - 
%0 Journal Article
%A Bennett, Michael A.
%T Differences between Perfect Powers
%J Canadian mathematical bulletin
%D 2008
%P 337-347
%V 51
%N 3
%U http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/articles/10.4153/CMB-2008-034-8/
%R 10.4153/CMB-2008-034-8
%F 10_4153_CMB_2008_034_8

[1] [1] Bennett, M., Fractional parts of powers of rational numbers. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 114(1993), no. 2, 191–201. Google Scholar

[2] [2] Bennett, M., On some exponential equations of S. S. Pillai. Canad. J. Math. 53(2001), no. 5, 897–922. Google Scholar

[3] [3] Beukers, F., Fractional parts of powers of rationals. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 90(1981), no. 1, 13–20. Google Scholar

[4] [4] Cassels, J. W. S., On the equation ax – by = 1 . Amer. J. Math. 75(1953), 159–162. Google Scholar

[5] [5] Cassels, J. W. S., On the equation ax – by = 1. II. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 56(1960), 97–103. Google Scholar

[6] [6] Ellison, W. J., On a theorem of S. Sivasankaranarayana Pillai. In: Séminaire de théorie des nombres, 1970-71. no. 12, Lab. Théorie des Nombres, Centre Nat. Recherche Sci., Talence, 1971. Google Scholar

[7] [7] Herschfeld, A., The equation 2 x – 3 y = d. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 42(1936), no. 4, 231–234. Google Scholar

[8] [8] Khinchin, A. Y., Continued Fractions. Third edition. P. Noordhoff Ltd., Groningen, 1963. Google Scholar

[9] [9] Laurent, M., Mignotte, M., and Nesterenko, Y., Formes linéaires en deux logarithmes et déterminants d’interpolation. J. Number Theory 55(1995), no. 2, 285–321. Google Scholar

[10] [10] LeVeque, W. J., On the equation ax – by = 1 . Amer. J. Math. 74(1952), 325–331. Google Scholar

[11] [11] Mihăilescu, P., Primary cyclotomic units and a proof of Catalan's conjecture. J. Reine Angew.Math. 572(2004), 167–195. Google Scholar

[12] [12] Pillai, S. S., On the inequality 0 &lt; ax – by ≤ n. J. Indian Math. Soc. 19(1931), 1–11. Google Scholar

[13] [13] Pillai, S. S., On ax – by = c. J. Indian Math. Soc. (N.S.) 2(1936), 119–122, 215. Google Scholar

[14] [14] Pillai, S. S., On ax – bY = by ± ax J. Indian Math. Soc. (N.S.) 8(1944), 10–13. Google Scholar

[15] [15] Pillai, S. S., On the equation 2 x – 3 y = 2 X + 3 Y . Bull. Calcutta Math. Soc. 37(1945), 18–20. Google Scholar

[16] [16] Ribenboim, P., Catalan's Conjecture. Academic Press, Boston, MA, 1994. Google Scholar

[17] [17] Scott, R. and Styer, R., On the generalized Pillai equation ±ax ± by = c J. Number Theory 118(2006), no. 2, 236–265. Google Scholar

Cité par Sources :