Talk:Thue's lemma
| Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thue's lemma article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Merge proposal
editI have edited the article for wikifying it. As far as I know, this result, although widely used, is rarely referred to as "Thue's lemma". One of the modifications I have done, was to replace "the result was first proved by" by "the first known proof is due to". In fact, I strongly doubt that such an easy and important result was not known before Thue.
Nevertheless, as the lemma is important and not known under this name, I suggest to merge this article into a section "Rational numbers modulo n" of Modular arithmetic. D.Lazard (talk) 18:43, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Reply
editThank you for your help. I added the page for I did not have any other name for this statement. When it is to be merged, please redirect accordingly (formerly, the redirect went to Langrange's theorem) and keep the name visible somewhere. I think a better solution would be to extend the page to include a solution method (a variant of the EEA) and refer to it from Modular arithmetic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.59.143.164 (talk) 12:54, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Section "unicity" added
editUser D. Lazard added a well-written and helpful section about unicity. -- 37.24.145.34 (talk) 17:04, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
The statement of the theorem requires `m < XY`, but the proof of uniqueness requires `2XY < m`. These appear to be incompatible with each other as written. How should it be resolved? Qaanol (talk) 02:35, 27 October 2020 (UTC)