Solution:
For an indirect proof we assume that there exists a k∈N with m2+⌈n4m2⌉=(m+k)2, i.e. ⌈n(2m)2⌉=(2m+k)k. Obviously k≥1. Thus the equation ⌈nc2⌉=(c+k)k (1) has a positive integer solution (c,k) with even c. Without paying attention to the parity of c, we consider such a solution of (1) with minimal k.
From nc2>⌈nc2⌉−1=ck+k2−1≥ck and n(c−k)(c+k)<nc2≤⌈nc2⌉=(c+k)k we obtain c>nk>n−k, so that c=kn+r holds with a suitable 0<r<k.
Substituting this into (1) gives ⌈nc2⌉=⌈n(nk+r)2⌉=k2n+2kr+⌈nr2⌉ and (c+k)k=(kn+r+k)k=k2n+2kr+k(k−r), so that ⌈nr2⌉=k(k−r) (2) follows.
This yields another positive integer solution of (1) with c′=r and k′=k−r<k, which contradicts the minimality of k.
Variant:
Let m2+⌈n4m2⌉=c2 for a positive integer c>m, from which follows c2−1<m2+n4m2≤c2 and from this 0≤c2n−m2(n+4)<n (3).
We substitute d=c2n−m2(n+4), x=c+m and y=c−m, obtain c=2x+y as well as m=2x−y and thereby rewrite (3):
(2x+y)2n−(2x−y)2(n+4)=d or x2−(n+2)xy+y2+d=0 with 0≤d<n.
For fixed n and d we choose an integer solution pair (x,y) for which x+y is minimal. Because of the symmetry of (4) we may assume x≥y≥1. As above, another solution (z,y) can be found here as well, for which z<x — contradiction!