Lattice
Named by 25 essays across 10 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
The shape of a number's divisors
Lay a number's divisors out as a lattice with one axis per prime, and two of the most useful facts in arithmetic stop being formulas and become the width and the corner of a rectangle.
Two squares, and a lattice
Whether a prime is the sum of two squares is decided entirely by its remainder on division by four. A fact about circles is settled by a fact about remainders, and neither statement contains any hint of the other.
Two dials at once
Watch one number on two clocks with different faces. If the faces share no factor, every pair of readings occurs exactly once — so two remainders name a number, and a hard calculation can be split into two easy ones.
Counting one rectangle, twice
Whether seven is a square modulo eleven, and whether eleven is a square modulo seven, are two unrelated-looking questions. Their answers are linked, and the link is a rectangle of dots counted along its rows and then along its columns.
Area by counting dots
Draw a polygon with every corner on a grid of dots. Count the dots strictly inside, add half the dots on the edge, subtract one — and the answer is the area, exactly, with no measuring anywhere.
The lattice that runs the other way
The symmetries of a polynomial's roots form a group, and the fields between the bottom and the top form a lattice. The two are the same picture, one of them turned over — a bigger group of symmetries fixes less, so it names a smaller field.
The planes a recurrence cannot leave
One multiplication and one addition, taken modulo a fixed number, produce a sequence that passes for random one value at a time. Taken two or three at a time it does not, and the reason is a whole-number relation that pins every point onto one of a small family of parallel lines.
One point in every big enough shape
A determinant measures a lattice, not the basis that happened to describe it — and that measurement is an exchange rate. Any symmetric convex region with more than four times that area has to swallow a lattice point.
The integers among the quaternions
The obvious integer quaternions are the ones with whole coordinates, and they are the wrong ones. Sixteen more, with every coordinate a half, have to be let in — and with them comes a division algorithm, twenty-four units instead of eight, and a regular solid that exists only in four dimensions.
The theorem that has no version in space
A lattice polygon's area is decided completely by two counts of dots. The obvious guess is that a lattice solid's volume is decided by the same two counts in three dimensions, and there is a family of tetrahedra with identical counts and every volume that says otherwise.
The test that ranks the generators
Every linear generator's output lies on a family of parallel planes. Which generator is better is decided by how far apart those planes are, and that distance is the length of the shortest whole-number vector the modulus annihilates — a quantity that can be computed exactly rather than estimated by testing.
Two hundred and forty directions
The quaternions have twenty-four units and they are the vertices of the most symmetric object in four dimensions. Eight dimensions has two hundred and forty of them, and the quaternions turn out to be how they are built — twice over, with a hundred and ninety-two left to explain.
Sixteen polygons with one dot inside
Fix one of Pick's two counts at one and ask what is left. The answer is a finite list, the list has exactly sixteen entries, each one is its own kind of object with a dual that is another entry, and the whole classification is a search a page can carry out.
The dots a circle catches
Pick's theorem gives a lattice polygon's area exactly, with no error term anywhere. Ask a circle the same question and the exactness is gone: the count is the area plus something, the something has been measured for two centuries, and nobody knows how big it is.
Not one step but a continuum
Classical logic is the constructive system plus one axiom, which makes it sound as though there are two logics and one gap. There are uncountably many logics in that gap, each one a class of algebras, and the smallest separations between them fit in five elements.
The two squares actually produced
Three proofs say a prime one more than a multiple of four is a sum of two squares, and not one of them hands over the squares. Running the Euclidean algorithm half-way does — and where to stop is the whole of the correctness argument.
![The integers of ℚ(√5), with ℤ[√5] inside them. Points a + bφ plotted against their conjugates for small whole a and b, with the index-two sublattice ℤ[√5] filled and the basic cells of both lattices shaded, of areas √5 and 2√5.](/f/the-integers-of-q-5-with-z-5-inside-them-a4f067e7.svg)
The integers a field contains
Inside the field of numbers a + b√5, the obvious integers are those with whole a and b. They are not all of them: the golden ratio has a one-half in it and satisfies x² = x + 1, a monic equation with whole coefficients, exactly as an integer should. The right integers form a lattice twice as dense as the obvious one — and a whole-number matrix proves they are closed under addition.
Factoring uniquely with no way to divide
Unique factorisation is proved by dividing with a small remainder, and in the Gaussian integers that works because discs of radius one cover the plane. In the integers of ℚ(√−19) the discs leave holes, no division algorithm of any kind can be made to work — and factorisation is unique anyway. The same field is why n² + n + 41 is prime forty times running.
A walk that may not step where it has been
Forbid a walk on the square grid from ever revisiting a site and the number of possible n-step walks grows like 2.638ⁿ instead of 4ⁿ — a number nobody can write down exactly. On the honeycomb it is exactly √(2 + √2), proved in 2010. And the walks spread out like n to the three-quarters, faster than any ordinary walk, which physicists have used since 1949 and mathematicians still cannot prove.
The loops on a torus that never cross themselves
Every loop on a torus is classified by two whole numbers: how often it goes round one way and how often the other. Some classes can be drawn without the loop ever crossing itself and some cannot, and the rule is the oldest in arithmetic — the two numbers must have no common factor. The same two numbers say how often any two loops must meet.
The ball that stays outside the table
Turn billiards inside out. A point outside a convex table looks at the corner on its right, jumps straight through it, and lands as far beyond as it started before. Round a square every orbit closes; round a circle every orbit keeps to its own circle; round a regular pentagon the orbits form islands with a fractal between them. Whether some table lets a point wander off to infinity was Moser's question, and the answer — yes, for a kite — took until 2007.
The diagonal no unit measures
Draw the five diagonals of a regular pentagon and they make a star with a smaller pentagon at its centre. Subtract the side from the diagonal and what is left is the smaller pentagon's diagonal; subtract that from the side and what is left is its side. The pentagon has handed back a smaller copy of itself, and it will do so for ever — which means no unit, however small, measures both the side and the diagonal an exact whole number of times.
The polygon a lattice becomes from far away
Walk the grid of whole-number points with a fixed set of moves and the places reachable in r moves fill a shape. With axis steps it is a diamond, add a diagonal and it is a hexagon, move like a knight and it is a ragged thing full of holes — which, seen from far enough away, is an octagon exactly. The generators decide the polygon, and the polygon decides the count.
One extra person on one side
In a random market of a thousand a side, whoever proposes gets about their seventh choice and whoever receives gets about their hundred-and-fortieth. Add one person to one side and the advantage of proposing all but disappears: the shorter side does well and the longer side badly, whichever side proposes, and most people are left with exactly one stable partner.
The matching in the middle
List every stable matching of a market, give each member their stable partners sorted from best to worst, and hand each the one in the middle. Nothing says the result should even be a matching — two people might pick the same partner — and yet it always is one, it is always stable, and the other side gets its median partners too.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Counting two waysModular arithmeticExhaustive searchNormInvariantUnique factorisationCounting argumentEuclidean algorithmGaussian integersGolden ratioPick theoremAlgebraic integer