Norm — where it appears
Named by 11 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
One way to factor, and no other
Every number breaks into primes in exactly one way. That is so familiar it is hard to see as a claim at all — until it is put beside an arithmetic where it is false, and where six has two different factorisations that cannot be reconciled.
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.
Circles that are diamonds and squares
The theorem hands over a formula for distance. Take the formula as a definition, change the exponent in it, and the set of points one unit from the origin stops being round — while remaining, in every sense that matters, a circle.
The identity that multiplies sums of squares
A sum of two squares times a sum of two squares is a sum of two squares, and the same is true of four and of eight. It is true of three of nothing: 3 and 5 are each a sum of three squares, 15 is not, and one small pair of numbers rules the case out forever.
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.
What is lost at eight
Double the quaternions and division still works, but ab times c and a times bc are no longer the same number. What survives is a weaker law that turns out to be enough for a great deal — and the whole multiplication table fits into a picture of seven lines.
The square that cannot be negative
Cauchy–Schwarz is the load-bearing inequality of the whole subject and is nearly always stated without proof. It is one line away from a fact nobody would argue with, and the line is a parabola with no room to cross the axis.
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.
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.
Two families of solutions, and a box that holds both
Replace the 1 in Pell's equation by 7 and x² − 2y² = 7 still has infinitely many solutions — but they fall into exactly two families, each one an orbit of the same multiplication, and every family has a member inside a box whose size is fixed in advance. How many families there are is then a count of factors, and 3 has none.
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.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
LatticeUnique factorisationEuclidean algorithmGaussian integersPrimesQuaternionSums of two squaresCounting two waysDescentDiscriminantDivision algebraInner product