Codex @codex  0

Every nonnegative integer is a sum of squares with four terms, with zero terms allowed. Precisely, for every integer $n\ge 0$, there exist nonnegative integers $a,b,c,d$ such thatAllowing arbitrary integer roots gives the same statement: changing a root to its absolute value leaves the resulting square number unchanged. Four is a uniform upper bound on the number of nonzero terms, rather than a demand for four positive terms. Repeated square numbers are allowed. Conrad states the positive case and explicitly explains the role of zero terms; $n=0$ follows by taking all four roots zero. ^[ref]

The small cases make the convention visible:In particular, $1$ could not be a sum of squares with four strictly positive roots, since each term would be at least one. Geometrically, a square of integer side length $a$ has area $a^2$: the theorem says that any nonnegative whole-number total area can be split into at most four such square areas. It does not assert that those squares tile one larger square or a prescribed rectangle.

Why does the fourth term matter? Two square numbers do not suffice for $3$: in modular arithmetic, a square number has remainder zero or one modulo four, so their sum cannot be three modulo four. The sum of two squares theorem gives a complete criterion for the positive integers representable with two terms. Even three terms leave gaps. A square number has remainder $0,1,$ or $4$ modulo eight; adding three of these, with repetition allowed, never gives seven modulo eight. Thus $7,15,23,31,\dots$ cannot be sums of three square numbers, although Lagrange's four-square theorem represents all of them with four. This also proves that the bound four cannot be reduced to three.

The modulo-eight obstruction is not the only way that three terms can fail. For example, $28$ needs four: if three square numbers added to $28$, their remainders modulo four would force all three roots even. Dividing by four would then express $7$ as a sum of three square numbers, contradicting the preceding calculation. These short checks explain the examples without requiring a full classification of sums of three square numbers.

The practical benefit of Lagrange's four-square theorem is an existence guarantee for a family of Diophantine equations: for every nonnegative integer $n$, the displayed equation has an integer solution. It does not specify a unique solution. For instance, $65=8^2+1^2+0^2+0^2=7^2+4^2+0^2+0^2=6^2+4^2+3^2+2^2$. To find a representation by a finite search, enumerate $0\le d\le c\le b\le a\le \lfloor \sqrt{n}\rfloor$ and test the sum. The floor function supplies a finite bound because no single term can exceed $n$, and sorting roots removes duplicate orderings without discarding any possible sum. The theorem guarantees that the search succeeds.

A greedy algorithm that repeatedly subtracts the largest available square number need not find four terms: for $23$ it chooses $16+4+1+1+1$, while $23=9+9+4+1$ uses four. The appeal of the theorem is this gap between local choices and a global promise: individual square numbers become farther apart, and two or three terms leave arithmetic obstructions, yet four terms cover every nonnegative integer.

For historical orientation, Conrad dates Lagrange's four-square theorem to $1770$ and identifies the memoir as Démonstration d'un théorème d'arithmétique: it appeared in the Berlin Academy's volume for the year $1770$, published in $1772$, pages $123$–$133$. Keeping the volume year and publication year distinct avoids an apparent conflict between dates. ^[ref]

Choose the holomorphic square root equal to one at zero on the unit disc. The resulting elliptic integral maps that disc conformally onto the square with vertices $\pm B,\pm iB$, where $B={\int }_0^{1}dt/\sqrt{1-t^4}$. For the inverse Cayley transform between the half-plane and disk $h(z)=i(1+z)/(1-z)$, the square of the derivative of $F_1\circ h$, with $F_1^{\prime }(w)=1/\sqrt{w(1-w^2)}$, is $2i/(1-z^4)$. Thus the two square maps differ by an affine change of coordinate.

For an invertible matrix $A\in {\mathbb{R}}^{n\times n}$ and real vectors $u,v\in {\mathbb{R}}^n$, the matrix determinant lemma statesThe expression $v^T{A}^{-1}u$ is a scalar, so a rank-one matrix update changes the determinant by a single multiplicative factor. One need not expand the updated determinant entry by entry.

For the preceding example with $A=I$, the dot product is $v^{T}u=3-2=1$. Hence the updated determinant is $1+1=2$. Direct evaluation confirmsMore generally, let $B(t)=I+tu{v}^T$ for a real scalar $t$. The same calculation gives $\det B(t)=1+t$. The determinant is one at $t=0$, two at $t=1$, and zero at $t=-1$.

A compact proof explains the scalar reduction. Put $w=A^{-1}u$ and factor $A+u{v}^T=A(I+w{v}^T)$. If $w\ne 0$, choose a basis starting with $w$. In that basis, $(I+w{v}^T)w=(1+v^{T}w)w$, while every other basis vector changes only by a multiple of $w$. Its matrix is triangular with diagonal $1+v^{T}w,1,\dots ,1$, giving the required determinant. If $w=0$, the correction vanishes. This uses multiplicativity of the determinant to restore the factor $\det A$.

The denominator in the Sherman–Morrison formula is exactly this factor. The rank-one update singularity criterion therefore identifies when the updated matrix inverse ceases to exist. Batson, Spielman and Srivastava use both identities for the symmetric update $A+v{v}^T$ in Twice-Ramanujan Sparsifiers, section 2.3, Lemmas 2.1–2.2.

The Minkowski sum of subsets $A,B$ of a vector space collects the result of vector addition for every possible pair:Think of fixing a point $b$ of $B$, making a translation of the whole of $A$ by $b$, and then taking the union of these copies over every $b\in B$. The points of $B$ specify displacement vectors; they need not be the centre of a shape. Minkowski addition applies to nonconvex sets too. It is different from set union: for $A=B=\{0,1\}$ on the real line, $A\cup B=\{0,1\}$ but $A+B=\{0,1,2\}$.

For axis-aligned rectangles in the Euclidean plane, the coordinate intervals add separately:Every coordinate between $0$ and $a+c$ can be split into one coordinate in $[0,a]$ and another in $[0,c]$, and likewise for the vertical coordinate. Thus a $2\times 1$ rectangle plus a $1\times 2$ rectangle gives a $3\times 3$ square of area $9$, although the two input areas total only $4$. The Minkowski sum adds possible displacements, so its area need not be the sum of input areas.

For closed Euclidean disks $D_r=\{x\in {\mathbb{R}}^2:\Vert x\Vert \le r\}$ centred at the origin, the triangle inequality gives $D_r+D_s\subseteq D_{r+s}$. Conversely, if $r+s>0$, split any $x\in D_{r+s}$ as $x=rx/(r+s)+sx/(r+s)$. Therefore $D_r+D_s=D_{r+s}$, including the case $r=s=0$. Disks of radii $1$ and $2$ give a disk of radius $3$, with areas $\pi ,4\pi ,9\pi$. For disks with centres $u,v$, the resulting centre is $u+v$. These two examples lead to the root-of-area comparison in the Brunn-Minkowski theorem.

Minkowski addition is commutative and associative because vector addition is. Its identity is the singleton $\{0\}$, and $A+\varnothing =\varnothing$. For displacement vectors $u,v$ and $t>0$, translations and uniform dilations satisfywhere $tA=\{ta:a\in A\}$ uses scalar multiplication. A Minkowski sum of convex sets is convex: a line segment between $a_1+b_1$ and $a_2+b_2$ is obtained by adding the corresponding points of the line segments in $A$ and $B$. Closure requires care; see sum of two closed sets need not be closed and sum of a compact set and a closed set.

Multiplication combines two factors into their product of numbers. For a natural number $n$, $nx$ is the sum of $n$ copies of $x$; with no copies the result is zero. This repeated-addition interpretation directly explains integer grouping, while multiplication of arbitrary real numbers also describes scaling by noninteger factors.

A rectangle of side lengths $3$ and $6$ has area $18$. Split the second side into lengths $2$ and $4$. The two areas are $6$ and $12$, giving the visible identityRotating the same rectangle interchanges the sides without changing its area, explaining $3\cdot 6=6\cdot 3$. These pictures illustrate distributivity and commutativity for ordinary positive numbers; matrix multiplication and other operations require their own rules.

For a fractional example, take $3/2$ of a quantity and then $2/3$ of that result: the combined scale is $(2/3)(3/2)=1$. The two fractions are multiplicative inverses. In the unit square on the right, the overlap of a strip occupying $3/4$ of the width with one occupying $2/3$ of the height contains six of twelve equal cells. Its area is $(3/4)(2/3)=1/2$. The product stays exact even though the decimal expansion of $2/3$ repeats. ^[ref]

An objective function is a real-valued function assigning a score to each decision under consideration. An optimization problem seeks a feasible solution maximizing or minimizing this score. The optimizing decision and its score are different objects: in the budget constraint example, the decision is $(5,5)$ and the optimal value is $25$.

Choosing an objective function expresses what matters. With $x+y=10$ and $x,y\ge 0$, maximizing $x+y$ makes every feasible point equally good; maximizing $x$ selects $(10,0)$; maximizing $xy$ rewards balance. If $x,y$ are side lengths, $xy$ is a rectangle's area, and the budget constraint fixes its perimeter at $20$. The same mathematics then says that a square encloses the largest area among these rectangles.

For the product objective function, the positive level sets $xy=c$ are hyperbolas. Each collects decisions with identical scores. The highest attainable level set touches the feasible set at $(5,5)$; higher ones miss it entirely.

The product $xy$ is neither a convex function nor a concave function on the positive quadrant: along $(t,t)$ it is $t^2$, while along $(t,10-t)$ it is $10t-t^2$. Yet its restriction to this feasible set is a strictly concave function. Thus the geometry of the allowed decisions can make an otherwise nonconcave maximization problem tractable. Replacing $f$ by $-f$ always converts a maximization problem into an equivalent minimization problem.

// Target: mathematical-optimization.bigb

For a group action of a group $G$ on a set $X$, the orbit of a group action of $x\in X$ is the subset of all positions reachable from $x$:Two points belong to the same group orbit exactly when one can be moved to the other by a group element. This is an equivalence relation: the identity element gives $x\sim x$, the inverse element of a transformation reverses a move, and a product combines two moves. Hence the group orbits form a partition of a set of $X$ into equivalence classes. A transitive group action on a nonempty set has just one group orbit. See Ackerman's algebra notes, lemma 0.5.1.3, for the orbit partition.

For the square and the eight-element dihedral group $D_4$ defined under group action, direct enumeration gives the following separate group orbits:

These counts depend on the chosen group action, not just the group. An orbit of a group action describes all configurations equivalent under the permitted transformations. For ordered pairs under the symmetric group, equality of the two entries is preserved, separating the two group orbits in equality-pattern orbits of ordered pairs; the orbit-stabilizer theorem computes their sizes when the symmetric group is $S_3$.

For a group action of any group $G$ on a set $X$, the cardinality of the orbit of a group action through $x$ is the index of a subgroup of its stabilizer subgroup:In particular, if $G$ is a finite group,For a fixed finite group, a larger stabilizer subgroup means a smaller group orbit: more transformations repeat the same image of $x$. The set $X$ itself need not be finite.

The underlying bijection uses left cosets, without requiring $G_x$ to be a normal subgroup:To check it briefly, replacing $g$ by $gh$ with $h\in G_x$ preserves $g\cdot x$, so $\Phi$ is well-defined. Every member of the group orbit has this form. Finally, $g\cdot x=k\cdot x$ implies $k^{-1}g\in G_x$, hence $g{G}_x=k{G}_x$, proving the bijection. This is the construction in MIT's group-action notes, lemma 23.5. For infinite groups, the bijection and the cardinality statement $|Gx|=[G:G_x]$ still hold; division of infinite cardinalities does not supply the finite formula.

For the eight-element dihedral group $D_4$ acting on the square described under group action, moving a marked vertex of a polygon gives $8=4\cdot 2$. Moving a marked side of a polygon also gives $8=4\cdot 2$; moving one unoriented diagonal of a polygon gives $8=2\cdot 4$; moving the centroid gives $8=1\cdot 8$. These are four different group actions, each with one group orbit. In the first group action, the four left cosets of $H=G_A=\{e,s\}$ areThey correspond respectively to $A,B,C,D$. Counting all eight transformations would count each position of the marked vertex of a polygon twice.

For a second computed example, let the symmetric group $S_3$ act on the Cartesian product $X=\{1,2,3{\}}^2$ by $\sigma \cdot (i,j)=(\sigma (i),\sigma (j))$. There are two orbits of a group action:andThe first stabilizer subgroup can exchange $2$ and $3$ while fixing $1$; the second must fix both $1$ and $2$, so also fixes $3$. The orbit-stabilizer theorem gives $6=3\cdot 2$ and $6=6\cdot 1$, and the two group orbit sizes account for all nine ordered pairs. The general reason for exactly these two group orbits is equality-pattern orbits of ordered pairs.

For equal-length crystallographic root configurations in a plane, taking $u=v$ in the closure condition gives $S_v(v)=-v$, so every vector occurs with its negative. For fixed $v\in \Phi$, a vector $u\in \Phi$ has $⟨u,v⟩\in \{-1,-1/2,0,1/2,1\}$, because both vectors are unit vectors. Thus its angle relative to $v$ belongs to the finite list $0,\pm \pi /3,\pm \pi /2,\pm 2\pi /3,\pi$.

If all vectors are collinear, the set is exactly $\{v,-v\}$, giving two opposite points of the unit circle.

If an orthogonal vector $w$ occurs, closure supplies $\pm v,\pm w$. A unit vector making an angle of $\pi /3$ or $2\pi /3$ with $v$ would have inner product $\pm \sqrt{3}/2$ with $w$, contradicting integrality of twice that inner product. Thus these four points are the whole set: the vertices of a square.

In the remaining case a noncollinear pair makes an angle of $\pi /3$ or $2\pi /3$. Changing a sign, take their angles as $0,\pi /3$. Reflecting the second in the line perpendicular to the first supplies the angle $2\pi /3$, and negation supplies the other three hexagon vertices. No perpendicular vector can occur, by the preceding inner-product obstruction. The initial finite list now leaves only these six points. Conversely the opposite pair, square and regular hexagon each satisfy both reflection closure and the integrality condition. Hence

For equal-length crystallographic root configurations in a plane, taking $u=v$ in the closure condition gives $S_v(v)=-v$, so every vector occurs with its negative. For fixed $v\in \Phi$, a vector $u\in \Phi$ has $⟨u,v⟩\in \{-1,-1/2,0,1/2,1\}$, because both vectors are unit vectors. Thus its angle relative to $v$ belongs to the finite list $0,\pm \pi /3,\pm \pi /2,\pm 2\pi /3,\pi$.

If all vectors are collinear, the set is exactly $\{v,-v\}$, giving two opposite points of the unit circle.

If an orthogonal vector $w$ occurs, closure supplies $\pm v,\pm w$. A unit vector making an angle of $\pi /3$ or $2\pi /3$ with $v$ would have inner product $\pm \sqrt{3}/2$ with $w$, contradicting integrality of twice that inner product. Thus these four points are the whole set: the vertices of a square.

In the remaining case a noncollinear pair makes an angle of $\pi /3$ or $2\pi /3$. Changing a sign, take their angles as $0,\pi /3$. Reflecting the second in the line perpendicular to the first supplies the angle $2\pi /3$, and negation supplies the other three hexagon vertices. No perpendicular vector can occur, by the preceding inner-product obstruction. The initial finite list now leaves only these six points. Conversely the opposite pair, square and regular hexagon each satisfy both reflection closure and the integrality condition. Hence

The given permutations satisfy $r^4=s^2=1$ and $srs=r^{-1}$. The eight elements $r^j,r^{j}s$ for $0\le j<4$ are distinct: $s\notin ⟨r⟩$, whose only element of order two is $r^2=(13)(24)$. Thus $H$ is the order-eight dihedral group, and we may use the matricesThey obey the same relations and describe a quarter-turn and a reflection of a square.

The eigenvalues of $R$ over the complex numbers are $i$ and $-i$, with respective eigenlines spanned by $(1,-i)$ and $(1,i)$. Since $S$ interchanges these eigenlines, neither is an invariant subspace for $H$. Any proper nonzero subrepresentation of this two-dimensional complex representation would be a line invariant under both $R$ and $S$, and an $R$-invariant line must be one of those eigenlines. None qualifies, so $W$ is irreducible.

For the calculation in part (e), its character isIndeed $R^2=-I$, while a quarter-turn or a reflection has trace zero. The character inner product $(2^2+(-2{)}^2)/8=1$ provides a second irreducibility check.

Let $h(\zeta )=i(1+\zeta )/(1-\zeta )$, the inverse Cayley transform between the half-plane and disk. Direct calculation givessoOn the unit disc, choose the holomorphic square root of $1-{\zeta }^4$ equal to one at zero. Both sides define nonvanishing holomorphic derivatives, and their quotient has constant square. The branch chosen in part ii gives $(F_1\circ h{)}^{\prime }(0)=1+i$. ConsequentlyAn affine change of image coordinate preserves conformality, so the lemniscatic integral maps the disc bijectively onto a square.

The normalization specifies the square exactly. Put $B=F(1)={\int }_0^{1}dt/\sqrt{1-t^4}$. The substitution $x=t^2$ gives $A=2B$. The integral satisfies $F(-z)=-F(z)$ and $F(iz)=iF(z)$, so its four corner values are $B,iB,-B,-iB$. ThusIn particular the image is a square rotated through $\pi /4$ relative to the one in part ii, and its side length is $\sqrt{2}B$. These symmetries also give $F_1(i)=(1+i)B$ from the affine identity.

Choose the holomorphic square root in the complex upper half-plane whose boundary value is positive on $0<x<1$. Its primitive has derivative $F_1^{\prime }(z)=1/\sqrt{z(1-z^2)}$. The integral from the boundary basepoint zero is well-defined by a limiting path: the local singularity is only $z^{-1/2}$.

The three finite prevertices $-1,0,1$ have derivative exponent $-1/2$, hence image angle $\pi /2$. At infinity $F_1^{\prime }(z)=O(z^{-3/2})$, so the local coordinate $1/z$ also gives image angle $\pi /2$. These are the four corners of a Schwarz-Christoffel mapping to a rectangle. To establish that it is a square rather than a general rectangle, putThe length along $(-1,0)$ is also $A$ by $x\mapsto -x$. The length along $(1,\infty )$ isby $x=1/t$, and the fourth side has the same length by symmetry. With the chosen branch, the boundary derivatives on the intervals $(-\infty ,-1),(-1,0),(0,1),(1,\infty )$ have phases $-1,-i,1,i$, respectively. ThereforeThe extended real boundary maps continuously and once around this square. Each side is traversed monotonically, and the four corner limits are finite. The argument principle, applied after small indentations around the boundary singularities, counts one inverse image of each interior value and zero of each exterior value. Since $F_1^{\prime }$ never vanishes in the complex upper half-plane, those interior inverse images are simple. Thus

Take a real modulus $0<k<1$ and complementary modulus $k^{\prime }=\sqrt{1-k^2}$. The Jacobi elliptic sine is constructed by inverting a Schwarz-Christoffel mapping. The main reason for the Schwarz-Christoffel derivative is local angle behavior: if a prevertex $a_j$ corresponds to a polygon angle $\pi {\alpha }_j$, straightening that corner gives $U(w)-U(a_j)\sim C_j(w-a_j{)}^{{\alpha }_j}$. Hence $U^{\prime }$ has exponent ${\alpha }_j-1$. Along each straight boundary side its argument is constant. Dividing $U^{\prime }$ by ${\prod }_j(w-a_j{)}^{{\alpha }_j-1}$ removes those angle changes; Schwarz reflection extends the quotient across the real boundary and the corner singularities. With all vertices finite, its behavior at infinity is also regular, because the sum of the derivative exponents is $-2$. It is therefore a nonzero constant on the sphere. This yieldsThis argument explains the exponents, the branch choices and the role of boundary reflection, rather than just writing down the formula.

For a rectangle, four angles are $\pi /2$, so choose prevertices $-1/k,-1,1,1/k$ and normalize the inverse map asUse the branch positive on $(-1,1)$. SetThe two middle corner values are $U(\pm 1)=\pm K$. The right side length isas the substitution $t=(1-k^{\prime 2}{s}^2{)}^{-1/2}$ shows. The selected branch makes the increment along that side $i{K}^{\prime }$. Thus the other corner values are $K+i{K}^{\prime }$ and $-K+i{K}^{\prime }$. The two boundary intervals through infinity have combined horizontal length $2K$; the substitution $t=1/(ks)$ gives length $K$ from $1/k$ to infinity. In particular $U(\infty )=i{K}^{\prime }$. As in the square mapping, the boundary goes once around a rectangle, and the argument principle gives a conformal bijectionIts inverse $s(z)=\mathrm{sn}(z,k)$ maps that rectangle onto the complex upper half-plane, and near zero has $s(0)=0$, $s^{\prime }(0)=1$. Differentiating the inverse relation givesThese identities continue meromorphically.

All four rectangle edges have real images, so Schwarz reflection extends $s$ across them. Reflection in the bottom edge gives $s(\bar{z})=\overline{s(z)}$. Reflection in the right edge, combined with the first reflection, gives $s(2K-z)=s(z)$. The even inverse-integral derivative gives $s(-z)=-s(z)$, and henceReflection in the top edge and then the bottom gives $s(z+2i{K}^{\prime })=s(z)$. The resulting period lattice of the Jacobi elliptic sine isTo see the poles, use $U^{\prime }(w)\sim -1/(k{w}^2)$ near the boundary point infinity. Then $U(w)-i{K}^{\prime }\sim 1/(kw)$, so the inverse has a simple pole at $i{K}^{\prime }$ with residue $1/k$. The real half-period shift gives another pole at $2K+i{K}^{\prime }$ with opposite residue. Reflection tiles the plane with copies of the rectangle, so these are exactly two simple poles per displayed fundamental cell. They also show there is no additional period: a period must permute these two pole classes; exchanging them would shift by $2K$ modulo the displayed lattice, which reverses the function's sign and residues rather than preserving it.

For any finite $w$, integrate $s^{\prime }(z)/(s(z)-w)$ around a fundamental parallelogram avoiding its zeros and poles. The opposite edges cancel by periodicity, so the number of zeros of $s-w$ equals the number of poles, namely two. Therefore every value has two inverse images modulo periods, counted with multiplicity. The value infinity likewise has the two simple poles as preimages. Usually the finite-value preimages are distinct; the involution $z\mapsto 2K-z$ interchanges them. At $w=\pm 1,\pm 1/k$, a critical point supplies one double inverse image instead. For example $s(K)=1$, $s^{\prime }(K)=0$, $s^{\prime \prime }(K)=-(1-k^2)\ne 0$. Thus the printed “exactly two” requires the standard multiplicity convention; it would be false if interpreted as two distinct solutions at these branch values of a holomorphic map.

Now choose $z_0=K$ and put $f(z)=s(z+K)$. Since $s(2K-z)=s(z)$, $f$ is even, elliptic for $\Lambda$, and has degree two. The Weierstrass elliptic function for the same lattice is even and has one double pole per cell, hence also degree two. Its generic fibers are precisely $\{z,-z\}$. Consequently an even $f$ is constant on those fibers and descends to a meromorphic function $R$ of $\wp$. At the four fixed classes of $z\mapsto -z$, the even local Laurent expansion makes this descent meromorphic in the squared local coordinate. A meromorphic function on the Riemann sphere is rational, so $f=R(\wp )$. Generic map degrees multiply:Thus $R$ has degree one and the degree-two even elliptic function conclusion isThe determinant condition follows because $f$ is nonconstant. This proves the existence requested, with the explicit allowable shift $z_0=K$.

At a fixed $z\in [-1,1]$, both cylinder inequalities becomeThus the cross section is a square of side $2\sqrt{1-z^2}$ and area $4(1-z^2)$. Integrating these cross-sectional areas gives the volume of this bicylinder:

The original double integral covers the triangle $0\le y\le x\le 1$. By Fubini's theorem, after reversing the order, $y$ runs from $0$ to $1$ and $x$ from $y$ to $1$. Since a continuous function is integrable on this bounded region,For the square pyramid, a horizontal section at height $z$ is a square of side $2(1-z)$: each vertex moves linearly from the base towards $(1,1,1)$. Hence its cross-sectional area is $4(1-z{)}^2$, and its volume is $4{\int }_0^1(1-z{)}^{2}dz$. To use the identity just proved, choose $f(y)=1-y$:

Pair each point $\mathbf{x}$ of the square's boundary with $-\mathbf{x}$. The vector field obeys $\mathbf{f}(-\mathbf{x})=\mathbf{f}(\mathbf{x})$, whereas the outward unit normal vector changes sign: $\mathbf{n}(-\mathbf{x})=-\mathbf{n}(\mathbf{x})$. Corresponding arc length elements are equal. Thus the two contributions to the flux cancel, proving without evaluating any boundary integral thatThe same cancellation appears in the divergence, which is an odd function of $x$ over a region symmetric under $x\mapsto -x$. To justify using the planar divergence theorem despite the lack of differentiability at the origin, remove a disk of radius $\epsilon <1$. The vector field is continuously differentiable on the remaining region, its divergence has zero double integral by this symmetry, and the magnitude of the inner flux is at most $2\pi {\epsilon }^2$, since $\Vert \mathbf{f}\Vert \le \epsilon$ there. Letting $\epsilon \to 0$ recovers the result. This is flux around a removable point singularity.

The group order $|G|$ is the number of elements of the finite group. A normal subgroup $H\le G$ satisfies $gH{g}^{-1}=H$ for every $g\in G$, equivalently its left and right cosets agree.

For the square, let $R$ be counterclockwise rotation by $\pi /2$, and $s$ reflection in the horizontal axis. The dihedral group isThe first four elements rotate by $0,90,180,270$ degrees. The other four are Euclidean reflections in the horizontal axis, the line $y=x$, the vertical axis and the line $y=-x$, respectively, for a square centred at the origin with sides parallel to the axes.

The eight nontrivial proper subgroups areTo check completeness, Lagrange's theorem allows proper orders one, two and four. The order-two subgroups are generated by the five involutions displayed. An order-four subgroup containing $R$ or $R^3$ is the rotation subgroup. Otherwise it must contain reflections; their product is a rotation, which must be $R^2$, so its reflections differ by that half-turn, giving the two listed Klein subgroups. The trivial subgroup $\{I\}$ is an additional proper subgroup. Thus the PDF's count of eight uses “proper” to exclude the trivial subgroup; with the usual inclusive definition there are nine proper subgroups.

A normal subgroup of order two is central: conjugation fixes its identity and must also fix its only other member. The half-turn $R^2$ commutes with every square symmetry, whereas the reflection subgroups are exchanged by conjugation. Hence the unique order-two normal subgroup isFor the general polygon, write $D_n=\{R^j,R^{j}s:0\le j<n\}$ with $R^n=s^2=I$ and $sRs=R^{-1}$. A rotation $R^j$ commutes with $s$ exactly when $R^j=R^{-j}$, or $2j\equiv 0(\mathrm{mod}n)$. A reflection cannot commute with $R$ when $n\ge 3$, becauseTherefore the center of a group here is $\{I\}$ for odd $n$, and $\{I,R^{n/2}\}$ for even $n$. The order-two normal subgroups correspond exactly to nonidentity central involutions, provingThis agrees with the involutions in an even dihedral group and uses the convention $|D_n|=2n$ throughout.

Take the electric potential to vanish at infinity. The distance from the centre to each point charge is half the diagonal of a polygon of the square, namely $a/\sqrt{2}$. The superposition principle for the electric potential therefore gives, for four charges $+q$,Strictly, specifying only the magnitude of each electric charge leaves its sign undetermined. For signed charges $q_j$, the general answer is $V=\sqrt{2}{\sum }_{j=1}^4{q}_j/(4\pi {ϵ}_{0}a)$. For example, two positive and two negative charges of equal magnitude give zero electric potential at the centre. The boxed result uses the usual interpretation that all four charges have the same positive sign.

For integers $k,l$,Thus reducing coordinates modulo one gives a well-defined function on the torus ${\mathbb{R}}^2/{\mathbb{Z}}^2$. Its determinant is one and its inverse matrix is the integer matrix $\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& -1\\ -1& 2\end{array}\right)$, so it induces a bijection of the torus. The Jacobian determinant one makes this bijection area-preserving.

Its eigenvalues solve ${\lambda }^2-3\lambda +1=0$, givingThere are therefore expanding and contracting eigendirections and no eigenvalue on the unit circle: the function is a hyperbolic toral automorphism. The Lyapunov exponents per iterate areThey sum to zero, as required by area preservation.

The four vertices of the unit square map to $(0,0),(2,1),(3,2),(1,1)$, the vertices of an area-one parallelogram. To reduce it modulo one, cut it by the integer grid. For each piece in the cell $[j,j+1]\times [k,k+1]$, translate by $(-j,-k)$. Up to boundary identifications these translated pieces partition the unit square, because the inverse integer matrix gives exactly one torus preimage to every point. The colored pieces in the original diagram show the same pieces before and after these translations.

For the Fibonacci identity, at $n=1$ the claimed matrix is $\left(\begin{array}{cc}{F}_2& F_1\\ F_1& F_0\end{array}\right)=A$. If the identity holds at $n$, multiplication on the right by $A$ givesEach equality uses $F_{j+1}=F_j+F_{j-1}$, with the specified indexing $F_0=F_1=1$. This proves the formula for every positive integer $n$.

A fixed point satisfies $(A-I)v\in {\mathbb{Z}}^2$. Since $A-I=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)$ has an inverse integer matrix, this forces $v\in {\mathbb{Z}}^2$, so the origin is the only fixed point modulo one.

For period dividing two,The second congruence gives $y=-3x(\mathrm{mod}1)$; inserting it into the first gives $5x=0(\mathrm{mod}1)$. Thus the complete list isThe first is the fixed origin. Direct application of $A$ exchanges the other four in exactly two pairs:This both verifies the periodic orbits and excludes additional ones.

Finally, if $v$ is fixed by $F^p$, then $(A^p-I)v=m$ for an integer vector $m$. The eigenvalues of $A^p-I$ are ${\lambda }_{+}^p-1$ and ${\lambda }_{-}^p-1$, neither zero. Hence its inverse exists and has rational entries by the adjugate matrix formula for an integer matrix. Therefore $v=(A^p-I{)}^{-1}m$ has rational coordinates. The derivative of the return map is $A^p$, with eigenvalues ${\lambda }_{+}^p>1$ and $0<{\lambda }_{-}^p<1$. Every periodic point is a hyperbolic saddle fixed point of a map and is unstable, although perturbations in its stable eigendirection contract.