Science News, June 16, 2001; Vol. 159, No. 24

  
  ------------------------------------------------------------------ 
  
  Surprisingly Square
  
  Mathematicians take a fresh look at expressing 
  numbers as the sums of squares
  
  By Ivars Peterson
  
  For many decades, the study of the sums of squares was a stagnant 
  backwater of mathematical research. This state of affairs changed 
  unexpectedly in 1996 when mathematician Stephen C. Milne of Ohio 
  State University in Columbus unveiled powerful new formulas for 
  enumerating representations of numbers as the sums of squares.
  
  Milne's discoveries "came as a great surprise," says Ken Ono of the
  University of Wisconsin–Madison. "It's amazing that he found those 
  relations."
  
  Many mathematicians greeted Milne's startling results with 
  skepticism, however. Milne's published announcement provided only a 
  sketchy outline of his work. Moreover, the formulas he had obtained 
  were exceedingly complicated, making them difficult to understand and 
  apply. 
  
  Now, those initial doubts have evaporated. Details of Milne's 
  groundbreaking research will be published next year as a 125-page 
  paper in a special issue of the Ramanujan Journal.
  
  In the meantime, Ono and other mathematicians have used a different 
  mathematical approach to provide much shorter proofs of some of 
  Milne's main results and to furnish simpler formulas for counting 
  representations of numbers as the sums of squares.
  
  "Without Milne's pioneering effort, many of us would not have been 
  thinking about the problem," Ono says.
  
  The study of the sums of squares has a lengthy history, and it 
  remains an important area of research in pure mathematics, says 
  George E. Andrews of Pennsylvania State University in University Park.
  
  Nearly 2,000 years ago, for instance, Diophantus of Alexandria 
  observed in his book Arithmetica that 65 can be written in two 
  different ways as the sum of two squares: 4^2 + 7^2 and 8^2 + 1^2 . He 
  went on to detail a variety of relationships involving squares of 
  integers. 
  
  Modern efforts have focused on finding formulas that give the number 
  of different ways in which an integer can be represented as the sum 
  of a given number of squares.
  
  Consider the sequence of squares of whole numbers: 0, 1, 4, 9, 16, 
  and so forth. As the squares get larger, the gaps between consecutive 
  squares get wider. Clearly, most integers are not squares of whole 
  numbers.
  
  Many integers can be written as the sum of two squares: 8 = 4 + 4; 10 
  = 9 + 1; 13 = 9 + 4; and so on. Other numbers can't be expressed as 
  the sum of just two squares, however. To get a sum that equals 6, the 
  only squares available are 4 and 1, and that won't do the job. 
  Instead, it takes the sum of three squares: 4 + 1 + 1.
  
  Indeed, most positive integers can be written as the sum of three 
  squares. For instance, 11 = 9 + 1 + 1 and 12 = 4 + 4 + 4.
  On the other hand, 7 is an example of an integer that can't be 
  written as the sum of three squares. It takes four squares: 7 = 4 + 1 
  + 1 + 1.
  
  Do you ever need more than four squares to express an integer? In 
  1770, French mathematician Joseph-Louis Lagrange proved what 
  Diophantus, Pierre de Fermat, and others previously assumed: Every 
  positive integer is either a square itself or the sum of two, three, 
  or four squares.
  
  Mathematicians also became interested in the number of different ways 
  in which a given whole number can be expressed as the sum of four or 
  more squares. In such enumerations, 0 can be included as one of the 
  square numbers, and negative numbers can be squared.
  
  In 1829, German mathematician Carl Jacobi found formulas that give 
  the number of representations of an integer as the sum of two, four, 
  six, or eight squares. To do so, Jacobi worked with mathematical 
  expressions known as elliptic functions. Such expressions originally 
  arose in the context of determining the length of a piece of an 
  ellipse.
  
  Jacobi's formula for representations made up of four squares, for 
  instance, is simply 8 times the sum of all positive divisors of the 
  given integer that are not multiples of 4. Suppose the given integer 
  is 4, which also happens to be a square itself. The positive divisors 
  of 4 are 1, 2, and 4. Excluding 4, the calculation involves just 1 
  and 2. Multiplying the sum (1 + 2 = 3) by 8 gives 24 as the number of 
  different representations of 4 as the sum of four squares (see box, 
  above).
  
  Similarly, there are 48 representations of 5 as the sum of four 
  squares, starting with 22 + 12 + 02 + 02. The divisors of 5 are 1 and 
  5, and neither divisor is a multiple of 4. Applying Jacobi's formula, 
  the number of representations of 5 in terms of four squares is 8 
  multiplied by the sum of the divisors (1 + 5 = 6), giving the answer 
  48.
  
  Jacobi's formulas work for sums of up to eight squares. 
  Mathematicians then sought to come up with formulas for 
  representations of numbers using more than eight squares. This effort 
  tripped over an apparent stumbling block in the 1960s, when Robert A. 
  Rankin of the University of Glasgow proved a theorem ruling out the 
  existence of certain types of formulas analogous to the simple ones 
  found by Jacobi. Rankin's result discouraged other mathematicians 
  from pursuing the question further.
  
  There was a loophole, however. Rankin's result didn't cover every 
  possible type of formula, and Milne was one of the very few who 
  continued the pursuit. Probably no one else believed it possible to 
  find simple formulas, comments Bruce C. Berndt of the University of 
  Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 
  
  Returning to the elliptic-function approach pioneered by Jacobi and 
  combining it with other techniques, Milne eventually discovered new 
  formulas for the number of representations when more than eight 
  squares are involved. 
  
  Milne's 1996 discovery represented a "startling turnabout," Ono
  says. 
  "He made me believe that simple formulas could exist."
  
  Milne's formulas themselves, however, were hard to fathom and use. To 
  find simpler versions, mathematicians turned to an alternative 
  approach that uses mathematical objects known as modular forms.
  
  Mathematicians had developed the theory of modular forms in the early 
  part of the 20th century to gain deeper insights into number 
  relationships. A modular form is an abstract, highly symmetric, 
  impossible-to-visualize mathematical object that encodes 
  relationships far more complex than those expressed by simple 
  functions, such as the wavy sine function in trigonometry.
  
  The modular-form approach proved sufficiently powerful that it came 
  to dominate much of number theory, Andrews says. For example, it 
  played a central role in the recent proof of Fermat's last theorem by 
  Andrew Wiles of Princeton University (SN: 10/2/99, p. 221).
  
  In the course of his work on the sums of squares, Milne had proved 
  conjectures first proposed in 1994 by Victor G. Kac of the 
  Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Minoru Wakimoto of Kyushu 
  University in Fukuoka, Japan. The conjectures concerned the problem 
  of writing an integer as the sum of three triangular numbers. This 
  challenge is closely connected to the problem of writing an integer 
  as the sum of three squares. A triangular number has the form k (k + 
  1)/2, for k = 1, 2, 3, . . ., so the triangular numbers are 1, 3, 6, 
  10, and so on (see box, above). 
  
  Last year, working independently, number theorist Don Zagier of the 
  Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in Bonn, Germany, used a 
  modular-forms approach to provide a significantly shorter proof of 
  the Kac-Wakimoto conjectures. Zagier's version appeared in the 
  September-November 2000 Mathematical Research Letters.
  
  Zagier's method "involves an elegant and surprisingly simple 
  argument," Ono notes.
  
  Earlier this year, Ono extended Zagier's results to derive new 
  formulas for representations of sums of squares that are considerably 
  simpler than those of Milne. Ono "gives cleaner formulas and far 
  shorter proofs," Berndt says. "But he owes a debt to Milne, for Ono
  would not have discovered his theorems if it had not been for Milne's 
  work."
  
  To tackle questions concerning sums of squares, mathematicians now 
  have two distinctly different approaches—the one rooted in the theory 
  of elliptic functions and the other in the theory of modular 
  forms."It will take quite a while to see which method will open up 
  further new results and not just give new proofs," remarks 
  mathematician Richard Askey, also of the University of 
  Wisconsin-Madison. So far, the modular-forms method has only 
  confirmed Milne's work.
  
  "My hunch is that both methods will lead to surprises, but probably 
  in different ways," says Askey.
  
  The two approaches to the study of sums of squares "are greatly 
  enriching both areas of mathematics," Milne suggests.
  "Now, we have an interesting situation where there are many more 
  questions," he says. Why do the two seemingly unrelated approaches 
  give the same results? "In particular, what is the exact nature of 
  the beautiful relations between [the methods]?" he asks.
  
  The recent ventures of Milne, Zagier, and Ono could very well 
  represent just the first of many productive forays into a venerable 
  area where mathematicians had made little progress in recent decades.
  
  References and Sources
  
  References:
  
  Milne, S.C. In press. Infinite families of exact sums of squares 
  formulas, Jacobi elliptic functions, continued fractions, and Schur 
  functions. Ramanujan Journal. Available as a preprint at 
  http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/math.NT/0008068.
  
  Ono, K. Preprint. Representations of integers as sums of squares.
  
  Zagier, D. 2000. A proof of the Kac-Wakimoto affine denominator 
  formula for the strange series. Mathematical Research Letters 
  7(September-November):597.
  
  Further Readings:
  
  Kac, V.G., and M. Wakimoto. 1994. Integrable highest weight modules 
  over affine superalgebras and Appell's function. In Progress in 
  Mathematics, eds. J.-L. Brylinski, et al. Boston, Mass.: Birkhauser.
  
  Milne, S.C. 1996. New infinite families of exact sums of squares 
  formulas, Jacobi elliptic functions, and Ramanujan's tau function. 
  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 93(Dec. 24):15004.
  
  Peterson, I. 1999. Curving beyond Fermat. Science News Online. 
  Available at 
  http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arc99/11_20_99/mathland.htm.
  
  ______. 1999. Curving beyond Fermat's last theorem. Science News 
  156(Oct. 2):221.
  
  Sources:
  
  George E. Andrews
  Department of Mathematics
  Pennsylvania State University
  University Park, PA  16802-6402
  
  Richard Askey
  Department of Mathematics
  University of Wisconsin
  Madison, WI  53706
  
  Bruce C. Berndt
  Department of Mathematics
  University of Illinois
  1409 West Green Street
  Urbana, IL  61801
  
  Stephen C. Milne
  Department of Mathematics
  Ohio State University
  Columbus, OH  43210
  Web site: http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~milne/
  
  Ken Ono
  Department of Mathematics
  University of Wisconsin
  Madison, WI  53706
  Web site: http://www.math.wisc.edu/~ono/
  
  
  http://www.sciencenews.org/20010616/bob19.asp
  From Science News, Vol. 159, No. 24, June 16, 2001, p. 382.
  Copyright (c) 2001 Science Service.  All rights reserved.


---------------------------------

  Interested in new developments in science and technology? Consider
  subscribing to Science News. Visit Science News Online at
  http://www.sciencenews.org/ for access to additional news
  articles and subscription information.