Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Consider this 5-Square Identity,

$(x_1^2+x_2^2+x_3^2+x_4^2+x_5^2)^2 (y_1^2+y_2^2+y_3^2+y_4^2+y_5^2) = z_1^2+z_2^2+z_3^2+z_4^2+z_5^2$


$\begin{align} z_1 &= (-x_1^2+x_2^2+x_3^2+x_4^2+x_5^2)y_1 - 2x_1(0x_1 y_1+x_2 y_2+x_3 y_3+x_4 y_4 + x_5 y_5)\\ z_2 &= (x_1^2-x_2^2+x_3^2+x_4^2+x_5^2)y_2 - 2x_2(x_1 y_1+0x_2 y_2+x_3 y_3+x_4 y_4 + x_5 y_5)\\ z_3 &= (x_1^2+x_2^2-x_3^2+x_4^2+x_5^2)y_3 - 2x_3(x_1 y_1+x_2 y_2+0x_3 y_3+x_4 y_4 + x_5 y_5)\\ z_4 &= (x_1^2+x_2^2+x_3^2-x_4^2+x_5^2)y_4 - 2x_4(x_1 y_1+x_2 y_2+x_3 y_3+0x_4 y_4 + x_5 y_5)\\ z_5 &= (x_1^2+x_2^2+x_3^2+x_4^2-x_5^2)y_5 - 2x_5(x_1 y_1+x_2 y_2+x_3 y_3+x_4 y_4 + 0x_5 y_5) \end{align}$

The pattern is easily seen for,

$(x_1^2+x_2^2 + \dots + x_n^2)^2 (y_1^2+y_2^2 + \dots + y_n^2) = z_1^2+z_2^2 + \dots + z_n^2$

The case n = 4 is used in Pfister’s 8-square Identity. How to prove the pattern indeed holds true for ALL positive integer n?

share|cite|improve this question
Is there a square wrong on $x_1^2+\dots+x_5^2$ in the title and the first equation? – emiliocba Jan 30 '12 at 19:44
Look at first term. Get $(\sum x_i^2)-2x_1^2$. Also, have in second summand of first term, $-2x_1((\sum x_iy_i)-x_1y_1)$. But still unpleasant! – André Nicolas Jan 30 '12 at 19:49
@emiliocba: No, I've checked it with Mathematica and the 5-Square identity holds true. – Tito Piezas III Jan 30 '12 at 20:02
up vote 5 down vote accepted

We can write \begin{align*} z_k&=y_k\left(\sum_ix_i^2-2x_k^2\right)-2x_k\sum_{i\neq k}x_iy_i\\ &=y_k\sum_ix_i^2-2x_k\left(\sum_{i\neq k}x_iy_i+x_ky_k\right)\\ &=y_k\sum_ix_i^2-2x_k\sum_ix_iy_i \end{align*} so hopping we are working in a commutative ring $$z_k^2=y_k^2\left(\sum_ix_i^2\right)^2-4x_ky_k\left(\sum_ix_i^2\right)\left(\sum_ix_iy_i\right)+4x_k^2\left(\sum_ix_iy_i\right)^2$$ and finally \begin{align*} \sum_{k=1}^nz_k^2&=\sum_{k=1}^ny_k^2\left(\sum_ix_i^2\right)^2-4x_ky_k\left(\sum_ix_i^2\right)\left(\sum_ix_iy_i\right)+4x_k^2\left(\sum_ix_iy_i\right)^2\\ &=\left(\sum_ix_i^2\right)^2\sum_{k=1}^ny_k^2-4\left(\sum_kx_ky_k\right)\left(\sum_ix_i^2\right)\left(\sum_ix_iy_i\right)\\ &+4\left(\sum_kx_k^2\right)\left(\sum_ix_iy_i\right)^2\\ &=\left(\sum_ix_i^2\right)^2\sum_{k=1}^ny_k^2. \end{align*}

share|cite|improve this answer
strictly speaking, is it true that: $$\sum_{k=1}^{n}-4\left(\sum_{k} x_{k}y_{k}\right)\left(\sum_{i} x_{i}^2\right) \left(\sum_{i} x_iy_i\right)+4\left(\sum_{k}x_{k}^2\right)\left(\sum_{i} x_{i}y_{i}\right)^2=0$$??????? I am not saying you are incorrect, I am simply saying that it looks bizarre to me. Do you have any way of clarifying this? My issue lies in the fact that you are cancelling summations which have similar terms but different indexes. – 000 Jan 30 '12 at 20:55
@user22144: in the equality you write, there should not be $\sum_{k=1}^n$. The last step of my computation is in fact a consequence of the fact that $\sum_{i=1}^nc_i=\sum_{j=1}^nc_j$. – Davide Giraudo Jan 30 '12 at 21:02
Dear @Davide: Thanks so much! When I first stumbled upon the general form in the context of "Pfister's 8-Square Identity", I assumed it was only for n = 2^m. But a little experimentation with Mathematica showed it was was more than that. It is good to know it is in fact valid for all n. Thanks again. – Tito Piezas III Jan 31 '12 at 5:42
@DavideGiraudo, my mistake! I had misinterpreted the sum. No wonder it looked so bizarre. – 000 Jan 31 '12 at 20:34
Davide, you may have interests in this:… :0) – annie heart Apr 12 '14 at 22:42

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.