Full text: The collected mathematical papers of Arthur Cayley, Sc.D., F.R.S., sadlerian professor of pure mathematics in the University of Cambridge (Vol. 2)

52 
DEMONSTRATION OF A THEOREM RELATING &C. 
[112 
where the summation extends to all the quadruplets formed each by the combination 
of two duads such as ab and cd, or ac and db, or ad and be, i. e. two duads, which, com 
bined with the same common letter (in the instances just mentioned e, or f or g), enter 
as triplets into the system of quasi-equations—so that if v = 2 W — 1, the number of quad 
ruplets is 
h {I 0 - 1) • i O' - 3)} v . £, = ^ v (v - 1) (v - 3), 
and the terms under the sign X will vanish identically if only 
ee' = = u ’; 
but the relation ee' = u is of the same form as the equation ee' = ££'; hence if all the 
relations 
ee' = 
are satisfied, the terms under the sign X vanish, and we have 
(w 3 + a 3 + b 3 + c 3 + .,.) = (w 2 + a 2 + b' 2 + c 2 + ...) (w 3 + a 3 + b 3 + c 3 + ...) 
which is thus shown to be true, upon the suppositions— 
1. That the system of quasi-equations is such that 
e o a 0 bo, e Q c Q d 0 
being any two of its triplets with a common symbol e 0 , there occur also in the system 
the triplets 
fo a oC 0 > fodo b o> 
9o a c d o> gJ> 0 c 0 - 
2. That for any two pairs of triplets, such as 
eajb,, eji r d r and f r a r c n , f^db n , 
ooo> ooo t/OOO? J o o o 3 
the product of the signs of the triplets of the first pair is equal to the product of the 
signs of the triplets of the second pair. 
In the case of fifteen things a, b, c, ... the triplets may, as appears from Mr Kirk- 
man’s paper, be chosen so as to satisfy the first condition; but the second condition 
involves, as Mr Kirkman has shown, a contradiction; and therefore the product of two 
sums, each of them of sixteen squares, is not a sum of sixteen squares. It is proper to 
remark, that this demonstration, although I think rendered clearer by the introduction of 
the idea of the system of triplets furnishing the rule for the formation of the expres 
sions w n , a„, b //} c ;/ , &c., is not in principle different from that contained in Prof. Young’s 
paper “On an Extension of a Theorem of Euler, &c.”, Irish Transactions, vol. xxi. [1848 
pp. 311—341].
	        
Waiting...

Note to user

Dear user,

In response to current developments in the web technology used by the Goobi viewer, the software no longer supports your browser.

Please use one of the following browsers to display this page correctly.

Thank you.