- Prove that if \(n\equiv 3\text{ mod }(4)\), then \(n\) cannot be written as a sum of two squares.
- Show that if \(n\equiv 7\text{ mod (8)}\), then \(n\) cannot be written as a sum of three perfect squares.
- Find two numbers that can be written as a sum of three squares in two different ways (where different really means different, not \(1^2+0^2+0^2=0^2+1^2+0^2\)).
- Find as many integers \(n\) as possible which are only writeable as a sum of squares via \(n=a^2+a^2=2a^2\), i.e. \(n\) is not writeable as a sum of distinct squares.
- Verify the Brahmagupta-Fibonacci identity by hand (i.e. write all the algebra out).
- Let \(r_2(n)\) be the number of different ways to write \(n\) as a sum of two squares, where every different way is counted. For instance, \[r_2(2)=4\text{ because }(-1,1),(-1,-1),(1,1),(1,-1)\text{ all work.}\] Prove that \[r_2\left(2^n\right)=4\text{ for all }n\; .\]
- Let \(N\) be odd, and let \(N=a^2+b^2\) and \(n=c^2+d^2\), where the pairs \((a,b)\) and \((c,d)\) are both positive and not the same or just switched in order. Verify the following:
- It's okay to assume that \(a\) and \(c\) are odd and \(b\) and \(d\) are even.
- If this is the case, show that \(k=gcd(a-c,b-d)\) and \(n=gcd(a+c,b+d)\) are both even.
- Then show that \(\frac{a-c}{k}=\frac{b+d}{n}\) and \(\frac{b-d}{k}=\frac{a+c}{n}\).
- Pick four random (to you) three digit numbers which are not of the form \(4k+3\) and decide whether they are a sum of two squares without using Sage.
- Pick two of those numbers and write them in all possible ways as a sum of two squares.
- Show a positive integer \(k\) is the difference of two squares if and only if \(k\not \equiv 2\) mod (4).
- Prove that if \(n\equiv 12\) mod (16), show that \(n\) cannot be written as a sum of two squares.
- Is there any congruence condition modulo \(6\) for which a number cannot be written as a sum of two squares?
- Referring to the proof of the main theorem: Check that the pictures you get from some other primes with these lattices really work.
- Check every piece of the Zagier proof:
- The set \(S\) is finite. Try figuring out what \(S\) is for \(p=5\) or \(p=13\), the smallest such primes.
- Each \((x,y,z)\) has exactly one of the three things to go to.
- The function in question is an involution. That is, if you take the output and apply the function a second time, you get your original \((x,y,z)\) back (this is a little tougher).
- If \((x,y,z)\) goes to \((x,y,z)\) then it turns out that \((x,y,z)=(1,1,\frac{p-1}{4})\) (you will probably need to use the definition of \(S\) for this, and remember that we assume \(p\equiv 1\) mod (4)).
- That if the map \((x,y,z)\to (x,z,y)\) has a point which is fixed (the output is same as input) then this, combined with the definition of \(S\), means that \(p\) is writeable as the sum of two squares.