SynopsisGabriel Arnoux suggested his 1887 order 17 perfect magic cube was special because it contained many special patterns. These page summarizes the results of my investigation of this subject. It turns out that Arnoux’s patterns are NOT unique to his cube, but commonly appear in all types of magic hypercubes, whether squares, cubes, or higher dimensions. However, because I can find no
other reference to these types of patterns, even after all these years,
|
![]()
On April 17th, 1887, the Frenchman
Gabriel Arnoux deposited a perfect(i.e. pandiagonal and pantriagonal) magic cube of order 17 with the
Académie des Sciences. It consists of 26 handwritten pages! As far as I
have been able to determine, this is the first normal
perfect magic cube ever constructed!
For more information on the Arnoux cube,
see my Big Cubes page. You may also
download the complete listing of the Arnoux cube by visiting my cube
Downloads page.
Each of the 4913 cells in Arnoux’s order 17 cube is part of 13 different lines that sum to the constant.
However, there are many other patterns
of 17 numbers that also sum to the constant.
These are sets of 17 numbers formed by moving through the cube similar to how a
knight moves in chess. This page is a summary of an investigation of such lines.
A multitude of these patterns can be created by varying the size of the jumps (I
refer to them as steps).
Again I express my gratitude to Christian Boyer of Paris, France, for locating and obtaining a copy of this marvelous and historically significant cube, and making it available to me.
Following is quoted from an email by Christian Boyer sent on July 7, 2003.
About the other announced characteristics, Gabriel Arnoux says > that his cube is "hypermagic" : he means that all the > miscellaneous lines are magic, not only the 90° lines and 45° diagonals. > Choose randomly two numbers in the cube, draw the line going > through these two numbers, and the magic sum of this line will be > magic (excluding some rare exceptions). > An incredible feature, far better that what you call a "perfect > magic" cube. More perfect than perfect! > Look at the "ArnouxExplications1.JPG" image, he gives an example > with the line going through the 2 numbers 1759 and 3891. > I will describe an easiest sample with for example the line going > through the 2 numbers 4718 (high left corner of Arnoux01.JPG) and > 3477 (line 2, column 3 of Arnoux02.JPG): > 1,1 in Arnoux01 = 4718 > 2,3 in Arnoux02 = 3477 > 3,5 in Arnoux03 = 3443 > 4,7 in Arnoux04 = 3953 > 5,9 in Arnoux05 = 944 > 6,11 in Arnoux06 = 2916 > 7,13 in Arnoux07 = 1607 > 8,15 in Arnoux08 = 2780 > 9,17 in Arnoux09 = 4174 > 10,2 in Arnoux10 = 43 > 11,4 in Arnoux11 = 2304 > 12,6 in Arnoux12 = 2525 > 13,8 in Arnoux13 = 638 > 14,10 in Arnoux14 = 4565 > 15,12 in Arnoux15 = 1403 > 16,14 in Arnoux16 = 1879 > 17,16 in Arnoux17 = 400
In this example, Christian used jumps of 1 for coordinates Y and Z, jumps of 2 for the X coordinates.
|
Arnoux’s example used the following
jumps: X = 4, Y = 2, and Z = 12 This is Arnoux’s example, as listed by
him (that was referred to in the above quote):
(I am unable to show an image of the actual page due to restrictions imposed by the Académie des Sciences.)
|
|
Because of the very large number of possible patterns, I adopted the following strategy to make the number of tests required manageable. I did check both magic squares and magic cubes. Also, one plane each of the three orthogonal orientations of each cube tested.
· Tests were limited to ODD orders of magic cubes and squares.
· Step refers to the number of rows moved down as we move to the right (or left) to the adjacent column (X). For lines that move through 3 dimensions, I considered only moving 1 orthogonal plane (Z) at a time. So, in these tests, X and Z are limited to steps of 1.
·
For dimension Y (the rows), in most cases, I checked
only for steps of 2, 3, or 4.
Other patterns obviously exist by using various steps for X, Y and Z.
With the following exceptions, all lines
with steps from 2 to m-2 exist in odd order magic squares and cubes.
If the odd order square or cube is not prime, then steps that are factors or
contain factors, of the order cannot exist. This is because the cycle cannot be
of length m.
The sloping line with step m-1 is always a pandiagonal or pantriagonal (depending on whether the line goes through 2 or 3 dimensions.
Squares or cubes of even order can also contain Arnoux patterns if ‘step is not a factor of m. However, the tests summarized here only applied to odd order squares and cubes. I did check out two order 4 and two order 8 magic squares in the Sqr_9-OtherLines.xls spreadsheet.
For most tests, I checked only lines starting at each of the cells in columns 1 and 2 for lines moving down and to the right. I also checked lines starting at each of the cells in columns m and m-1 for lines sloping down to the left. I was confident that if all these lines are correct, then ALL lines in the magic square or cube are correct.
By the time I had started testing the order 17 Arnoux, I had established the fact that similar patterns starting on any column of a given plane of the cube contained the same m totals (but the series of totals start on a different line). Therefore if a column contains all correct sums, all occurrences of that pattern in the cube are correct. With this in mind, for the order 17 Arnoux cube and the order 13 Quadrant magic square, I tested only column 1 and m-1.
For the cube tests, I tested the 3-dimensional lines, then I tested the Top, Back and Left orthogonal planes for correct 2-dimensional lines.
To demonstrate that Arnoux example patterns with all 3 coordinates stepping by an amount greater then 1 is universal, I show here two other examples. In both cases I started at an arbitrary cell and used arbitrary steps for all 3 coordinates. And in both cases, my first attempt was successful! Of course, the fact that these two example patterns are correct does not guarantee that all patterns in the cube (with these particular steps) will sum correctly.
My two examples simply show that patterns with any particular combination of steps can exist in a particular cube.
Order 11 Seimiya Perfect: Order 9 Hendricks Perfect
X Y Z X Y Z
1 - 11 -- 3 = 1279 4 - 7 - 1 = 501
3 -- 6 -- 6 = 1056 9 - 9 - 3 = 228
5 -- 1 -- 9 = 844 5 - 2 - 5 = 721
7 -- 7 -- 1 = 500 1 - 4 - 7 = 133
9 -- 2 -- 4 = 277 6 - 6 - 9 = 265
11 -- 8 -- 7 = 65 2 - 8 - 2 = 5
2 -- 3 - 10 = 1173 7 - 1 - 4 = 461
4 -- 9 -- 2 = 950 3 - 3 - 6 = 602
6 -- 4 -- 5 = 606 8 - 5 - 8 = 369
8 - 10 -- 8 = 394 Total = S = 3285
10 -- 5 - 11 = 171
Total = S = 7315
X = step 2, Y = step 5, X = step 5, Y = step 7,
and Z = step 3 and Z = step 2
Both of these cubes are listed elsewhere on these cube pages.
I mentioned above that for the most part I have limited my tests to X and Z steps of 1, varying only the steps for Y. However, in my cube test spreadsheets, of which the Arnoux pattern test is just one sheet, I already have all the planes in the two vertical orientations. Because the row and column positions of these planes are exactly the same as those for the horizontal planes, it was simple to test these arrays also.
Without thinking the matter through carefully, I figured that, in effect, testing these different orientations was equivalent to varying the Y and Z coordinates. Now that I have virtually completed all the tests I wish to do, I have checked this out. I find that the steps of only the Z coordinate varies when I use the same formulae as I did when testing the horizontal planes. Testing the second orientation of the vertical planes produced only a variation of the same patterns the first orientation produced.
To better illustrate this discussion, here is an example I have extracted from Cube_7-Hendricks-JRM.xls on the basis of the X step = 3 (see the Cube Comparison chart).
For the cube:
I show a pattern generated from the horizontal planes. Then patterns generated
from the two vertical orientations with the coordinates in the horizontal
orientation where these values are found. The columns and rows (C-R) are the
same for all three so I show them just once. The Z, Y and X coordinates are
also the same for all three orientations, but I show them next to the new
horizontal orientation coordinate equivalents for convenience.
I have counted the planes (Z) as 1 on the top, 7 on the bottom of the cube. The rows (Y) as 1 on the top to 7 on the bottom (when the plane is shown as in my spreadsheet. The columns (X) are counted from the left.
Horizontal planes Vertical B2F Horz Vertical L2R Horz C-R Value Z Y X Val. Z Y X Z Y X Val. Z Y X Z Y X B6 98 1 1 1 98 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 C19 319 2 4 2 298 2 4 2 4 2 2 775 2 4 2 4 6 2 D32 197 3 7 3 204 3 7 3 7 3 3 342 3 7 3 7 5 3 E38 131 4 3 4 117 4 3 4 3 4 4 117 4 3 4 3 4 4 F51 9 5 6 5 23 5 6 5 6 5 5 284 5 6 5 6 3 5 G57 286 6 2 6 279 6 2 6 2 6 6 59 6 2 6 2 2 6 H70 164 7 5 7 185 7 5 7 5 7 7 226 7 5 7 5 1 7 Total 1204 1204 1204
Conclusion: By testing the planes parallel to the front, I am in effect varying the Z coordinate step while limiting the X and Y coordinate steps to 1. The test of the planes parallel to the sides of the cubes, turns out to be redundant. Again, the X and Y steps have been a constant 1 with the Z step varied.
For the squares:
I show a pattern generated from the top horizontal plane. Then patterns
generated from the back and the left vertical planes with the coordinates where
these values are found in the cube. The results are the same as for the above.
In effect, I have tested for variations in the steps of Y and Z (in the cube),
but not for X.
Regardless, I feel that my tests have proven the general universality of these
patterns within hypercubes of different orders and dimensions.
Top Back Left C_R Value Y X Z Y X Value Y X Z Y X Value Y X Z Y X B6 98 1 1 1 1 1 98 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 C9 264 4 2 1 4 2 257 4 2 4 1 2 132 4 2 4 6 1 D12 136 7 3 1 7 3 122 7 3 7 1 3 207 7 3 7 5 1 E8 302 3 4 1 3 4 330 3 4 3 1 4 331 3 4 3 4 1 F11 181 6 5 1 6 5 153 6 5 6 1 5 70 6 5 6 3 1 G7 4 2 6 1 2 6 18 2 6 2 1 6 194 2 6 2 2 1 H10 219 5 7 1 5 7 226 5 7 5 1 7 269 5 7 5 1 1 Total 1204 1204 1204
![]()
Magic objects I tested for this feature are:
|
My Test File |
Type |
Features |
|
Cube_17-Arnoux.xls |
perfect |
153 pandiagonal magic squares |
|
Cube_13-LiaoPerfect.xls |
perfect |
117 pandiagonal magic squares |
|
Cube_9-Seimiya.xls |
perfect |
81 pandiagonal magic squares |
|
Cube_7-Weidemann.xls |
simple |
14 pandiagonal and 5 simple magic squares |
|
Cube_7-Hendricks-JRM.xls |
pantriagonal |
3 simple magic squares |
|
Cube_7-Frost.xls |
pandiagonal |
22 pandiagonal & 5 simple magic squares |
|
Cube_5-Aale-1.xls |
pantriagonal |
all pantriagonals correct in 4 directions. No magic squares |
|
Cube_5-Boyer-2.xls |
simple |
all pantriagonals correct in 1 direction, 15 magic squares. |
|
Cube_5-Trump-2.xls |
simple |
NO directions with all pantriagonals correct, 17 magic squares |
The above cube spreadsheets are the
original test spreadsheets with an additional worksheet appended at the end.
Following is a new and an existing spreadsheet to test this feature in magic
squares.
|
Sqr_9-OtherLines.xls |
2 order 9, 2 order 7, and 4 order
5 squares, simple and pandiagonal magic. |
|
QMS_13.xls |
I modified this existing order 13 spreadsheet to test ALL steps of Y from 2 to 12. |
The three order 5 cubes permitted a
direct comparison between a cube with pantriagonals correct in all 4 directions,
in 1 direction only, and in NO directions. This last cube is Walter Trump’s,
which arrived at a late stage in my tests.
I have 8 different order 5 cubes and 1 order 7 cube by
Trump. All have the same feature; they do not contain all correct
pantriagonals in at least one direction. These are the ONLY cubes of these two
orders with this feature.
Because these 3 magic cubes do not appear on any of my other cube pages, I present the listings here.
Cube_5_Aale-1.xls (Aale de Winkel) Plane 1 - Top II III 1 50 69 88 107 110 4 48 67 86 89 108 2 46 70 125 19 38 57 76 79 123 17 36 60 58 77 121 20 39 94 113 7 26 75 73 92 111 10 29 27 71 95 114 8 63 82 101 25 44 42 61 85 104 23 21 45 64 83 102 32 51 100 119 13 11 35 54 98 117 120 14 33 52 96 IV V - Bottom 68 87 106 5 49 47 66 90 109 3 37 56 80 124 18 16 40 59 78 122 6 30 74 93 112 115 9 28 72 91 105 24 43 62 81 84 103 22 41 65 99 118 12 31 55 53 97 116 15 34
Cube_5_Boyer-2.xls Plane 1 - Top II III 54 31 13 115 97 10 117 99 51 33 96 53 30 12 119 15 122 79 56 38 76 58 35 17 124 37 19 121 78 55 81 63 40 22 104 42 24 101 83 60 103 80 62 44 21 47 4 106 88 65 108 85 67 49 1 69 46 3 105 87 113 90 72 29 6 74 26 8 110 92 5 112 94 71 28 IV V - Bottom 32 14 116 98 50 118 95 52 34 11 123 75 57 39 16 59 36 18 120 77 64 41 23 100 82 20 102 84 61 43 0 107 89 66 48 86 68 45 2 109 91 73 25 7 114 27 9 111 93 70
Cube_5_Trump-2. Plane 1 - Top II III 34 6 115 35 120 11 122 92 47 38 78 108 96 23 5 85 123 26 45 31 110 54 49 55 42 15 56 76 57 106 8 91 20 94 97 81 74 73 72 10 80 63 62 61 44 95 37 25 112 41 22 58 64 59 107 18 67 48 68 109 88 53 124 24 21 86 2 32 77 113 119 16 28 101 46 IV V - Bottom 84 3 7 105 111 103 71 0 100 36 17 65 60 66 102 83 12 99 87 29 114 52 51 50 43 27 30 104 33 116 82 69 75 70 14 93 79 98 1 39 13 121 117 19 40 4 118 9 89 90
As an afterthought, I decided to check out order 16 cubes because order 16 is 42, and also to investigate Arnoux patterns in the even orders.
As with the preceding tests, I tested X
and Z steps of 1, Y steps of from 2 to m-1 and for X and Y steps of 1, Z
steps of from 2 to m-1
For order 16, the possible steps are 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13.
The even numbers of course, are factors (or contain factors) of 16 so cannot
produce a full cycle of 16 numbers.
Here I will compare results of 4
different types of order 16 magic cubes.
In all cases, if any step produces all correct patterns, then all six possible
steps result in m2 correct patterns.
Therefore I will indicate only if all patterns (for all steps tested) or no
patterns are correct.
Be aware that in many cases there will be some patterns correct for some steps
tested. I do not indicate these situations.
The 2
Boyer cubes are Bimagic. Shown here are the degree 1 cube of each set, so
contain the numbers from 0 to 4095.
The number of magic squares shown in the table are the orthogonal squares included in the cube .
|
File name |
Author |
Type |
# of magic squares |
3-D (x, y, z) |
2-D (x, y) |
|
Cube_16-BiCube-1A.xls |
Christian Boyer |
Simple |
32 |
None |
None |
|
Cube_16-BiCube-2A.xls |
Christian Boyer |
Diagonal |
48 simple |
None |
None |
|
Cube_16-Aale.xls |
Aale de Winkel |
Pantriagonal |
0 |
All |
None |
|
Cube_16-Soni.xls |
Abhinav Soni |
Perfect |
48 pandiagonal |
All |
All |
The following notes and table summarize the findings from my tests.
For magic cubes
For X and Z steps of 1, Y steps of from 2 to m-1 and for X and Y steps of 1, Z steps of from 2 to m-1
· Patterns starting in column m-1 will always be equivalent to a pantriagonal
·
This feature is NOT limited to the Arnoux perfect
order 17 cube!
It is common to all cubes to a lesser or greater
degree
o
It seems to be dependent to some degree on
correct pantriagonals
Notice that Trumps order 5 with ALL pantriagonals correct in none of the 4
directions has NO steps with ALL solutions correct!
o Notice also the Hendricks lowly order 7 pantriagonal cube has ALL solutions correct for steps 3 and 4! (This cube, by definition, has all triagonals correct in ALL 4 directions!)
o Frost’s order 7 pandiagonal cube also has all correct solutions for steps 3 and 4.
· This feature is NOT limited to magic hypercubes whose order is a prime number. However, only steps that are relatively prime to the order can possibly work. So, for example, for order 9, steps of 3 and 6 will not work. That is because it is impossible to cycle through a series of 9 numbers.
· I tested two other cubes with all three coordinates using steps other then 1!
For X steps of 1, Y steps of from 2 to m-1
· Patterns with a step for X of 1 and Y of 1 or m-1 will always be equivalent to a pandiagonal
· This feature is very common in magic squares and orthogonal arrays of magic cubes
· Hendricks order 7 pantriagonal cube (no magic squares) – ALL solutions for steps 2, 3, 4, and 5
· Arnoux order 17 perfect cube (orthogonal planes) - ALL solutions are correct for steps 2, and 3 (and step 4 for one , step 5 for two orientations).
· Pandiagonal magic order 13 square (my quadrant magic square) – All solutions for steps 2, 5, 6. 7, 8, 11, and 12. For this square, I also tested patterns with X confined to a step of 1 and Y with steps 2, 3, 4, and 5. They show exactly the same results as the normal steps
· This feature is NOT dependent on pandiagonals because I tested it on two order 5 pandiagonal magic squares, and none of the steps had ALL solutions correct (except step 4 which is m-1)

![]()
|
· My tests, with a few exceptions, only involved testing multiple values for Y or Z, with a step of 1 for x. Patterns of course exist for all allowed values in any combination for X, Y and Z. · These patterns are very common in magic squares and cubes and have many variations i.e. differences in step amounts. However, I have seen no previous reference to patterns of this type in the literature. · I have been unable to determine what characteristics of a magic square or cube contribute to a proliferation of these patterns. · Patterns can appear in both odd and even orders. The only limitation is that the step number not be a factor of the order. · For a particular hypercube, some patterns, when started on ANY cell, will sum correctly. Other patterns may sum correctly only when started on certain cells, or may have no correct solutions. · This is not a unique feature of the Arnoux cube, as was mentioned by Gabriel Arnoux. But I suggest, as a tribute to him, that they be referred to as Arnoux patterns. |
Please send me Feedback about my Web
site!![]()
![]()
![]()
Harvey Heinz harveyheinz@shaw.ca
This page last updated
October 14, 2009
Copyright © 2003 by Harvey D. Heinz