I recently found a very interesting Algebraic Identity: \[xyz+(x+y)(y+z)(z+x)=(x+y+z)(xy+yz+zx)\]

What's so special about it? Note that going from one side of the equality to the other, all products are switched with sums, and all sums are switched with products!

This may be seen a bit easier if I rewrite it as follows: \[ \begin{align*} &\color{white}{)}x\color{red}{\times} y\color{red}{\times }z \color{white}{)}\color{blue}{+} \color{grey}{(}x\color{blue}{+}y\color{grey}{)}\color{red}{\times}\color{grey}{(}y\color{blue}{+}z\color{grey}{)}\color{red}{\times} \color{grey}{(}z\color{blue}{+}x\color{grey}{)}\\ =&\color{grey}{(}x\color{blue}{+}y\color{blue}{+}z\color{grey}{)}\color{red}{\times}\color{grey}{(}x\color{red}{\times} y\hspace{0.9ex}\color{blue}{+}\hspace{0.9ex}y\color{red}{\times }z\color{white}{)}\color{blue}{+}\hspace{0.9ex}z\color{red}{\times }x\color{grey}{)} \end{align*}\]

Cool!

## Comments

Sort by:

TopNewestYes; I really like this identity too. For example it can be used to prove that \(r_1 + r_2 + r_3 - r = 4R\) (from Incircles and Excircles). If we substitute \(x = s-a\) etc., then

\[s(s-b)(s-c)+s(s-c)(s-a)+s(s-a)(s-b)-(s-a)(s-b)(s-c) = abc\]

where \(s\) is the semi-perimeter, and this reduces nicely using area formulas to the desired relationship. – Michael Ng · 2 years ago

Log in to reply

@Michael Ng created this problem which uses the identity. – Calvin Lin Staff · 1 year, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

thanks @Daniel Liu i used this to solve problems like this i wrote a solution using this identity, and i'm thinking about a problem with this identity, will post soon! – Aareyan Manzoor · 1 year, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

F B U L O U S !!!!!! – Atanu Ghosh · 1 year, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

I didn't realise that- thanks. It should inspire some good problems :) – Curtis Clement · 2 years ago

Log in to reply

Most awesome discoveries ever!Thanks,this must help a lot. – Frankie Fook · 1 year, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

Thanks. I too did not realize this very useful identity. – Niranjan Khanderia · 1 year, 12 months ago

Log in to reply

I didn't examine. Good for making questions. However, it could have been found by people in the past. – Lu Chee Ket · 1 year, 12 months ago

Log in to reply

– Daniel Liu · 1 year, 12 months ago

Yea, I'm just saying that I just noticed it. I most likely was not the person who discovered it (as seen by the comment by Michael Ng)Log in to reply

– Lu Chee Ket · 1 year, 12 months ago

I had just expanded both sides to compare. Should be correct. Do not feel disappointed by what I guessed. You could be the first person to find this. Congratulation!Log in to reply

It's following the rules of principle of duality – Akhil Bansal · 1 year, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

– Calvin Lin Staff · 1 year, 3 months ago

No, that is not the principle of duality.Log in to reply

– Akhil Bansal · 1 year, 3 months ago

I mean l'll bit similar to thatLog in to reply