July 18, 2006
Algebra and American Civilization
Zernik on Derbyshire’s Unknown Quantity
[VDARE.COM note:
Wolfgang Zernik is
one of our favorite
Today’s Letter
writers. We’re pretty
fond of John Derbyshire too. This article may seem a bit
off-topic for us, but Wolfgang doesn’t think so]
By
Wolfgang Zernik
Readers
of
VDARE.COM will recognize
John Derbyshire as a witty and provocative writer of
conservative political columns that have occasionally
been published here although his regular home is
National Review. Derbyshire is a true renaissance
man with a variety of interests. He was
originally trained as a mathematician and has
recently published a
well-received book in that field,
Prime Obsession. He is also the author
of two novels,
Fire from the Sun and
Seeing Calvin Coolidge in a Dream,
and writes
book reviews and
literary articles for the New Criterion and
other magazines. Now he has published
Unknown Quantity: A Real And Imaginary History of
Algebra, a book designed for the general reader
that meets his usual high standard.
Why is
this book being reviewed here, on a webzine best known
for dealing with immigration, the National Question and
related political matters? One answer is a personal one.
Many of us are fans of John Derbyshire and find anything
he writes noteworthy.
Another
answer is much deeper. It has to do with how we wish the
American civilization to develop in the future as a
result of the immigration policies we chose now. If we
desire that the pursuit of excellence in the arts and
sciences should continue, we need to understand the
potential for
human accomplishment of the
immigrant groups we admit. It is helpful in this
regard to follow in detail how progress in a particular
field, algebra in this case, has been made over the
course of history. Whatever else it may be, the history
of algebra is after all the story of an intellectual
triumph—a splendid victory of the human spirit that we
must hope can be often repeated in our great country.
Derbyshire describes his intended audience as
"curious non mathematicians unencumbered by fear of
formulae". The level of knowledge that is assumed is
that covered by a typical high school course. It is of
course helpful if the reader has gone beyond that, but
it's not necessary. When additional explanations are
needed, Derbyshire has thoughtfully inserted "Math
Primer" sections where the necessary technical
material (but no more than that) is carefully provided.
So if
your math education stopped at high school and even if
you have forgotten much of that, you should have no
problem in reading this book. However, there is no
denying the fact that careful attention must be paid.
Derbyshire never makes the mistake of underestimating
the intelligence of his readers!
The
book is divided, like ancient Gaul, into three parts.
Part I
"The Unknown Quantity" is a straightforward
history of algebra from four thousand years ago through
the Middle Ages to the Renaissance. This is the period
during which what we can very roughly describe as
"high school" algebra was developed. The typical
reader will learn more about history than algebra here.
However, I certainly leaned some algebra as well—for
instance how easy it is to solve cubic or
quartic equations.
The
time-span involved here is enormous, about three and a
half millennia. The story begins where civilization
itself began in Babylon and moves on to Egypt, then to
the
Islamic Empire at its height in the ninth century.
Here the modern Hindu-Arab system of numerals was
introduced and
algebra acquired its
name. The story moves on to Italy in the thirteenth
century where general methods for solving equations were
developed and finally to France where, in the
seventeenth century, algebra began to look like the
material we learned in high school.
One
question that comes to mind: why did it take so long to
develop what we now think of as elementary algebra? For
thousands of years, only very slow progress was made. As
Derbyshire writes in a characteristic aside:
"I fear
that at this point the reader may be slipping into the
conviction that these ancient and medieval algebraists
were not very bright. We stated in 1800 BCE with the
Babylonians solving quadratic equations written as word
problems and now here we are, 2,600 years later with
al-Khwarizmi ... solving
quadratic equations written as word problems."
One
explanation, as Derbyshire points out, is the
very high level at which the subject dwells. Another
reason has to be the extraordinarily clumsy notation
which was all that was available in the early years.
After all, before the introduction of modern numerals,
even arithmetic was horrendously difficult. Imagine
doing long division with Roman numerals. What a
nightmare!
Before
the modern notation for a symbolic algebra, equations
had to be described in words. This made the finding of
solutions very difficult and so it is remarkable that
any progress at all was made. Once the notation problem
was solved in the seventeenth century, the way was clear
for progress into modern algebra.
This
brings us to Part 2 of the book entitled "Universal
Arithmetic", a name for algebra used by
Isaac Newton. At this point the curious
nonmathematical reader can look forward to learning
something he did not learn in high school.
The
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were a period of
consolidation in algebra when little new was invented.
What held up progress was a stubborn problem that turned
out to be much harder than anticipated. This was the
problem of finding a
general algebraic solution of the quintic.
You may
remember that in high school you learned the simple
formula for the solution of the quadratic equation. What
you probably did not learn was that, in the sixteenth
century, Italian mathematicians had developed similar
although of course more complicated solutions for the
cubic and quadratic i.e. equations where the highest
power of x was three or four. The next logical
step was to find a general solution for those equations
where the highest power of x was five, the
notorious quintics. The trouble was—no one was able to
do it. Imagine the frustration.
For two
hundred years, algebraists lived and died trying in vain
to solve the next obvious problem. Some must have
thought that this was the end of algebra. But of course
it wasn't.
By the
beginning of the nineteenth century it began to dawn on
some algebraists that the reason they could not solve
the quintic was perhaps that a solution does not
exist. Some publications began to appear claiming to
prove that the quintic has no general algebraic
solution. But the idea was too novel to accept. For some
twenty years or so, there were bitter arguments about
whether these proofs were valid.
In the
end, however, a universally accepted proof that the
quintic has no solution was published. The
year was 1826. Derbyshire tells us that this year
closes the first great epoch in the history of algebra.
What
happened in the first decades of the nineteenth century
was the gradual discovery of new mathematical objects.
Algebraists realized that the "unknown variable"
did not necessarily have to represent a number. Instead,
it could stand for any object as long as the rules for
combining such objects were specified. This is the basis
for modern algebra—or rather algebras, for there are now
several.
The
simplest way of generalizing is to go from a single
number to an array of numbers with rules determining how
such arrays are to be added or multiplied. Two examples
are vectors and matrices. Derbyshire devotes a chapter
to each.
If you
took a physics course in high school, you may remember
that in physics a vector is defined as a
quantity that has both a magnitude and a direction.
Examples are velocity, force and electric field
strength. Since we
live in a three-dimensional world, a vector can be
represented by its three components (north-south,
east-west and up-down). Thus a physics vector is an
array of three numbers.
Mathematicians, however, have a more general way of
defining vectors. When you read the book, you will
easily learn some very modern math about vector spaces
and algebras. At the end of the day, though, it is still
true that a vector is a one-dimensional array, and so
the first modern algebra is vector algebra.
Matrices are also arrays, but in two dimensions rather
than just one. For example, an (i x j)
matrix has i rows and j columns. Since the
rules for manipulating and combining matrices are known,
a matrix algebra easily follows.
The
history of matrix algebra is however more complicated
than my simplistic explanation suggests. It involves
detours through Han dynasty China over 2,000 years
ago and
seventeenth century Japan. The history of algebra,
like that of mathematics as a whole, has always been
a world-wide phenomenon.
Finally, we come to Part 3 which has the honest but
slightly ominous title "Levels of Abstraction".
Here
the story is brought up to date. In the nineteenth
century, algebra continued to move further into the
realm of the abstract. The first and by far the most
useful (especially to
physicists) of these new objects are groups.
Consider, for example, a child's play cube sitting on
your desk. You can rotate that cube in a number of ways
so that it will still look the same—for example, turn it
through 90 degrees or 180 degrees. Two such rotations
applied in sequence will clearly give you just another
rotation.
We can
express this by saying that all possible rotations of
the cube form a set. Combining two members of the set
yields just another member of the same set. Sets with
this property are, in a natural use of language, called
groups.
In this
case, we have defined the group of rotations of a cube.
If you specify how all the elements of a group are
combined, you will have, by the previous definition,
specified an algebra but an algebra whose elements
represent operations rather than numbers. So here's a
simple but not rigorous example of an abstract algebra.
Derbyshire describes more abstract algebras such as
rings and fields. As these are more complicated—also
less useful—I'm going to take a pass on further
explanations. (I do want to express some surprise
however at the way algebraists have taken the word
"field" which is a basic technical term in physics
and have used it in a different and quite unconnected
sense—rather like President Bush has hijacked the term
“immigration reform”!
And now
for something completely different. As Derbyshire says
several times, the history of algebra is essentially a
story of increasing levels of abstraction. The trouble
is that the average reader can take only so much of
this.
Look,
let's be frank, the eyes may tend to glaze over. The
successful author has to find a way to deal with this
problem. Derbyshire does deal with it and as readers of
Prime Obsession will remember he does so by
telling lots of entertaining personal stories.
Mathematicians (as far as I know) are no more odd than
members of other professions. But they certainly have
their share of strange characters and sometimes, too,
they lived in what the
Chinese would call interesting times. So the fund of
interesting, scandalous, sexual or political anecdotes
is very large and Derbyshire makes skillful use of it.
The more abstract the material, the more Derbyshire uses
the personal to lighten the technical.
For
example, the important chapter on group theory is
engagingly entitled "Pistols at Dawn" and begins
by telling the dramatic life story of
Evariste Galois, the brilliant young man who founded
the
field of group theory and died
tragically in a duel at the age of only 20. It is
only after several pages of this entertainment that the
reader finds himself in technical material where careful
attention must again be paid.
Enjoy
the book!
Wolfgang Zernik
[e-mail
him] lives in
Pennsylvania. His last article for VDARE.COM was
A Reader vs. Steve Sailer On “Christmas, Jews,
De-Assimilation And Decline”