DOCSLIB.ORG

Jeremy Gray from Algebraic Equations to Modern Algebra

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Jeremy Gray from Algebraic Equations to Modern Algebra Springer Undergraduate Mathematics Series Jeremy Gray A History of Abstract Algebra From Algebraic Equations to Modern Algebra Springer Undergraduate Mathematics Series Advisory Board M.A.J. Chaplain, University of St. Andrews A. MacIntyre, Queen Mary University of London S. Scott, King’s College London N. Snashall, University of Leicester E. Süli, University of Oxford M.R. Tehranchi, University of Cambridge J.F. Toland, University of Bath More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/3423 Jeremy Gray A History of Abstract Algebra From Algebraic Equations to Modern Algebra 123 Jeremy Gray School of Mathematics and Statistics The Open University Milton Keynes, UK Mathematics Institute University of Warwick Coventry, UK ISSN 1615-2085 ISSN 2197-4144 (electronic) Springer Undergraduate Mathematics Series ISBN 978-3-319-94772-3 ISBN 978-3-319-94773-0 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94773-0 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018948208 Mathematics Subject Classification (2010): 01A55, 01A60, 01A50, 11-03, 12-03, 13-03 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG. The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Introduction The conclusion, if I am not mistaken, is that above all the modern development of pure mathematics takes place under the banner of number. David Hilbert,The Theory of Algebraic Number Fields, p. ix. Introduction to the History of Modern Algebra This book covers topics in the history of modern algebra. More precisely, it looks at some topics in algebra and number theory and follows them from their modest presence in mathematics in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries into the nineteenth century and sees how they were gradually transformed into what we call modern algebra. Accordingly, it looks at some of the great success stories in mathematics: Galois theory—the theory of when polynomial equations have algebraic solutions—and algebraic number theory. So it confronts a question many students ask themselves: how is it that university-level algebra is so very different from school-level algebra? The term ‘modern algebra’ was decisively introduced by van der Waerden in his book Moderne Algebra (1931), and it is worth discussing what he meant by it, and what was ‘modern’ about it. That it still suffices as an accurate label for much of the work done in the field since is indicative of how powerful the movement was that created the subject. The primary meaning of the term ‘modern algebra’ is structural algebra: the study of groups, rings, and fields. Interestingly, it does not usually include linear algebra or functional analysis, despite the strong links between these branches, and applied mathematicians may well encounter only a first course in groups and nothing else. Modern algebra is in many ways different from school algebra, a subject whose core consists of the explicit solution of equations and modest excursions into geometry. The reasons for the shift in meaning, and the ways in which structural algebra grew out of old-style classical algebra, are among the major concerns of this book. Elucidating these reasons, and tracing the implications of the transformation of algebra, will take us from the later decades of the eighteenth century to the 1920s and the milieu in which Moderne Algebra was written. v vi Introduction Classical algebra confronted many problems in the late eighteenth century. Among them was the so-called fundamental theorem of algebra, the claim that every polynomial with real (or complex) coefficients, has as many roots as its degree. Because most experience with polynomial equations was tied to attempts to solve them this problem overlapped with attempts to find explicit formulae for their solution, and once the polynomial had degree 5 or more no such formula was known. The elusive formula was required to involve nothing more than addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division applied to the coefficients of the equation and the extraction of nth roots, so it was known as solution by radicals, and Lagrange in 1770 was the first to give reasons why the general quintic equation might not be solvable by radicals. Another source of problems in classical algebra was number theory. Fermat had tried and largely failed to interest his contemporaries in the subject, but his writings on the subject caught the attention of Euler in the eighteenth century. Euler wrote extensively on them, and what he conjectured but could not prove was often, but not always, soon proved by Lagrange. This left a range of partially answered questions for their successors to pursue. For example, Fermat had shown that odd prime numbers of the form x2 + y2 are precisely those of the form 4k + 1, and had found similar theorems for primes of the form x2 + 2y2 and x2 + 3y2 but not for primes of the form x2 + 5y2—why not, what was going on? There was a good theory of integer solutions to the equation x2 −Ay 2 = 1, where A is a square-free integer, and Lagrange had begun a theory of the general binary quadratic form, ax2 +bxy+cy2, but much remained to be done. And, famously today if less so in 1800, Fermat had a conjecture about integer solutions to xn + yn = zn,n > 2 and had indeed shown that there were no solutions when n = 4, and Euler had a suggestive but flawed proof of the case x3 + y3 = z3 that led into the theory of quadratic forms. The nineteenth century began, in algebra, with Gauss’s Disquisitiones Arithmeti- cae (1801), the book that made Gauss’s name and may be said to have created modern algebraic number theory, in the sense that it inspired an unbroken stream of leading German mathematicians to take up and develop the subject.1 The work of Gauss and later Dedekind is central to the story of the creation of modern algebra. In the 1820s Abel had wrapped up the question of the quintic, and shown it was not generally solvable by radicals. This raised a deeper question, one that Gauss had already begun to consider: given that some polynomial equations of degree 5 or more are solvable by radicals, which ones are and how can we tell? It was the great, if obscure, achievement of Galois to show how this question can be answered, and the implications of his ideas, many of them drawn out by Jordan in 1870, also uncoil through the nineteenth century and figure largely in the story. Algebraic number theory led mathematicians to the concept of commutative rings, of which, after all, the integers are the canonical example, and Galois theory led to the concepts of groups and fields. Other developments in nineteenth century geometry—the rediscovery of projective geometry and the shocking discovery of 1Gauss also rediscovered the first known asteroid in 1801. Introduction vii non-Euclidean geometry—also contributed to the success of the group concept, when Klein used it in the 1870s to unify the disparate branches of geometry. The rise of structural mathematics was not without controversy. There was a long-running argument between Kronecker and Dedekind about the proper nature of algebraic number theory. There was less disagreement about the importance of Galois’s ideas once they were properly published, 14 years after his untimely death, but it took a generation to find the right way to handle them and another for the modern consensus to emerge. By the end of the century there was a marked disagreement in the mathematical community about the relative importance of good questions and abstract theory. This is not just a chicken-and-egg problem. Once it is agreed that theory has a major place, it follows that people can work on theory alone, and the subject has to grow to allow that. By and large, equations have contexts and solving them is of value in that context, but what is the point of a theory of groups when done for its own sake? Questions about integers may be interesting, but what about an abstract theory of rings? These questions acquired solid answers, ones it is the historians’ job to spell out, but they are legitimate, as are their descendants today: higher category theory, anyone? The end of the nineteenth century and the start of the 20th see the shift from classical algebra to modern algebra, in the important sense that the structural concepts move from the research frontier to the core and become not only the way in which classical problems can be reformulated but a source of legitimate problems themselves.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1. Make Sense of Problems and Persevere in Solving Them. Mathematically Proficient Students Start by Explaining to Themselves T
    1. Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them. Mathematically proficient students start by explaining to themselves the meaning of a problem and looking for entry points to its solution. They analyze givens, constraints, relationships, and goals. They make conjectures about the form and meaning of the solution and plan a solution pathway rather than simply jumping into a solution attempt. They consider analogous problems, and try special cases and simpler forms of the original problem in order to gain insight into its solution. They monitor and evaluate their progress and change course if necessary. Older students might, depending on the context of the problem, transform algebraic expressions or change the viewing window on their graphing calculator to get the information they need. Mathematically proficient students can explain correspondences between equations, verbal descriptions, tables, and graphs or draw diagrams of important features and relationships, graph data, and search for regularity or trends. Younger students might rely on using concrete objects or pictures to help conceptualize and solve a problem. Mathematically proficient students check their answers to problems using a different method, and they continually ask themselves, “Does this make sense?” They can understand the approaches of others to solving complex problems and identify correspondences between different approaches. 2. Reason abstractly and quantitatively. Mathematically proficient students make sense of quantities and their relationships in problem situations. They bring two complementary abilities to bear on problems involving quantitative relationships: the ability to decontextualize —to abstract a given situation and represent it symbolically and manipulate the representing symbols as if they have a life of their own, without necessarily attending to their referents—and the ability to contextualize , to pause as needed during the manipulation process in order to probe into the referents for the symbols involved.
    [Show full text]
  • Higher Mathematics
    ; HIGHER MATHEMATICS Chapter I. THE SOLUTION OF EQUATIONS. By Mansfield Merriman, Professor of Civil Engineering in Lehigh University. Art. 1. Introduction. In this Chapter will be presented a brief outline of methods, not commonly found in text-books, for the solution of an equation containing one unknown quantity. Graphic, numeric, and algebraic solutions will be given by which the real roots of both algebraic and transcendental equations may be ob- tained, together with historical information and theoretic discussions. An algebraic equation is one that involves only the opera- tions of arithmetic. It is to be first freed from radicals so as to make the exponents of the unknown quantity all integers the degree of the equation is then indicated by the highest ex- ponent of the unknown quantity. The algebraic solution of an algebraic equation is the expression of its roots in terms of literal is the coefficients ; this possible, in general, only for linear, quadratic, cubic, and quartic equations, that is, for equations of the first, second, third, and fourth degrees. A numerical equation is an algebraic equation having all its coefficients real numbers, either positive or negative. For the four degrees 2 THE SOLUTION OF EQUATIONS. [CHAP. I. above mentioned the roots of numerical equations may be computed from the formulas for the algebraic solutions, unless they fall under the so-called irreducible case wherein real quantities are expressed in imaginary forms. An algebraic equation of the n th degree may be written with all its terms transposed to the first member, thus: n- 1 2 x" a x a,x"- .
    [Show full text]
  • Section X.56. Insolvability of the Quintic
    X.56 Insolvability of the Quintic 1 Section X.56. Insolvability of the Quintic Note. Now is a good time to reread the first set of notes “Why the Hell Am I in This Class?” As we have claimed, there is the quadratic formula to solve all polynomial equations ax2 +bx+c = 0 (in C, say), there is a cubic equation to solve ax3+bx2+cx+d = 0, and there is a quartic equation to solve ax4+bx3+cx2+dx+e = 0. However, there is not a general algebraic equation which solves the quintic ax5 + bx4 + cx3 + dx2 + ex + f = 0. We now have the equipment to establish this “insolvability of the quintic,” as well as a way to classify which polynomial equations can be solved algebraically (that is, using a finite sequence of operations of addition [or subtraction], multiplication [or division], and taking of roots [or raising to whole number powers]) in a field F . Definition 56.1. An extension field K of a field F is an extension of F by radicals if there are elements α1, α2,...,αr ∈ K and positive integers n1,n2,...,nr such that n1 ni K = F (α1, α2,...,αr), where α1 ∈ F and αi ∈ F (α1, α2,...,αi−1) for 1 <i ≤ r. A polynomial f(x) ∈ F [x] is solvable by radicals over F if the splitting field E of f(x) over F is contained in an extension of F by radicals. n1 Note. The idea in this definition is that F (α1) includes the n1th root of α1 ∈ F .
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2106.01162V1 [Math.HO] 27 May 2021 Shine Conference in Kashiwa” 1 and Contain a Number of New Perspectives and Ob- Servations on Monstrous Moonshine
    Kashiwa Lectures on New Approaches to the Monster John McKay1 edited and annotated by Yang-Hui He2;3;4;5 1 CICMA & Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Concordia University, 1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd. West, Montreal, Quebec, H3G 1M8, Canada 2 London Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Royal Institution of Great Britain, 21 Albemarle Street, Mayfair, London W1S 4BS, UK; 3 Merton College, University of Oxford, OX14JD, UK; 4 Department of Mathematics, City, University of London, EC1V 0HB, UK; 5 School of Physics, NanKai University, Tianjin, 300071, P.R. China [email protected] [email protected] Abstract These notes stem from lectures given by the first author (JM) at the 2008 \Moon- arXiv:2106.01162v1 [math.HO] 27 May 2021 shine Conference in Kashiwa" 1 and contain a number of new perspectives and ob- servations on Monstrous Moonshine. Because many new points have not appeared anywhere in print, it is thought expedient to update, annotate and clarify them (as footnotes), an editorial task which the second author (YHH) is more than delighted to undertake. We hope the various puzzles and correspondences, delivered in a personal and casual manner, will serve as diversions intriguing to the community. 1Organized by the Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (IPMU) under the support of the Graduate School of Mathematical Sciences, the University of Tokyo. 1 Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Resources . 3 1.2 Talk Outline . 5 1.3 Where to Start ? . 6 2 Monstrous Moonshine 9 2.1 Primes in the Monster's Order . 10 2.2 Balance .
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamental Theorems in Mathematics
    SOME FUNDAMENTAL THEOREMS IN MATHEMATICS OLIVER KNILL Abstract. An expository hitchhikers guide to some theorems in mathematics. Criteria for the current list of 243 theorems are whether the result can be formulated elegantly, whether it is beautiful or useful and whether it could serve as a guide [6] without leading to panic. The order is not a ranking but ordered along a time-line when things were writ- ten down. Since [556] stated “a mathematical theorem only becomes beautiful if presented as a crown jewel within a context" we try sometimes to give some context. Of course, any such list of theorems is a matter of personal preferences, taste and limitations. The num- ber of theorems is arbitrary, the initial obvious goal was 42 but that number got eventually surpassed as it is hard to stop, once started. As a compensation, there are 42 “tweetable" theorems with included proofs. More comments on the choice of the theorems is included in an epilogue. For literature on general mathematics, see [193, 189, 29, 235, 254, 619, 412, 138], for history [217, 625, 376, 73, 46, 208, 379, 365, 690, 113, 618, 79, 259, 341], for popular, beautiful or elegant things [12, 529, 201, 182, 17, 672, 673, 44, 204, 190, 245, 446, 616, 303, 201, 2, 127, 146, 128, 502, 261, 172]. For comprehensive overviews in large parts of math- ematics, [74, 165, 166, 51, 593] or predictions on developments [47]. For reflections about mathematics in general [145, 455, 45, 306, 439, 99, 561]. Encyclopedic source examples are [188, 705, 670, 102, 192, 152, 221, 191, 111, 635].
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2105.14305V1 [Cs.CG] 29 May 2021
    Efficient Folding Algorithms for Regular Polyhedra ∗ Tonan Kamata1 Akira Kadoguchi2 Takashi Horiyama3 Ryuhei Uehara1 1 School of Information Science, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (JAIST), Ishikawa, Japan fkamata,[email protected] 2 Intelligent Vision & Image Systems (IVIS), Tokyo, Japan [email protected] 3 Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Hokkaido University, Hokkaido, Japan [email protected] Abstract We investigate the folding problem that asks if a polygon P can be folded to a polyhedron Q for given P and Q. Recently, an efficient algorithm for this problem has been developed when Q is a box. We extend this idea to regular polyhedra, also known as Platonic solids. The basic idea of our algorithms is common, which is called stamping. However, the computational complexities of them are different depending on their geometric properties. We developed four algorithms for the problem as follows. (1) An algorithm for a regular tetrahedron, which can be extended to a tetramonohedron. (2) An algorithm for a regular hexahedron (or a cube), which is much efficient than the previously known one. (3) An algorithm for a general deltahedron, which contains the cases that Q is a regular octahedron or a regular icosahedron. (4) An algorithm for a regular dodecahedron. Combining these algorithms, we can conclude that the folding problem can be solved pseudo-polynomial time when Q is a regular polyhedron and other related solid. Keywords: Computational origami folding problem pseudo-polynomial time algorithm regular poly- hedron (Platonic solids) stamping 1 Introduction In 1525, the German painter Albrecht D¨urerpublished his masterwork on geometry [5], whose title translates as \On Teaching Measurement with a Compass and Straightedge for lines, planes, and whole bodies." In the book, he presented each polyhedron by drawing a net, which is an unfolding of the surface of the polyhedron to a planar layout without overlapping by cutting along its edges.
    [Show full text]
  • Convex Polytopes and Tilings with Few Flag Orbits
    Convex Polytopes and Tilings with Few Flag Orbits by Nicholas Matteo B.A. in Mathematics, Miami University M.A. in Mathematics, Miami University A dissertation submitted to The Faculty of the College of Science of Northeastern University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy April 14, 2015 Dissertation directed by Egon Schulte Professor of Mathematics Abstract of Dissertation The amount of symmetry possessed by a convex polytope, or a tiling by convex polytopes, is reflected by the number of orbits of its flags under the action of the Euclidean isometries preserving the polytope. The convex polytopes with only one flag orbit have been classified since the work of Schläfli in the 19th century. In this dissertation, convex polytopes with up to three flag orbits are classified. Two-orbit convex polytopes exist only in two or three dimensions, and the only ones whose combinatorial automorphism group is also two-orbit are the cuboctahedron, the icosidodecahedron, the rhombic dodecahedron, and the rhombic triacontahedron. Two-orbit face-to-face tilings by convex polytopes exist on E1, E2, and E3; the only ones which are also combinatorially two-orbit are the trihexagonal plane tiling, the rhombille plane tiling, the tetrahedral-octahedral honeycomb, and the rhombic dodecahedral honeycomb. Moreover, any combinatorially two-orbit convex polytope or tiling is isomorphic to one on the above list. Three-orbit convex polytopes exist in two through eight dimensions. There are infinitely many in three dimensions, including prisms over regular polygons, truncated Platonic solids, and their dual bipyramids and Kleetopes. There are infinitely many in four dimensions, comprising the rectified regular 4-polytopes, the p; p-duoprisms, the bitruncated 4-simplex, the bitruncated 24-cell, and their duals.
    [Show full text]
  • Computer-Aided Design Disjointed Force Polyhedra
    Computer-Aided Design 99 (2018) 11–28 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Computer-Aided Design journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cad Disjointed force polyhedraI Juney Lee *, Tom Van Mele, Philippe Block ETH Zurich, Institute of Technology in Architecture, Block Research Group, Stefano-Franscini-Platz 1, HIB E 45, CH-8093 Zurich, Switzerland article info a b s t r a c t Article history: This paper presents a new computational framework for 3D graphic statics based on the concept of Received 3 November 2017 disjointed force polyhedra. At the core of this framework are the Extended Gaussian Image and area- Accepted 10 February 2018 pursuit algorithms, which allow more precise control of the face areas of force polyhedra, and conse- quently of the magnitudes and distributions of the forces within the structure. The explicit control of the Keywords: polyhedral face areas enables designers to implement more quantitative, force-driven constraints and it Three-dimensional graphic statics expands the range of 3D graphic statics applications beyond just shape explorations. The significance and Polyhedral reciprocal diagrams Extended Gaussian image potential of this new computational approach to 3D graphic statics is demonstrated through numerous Polyhedral reconstruction examples, which illustrate how the disjointed force polyhedra enable force-driven design explorations of Spatial equilibrium new structural typologies that were simply not realisable with previous implementations of 3D graphic Constrained form finding statics. ' 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction such as constant-force trusses [6]. However, in 3D graphic statics using polyhedral reciprocal diagrams, the influence of changing Recent extensions of graphic statics to three dimensions have the geometry of the force polyhedra on the force magnitudes is shown how the static equilibrium of spatial systems of forces not as direct or intuitive.
    [Show full text]
  • A Student's Question: Why the Hell Am I in This Class?
    Why Are We In This Class? 1 A Student’s Question: Why The Hell Am I In This Class? Note. Mathematics of the current era consists of the broad areas of (1) geometry, (2) analysis, (3) discrete math, and (4) algebra. This is an oversimplification; this is not a complete list and these areas are not disjoint. You are familiar with geometry from your high school experience, and analysis is basically the study of calculus in a rigorous/axiomatic way. You have probably encountered some of the topics from discrete math (graphs, networks, Latin squares, finite geometries, number theory). However, surprisingly, this is likely your first encounter with areas of algebra (in the modern sense). Modern algebra is roughly 100–200 years old, with most of the ideas originally developed in the nineteenth century and brought to rigorous completion in the twentieth century. Modern algebra is the study of groups, rings, and fields. However, these ideas grow out of the classical ideas of algebra from your previous experience (primarily, polynomial equations). The purpose of this presentation is to link the topics of classical algebra to the topics of modern algebra. Babylonian Mathematics The ancient city of Babylon was located in the southern part of Mesopotamia, about 50 miles south of present day Baghdad, Iraq. Clay tablets containing a type of writing called “cuneiform” survive from Babylonian times, and some of them reflect that the Babylonians had a sophisticated knowledge of certain mathematical ideas, some geometric and some arithmetic. [Bardi, page 28] Why Are We In This Class? 2 The best known surviving tablet with mathematical content is known as Plimp- ton 322.
    [Show full text]
  • Visualization of Regular Maps
    Symmetric Tiling of Closed Surfaces: Visualization of Regular Maps Jarke J. van Wijk Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science Technische Universiteit Eindhoven [email protected] Abstract The first puzzle is trivial: We get a cube, blown up to a sphere, which is an example of a regular map. A cube is 2×4×6 = 48-fold A regular map is a tiling of a closed surface into faces, bounded symmetric, since each triangle shown in Figure 1 can be mapped to by edges that join pairs of vertices, such that these elements exhibit another one by rotation and turning the surface inside-out. We re- a maximal symmetry. For genus 0 and 1 (spheres and tori) it is quire for all solutions that they have such a 2pF -fold symmetry. well known how to generate and present regular maps, the Platonic Puzzle 2 to 4 are not difficult, and lead to other examples: a dodec- solids are a familiar example. We present a method for the gener- ahedron; a beach ball, also known as a hosohedron [Coxeter 1989]; ation of space models of regular maps for genus 2 and higher. The and a torus, obtained by making a 6 × 6 checkerboard, followed by method is based on a generalization of the method for tori. Shapes matching opposite sides. The next puzzles are more challenging. with the proper genus are derived from regular maps by tubifica- tion: edges are replaced by tubes. Tessellations are produced us- ing group theory and hyperbolic geometry. The main results are a generic procedure to produce such tilings, and a collection of in- triguing shapes and images.
    [Show full text]
  • Algebraic Solution of Nonlinear Equation Systems in REDUCE
    Algebraic Solution of Nonlinear Equation Systems in REDUCE Herbert Melenk∗ A modern computer algebra system (CAS) is primarily a workbench offering an extensive set of computational tools from various field of mathematics and engineering. As most of these tools have an advanced and complicated theoretical background they often are hard for an unexperienced user to apply successfully. The idea of a SOLV E facility in a CAS is to find solutions for mathematical problems by applying the available tools in an automatic and invisible manner. In REDUCE the functionality of SOLVE has grown over the last years to an important extent. In the circle of REDUCE developers the Konrad–Zuse–Zentrum Berlin (ZIB) has been engaged in the field of solving nonlinear algebraic equation systems, a typical task for a CAS. The algebraic kernel for such computations is Buchberger’s algorithm for com- puting Gr¨obner bases and related techniques, published in 1966, first introduced in REDUCE 3.3 (1988) and substantially revised and extended in several steps for RE- DUCE 3.4 (1991). This version also organized for the first time the automatical invo- cation of Gr¨obner bases for the solution of pure polynomial systems in the context of REDUCE’s SOLVE command. In the meantime the range of automatically soluble system has been enlarged substan- tially. This report describes the algorithms and techniques which have been implemented in this context. Parts of the new features have been incorporated in REDUCE 3.4.1 (in July 1992), the rest will become available in the following release. E-mail address: [email protected] 1 Some of the developments have been encouraged to an important extent by colleagues who use these modules for their research, especially Hubert Caprasse (Li`ege) [4] and Jarmo Hietarinta (Turku) [10].
    [Show full text]
  • Polytope 335 and the Qi Men Dun Jia Model
    Polytope 335 and the Qi Men Dun Jia Model By John Frederick Sweeney Abstract Polytope (3,3,5) plays an extremely crucial role in the transformation of visible matter, as well as in the structure of Time. Polytope (3,3,5) helps to determine whether matter follows the 8 x 8 Satva path or the 9 x 9 Raja path of development. Polytope (3,3,5) on a micro scale determines the development path of matter, while Polytope (3,3,5) on a macro scale determines the geography of Time, given its relationship to Base 60 math and to the icosahedron. Yet the Hopf Fibration is needed to form Poytope (3,3,5). This paper outlines the series of interchanges between root lattices and the three types of Hopf Fibrations in the formation of quasi – crystals. 1 Table of Contents Introduction 3 R.B. King on Root Lattices and Quasi – Crystals 4 John Baez on H3 and H4 Groups 23 Conclusion 32 Appendix 33 Bibliography 34 2 Introduction This paper introduces the formation of Polytope (3,3,5) and the role of the Real Hopf Fibration, the Complex and the Quarternion Hopf Fibration in the formation of visible matter. The author has found that even degrees or dimensions host root lattices and stable forms, while odd dimensions host Hopf Fibrations. The Hopf Fibration is a necessary structure in the formation of Polytope (3,3,5), and so it appears that the three types of Hopf Fibrations mentioned above form an intrinsic aspect of the formation of matter via root lattices.
    [Show full text]