DOCSLIB.ORG

Fermat's Last Theorem by Joseph Arnone

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fermat's Last Theorem by Joseph Arnone Fermat's Last Theorem Joey Arnone History Pierre de Fermat Pierre de Fermat was an incredibly influential mathematician from the 17th century, producing innovative works that have led to the development of calculus shortly after his lifetime. He has made amazing contributions to many different fields of math, including probability, prime numbers, geometry and algebra. His most infamous, and controversial, work remains to be one that is named after him, known as Fermats Last Theorem. It was first conjectured in 1637, written in the margin of a copy of Arithmetica by Diophantus. The work published in Arithmetica turned out to be very influential in the development of Fermats Last Theorem. In Arithmetica, Diophantus gives a means of producing two distinct numbers such that, when both squared, equal the square of a given rational number. In other words, when u and v are squared, a rational number can be found such that k2 = u2 + v2. This very equation is what sparked Fermats ideas for his famous theorem. Fermat came to the consensus that the equation an + bn = cn cannot exist for any integer n greater than 2. He related this theory in the margins of a copy of Arithmetica, stating that his proof would be too large to fit in the margins of the book, therefore excluding any actual proof of this theorem. In doing so, he would set off the most questioned and meticulously studied mathematical problem of the 20th century, being named in the Guinness Book of World Records as the most difficult math problem. Soon after he released his theory, Fermat released a proof which provides an answer to Fermats Last Theorem for n=4, stating that there cannot be integers a and b such that a4 + b4 would be equal to c2. Interestingly enough, the main focus of his proof was not his theorem at all, as he was trying to show how a right triangle cannot have an area equal to a square, and the implications of this proof were able to be utilised for n=4 in Fermat's Last Theorem. To obtain this proof, Fermat used proof by infinite descent, which was a means of showing that solutions to a certain equation cannot be made possible by implying solutions that keep getting smaller and smaller in value. Two proofs were later given for n=3 by Leonhard Euler in the year 1770. In one proof, he used an innovative way of solving using irrational numbers. However, he made a mistake of reasoning in this proof and it was not successful, unlike the other one. The successful proof was able to prove Fermat's Last Theorem for n=3 by infinite descent, similar to Fermat's own proof for n=4. Euler's proof that used irrational numbers was still very influential for mathematicians such as Kummer, Gauss and Dirichlet, who produced influential work regarding Fermat's Last Theorem themselves. Another important mathematician that was a notable contributer in working on Fermat's Last Theorem was Sophie Germain. In 1816, the Academy of Sciences in Paris held a competition for finding a proof that solves Fermat's Last Theorem. Germain did not actually submit the work she produced, or even publish it for that matter, but would have made a sudden impact if she did. By the time Germain began her work on solving Fermat's Last Theorem, there were only legitimate proofs for n=3 and n=4. No proof given was ever generalized, even for just a certain group of numbers. Her work was innovative, and after slight adaptations by mathematician Adrien-Marie Legendre in 1823, it gave a proof to Fermat's Last Theorem for certain prime numbers such that they equal 2n +1. Sophie Germain's work on Fermat's Last Theorem was both innovative and influential The case for n=5 was immediately available due to Germain's proof. Alternative proofs for n=5 were created throughout the year 1825 by mathematicians Peter Gustav Lejeune Dirichlet and Adrien-Marie Legendre. Over the course of the next century or so, many case-specific solutions were developed by many different mathematicians around the world. However, it was these initial mathematical proofs that held the most impact over the work that was to come. In 1847, mathematician Gabriel Lam´e announced that he conceived a proof for Fermat's Last Theorem at a conference. However, many mathematicians present at the conference were more reluctant to accept Lam´e's work as being completely accurate. Mathematician Ernst Kummer was able to fix what went wrong in Lam´e's proof, and as a result, gave a solution for Fermat's Last Theorem for regular prime numbers, which will be discussed later on. In 1922, a mathematician named Louis Mordell made a conjecture which implied that Fermat's Last Theorem had a finite number of primitive number solutions if the given exponent is greater than two. This conjecture 2 came back half a century later, as the 1970's brought an influx of mathematicians using geometry and surface analysis to prove Fermat's Last Theorem. This is what led mathematician Gerd Faltings (whose specialist area was algebraic geometry) to bring back Mordell's conjecture and apply it geometrically through a theorem. Falting's theorem, proved in 1983, was able to prove Mordell's conjecture, stating that for every genus (a donut- shaped object commonly used in math) greater than 1 over a field of rational numbers, there is a finite set of primitive solutions. The development of the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture in 1955 was integral in the foundation of a generalized proof for Fermats Last Theorem. Through this conjecture, it was found that elliptic curves were actually Diophantine equations, y2 = Ax3 + Bx2 + Cx + D. It was Yves Hellegouarch who, in 1975, began making the connection between Fermat's Last Theorem and the elliptic curves generated from the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture. He stated that if there is an equation with an odd prime number "l" as an exponent and coefficients of a, b and c such that al + bl = cl, then an algebraic curve will coexist in which y2 = x(x − al)(x + bl) (a standard elliptic curve will not exist). German mathematician Gerhard Frey, in 1982, took this idea one step further by showing that the curves attained by this equation would not be modular. He provided a theoretical counterexample which would disprove Fermat's Last Theorem, and wrote that the graph of the resulting equation would not cohere to the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture due to special properties of the curve - they are known as "semi-stable elliptic curves". Frey was not able to fully prove his theory, as he could not prove that the curve obtained was not modular, yet he presented his information at a conference in 1985. It was later published the following year. French mathematician Jean-Pierre Serre was a strong advocate for Freys conjecture, claiming that some of his own works support it. He too believed that the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture could validate Fermat's Last Theorem, providing a proof around the same time. His proof was able to use a case of semi-stable elliptic curves to imply Fermat's Last Theorem. Similar to Frey, Serre's proof was not fully complete. What was missing from each of these proofs is that neither of them were able to fully prove that the curves obtained from their equations were not modular. In 1986, Ken Ribet was able to prove the non-modularity of the curves, and in doing so, solved what was known as the "epsilon conjecture", or in other words the missing gaps that Frey and Serre were not able to fill. Ribet's solving of this conjecture made the full connection between the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture and Fermat's Last Theorem. His work was published four years later. It wasn't until the 1980's that the connection between the elliptic curves obtained from the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture and Fermat's Last Theorem was fully made. 3 One roadblock that perplexed mathematicians was the seeming unability to prove the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture. One mathematician that was willing to accomplish this was Andrew Wiles, a professor at Oxford, whose specialist area was elliptic curves. Wiles' work consisted of counting Galois representations and making a comparison with the number of modular forms obtained. In 1993, he finally completed his work and presented what he believed to be a proof of the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture for semi-stable elliptic curves. However, there was a slight error in his work which prevented what he had presented from being a complete proof. With the help of one of his students at Princeton named Richard Taylor (a respected mathematician himself), Wiles was able to prove the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture for semi-stable elliptic curves one year later, thus proving Fermat's Last Theorem. After over 300 years of research and questioning, it was Andrew Wiles who would finally find a general solution for Fermat's Last Theorem. 4 Mathematical Works / Proofs Fermat first wrote about his famous theorem in Arithmetica by Diophantus, whose proof he claimed "this margin would be too narrow to contain." Pierre de Fermat's proof for n=4 Suppose that there is a solution for a4 + b4 = c2 (or (a2)2 + (b2)2 = c2), where it can be assumed that a2, b2 and c are coprime numbers. Due to the solution to Pythagorean Triples (which describe the three given side lengths of a right triangle), we know that there exist coprime numbers x,y such that: a2 = 2xy b2 = x2 − y2, with x being odd and y being even c = x2 + y2 Another Pythagorean triple from this can be attained, as x2 = b2 + y2 From this, we can see that there exist k,l in N as a result of the solution of the Pythagorean equation such that b = k2 − l2 y = 2kl x = k2 + l2 Then the equation a2 = 2xy can be written as a2 = 2(k2 + l2)(2kl), which can be further simplified to 4kl(k2 + l2) This equation can be even further simplified to (a=2)2 = kl(k2 + l2) Given that k,l and k2 + l2 are relatively prime, it can be known that they are both perfect squares by Fermat's 5 proof of infinite descent, so theoretically k = u2; l = v2; k2 + l2 = w2 This implies that (u2)2 + (v2)2 = w2, or u4 + v4 = w2 Then k2 + l2 = w2 < a2 < c2, which cannot possibly be true.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • La Controverse De 1874 Entre Camille Jordan Et Leopold Kronecker
    La controverse de 1874 entre Camille Jordan et Leopold Kronecker. * Frédéric Brechenmacher ( ). Résumé. Une vive querelle oppose en 1874 Camille Jordan et Leopold Kronecker sur l’organisation de la théorie des formes bilinéaires, considérée comme permettant un traitement « général » et « homogène » de nombreuses questions développées dans des cadres théoriques variés au XIXe siècle et dont le problème principal est reconnu comme susceptible d’être résolu par deux théorèmes énoncés indépendamment par Jordan et Weierstrass. Cette controverse, suscitée par la rencontre de deux théorèmes que nous considèrerions aujourd’hui équivalents, nous permettra de questionner l’identité algébrique de pratiques polynomiales de manipulations de « formes » mises en œuvre sur une période antérieure aux approches structurelles de l’algèbre linéaire qui donneront à ces pratiques l’identité de méthodes de caractérisation des classes de similitudes de matrices. Nous montrerons que les pratiques de réductions canoniques et de calculs d’invariants opposées par Jordan et Kronecker manifestent des identités multiples indissociables d’un contexte social daté et qui dévoilent des savoirs tacites, des modes de pensées locaux mais aussi, au travers de regards portés sur une histoire à long terme impliquant des travaux d’auteurs comme Lagrange, Laplace, Cauchy ou Hermite, deux philosophies internes sur la signification de la généralité indissociables d’idéaux disciplinaires opposant algèbre et arithmétique. En questionnant les identités culturelles de telles pratiques cet article vise à enrichir l’histoire de l’algèbre linéaire, souvent abordée dans le cadre de problématiques liées à l’émergence de structures et par l’intermédiaire de l’histoire d’une théorie, d’une notion ou d’un mode de raisonnement.
    [Show full text]
  • Kummer, Regular Primes, and Fermat's Last Theorem
    e H a r v a e Harvard College r d C o l l e Mathematics Review g e M a t h e m Vol. 2, No. 2 Fall 2008 a t i c s In this issue: R e v i ALLAN M. FELDMAN and ROBERTO SERRANO e w , Arrow’s Impossibility eorem: Two Simple Single-Profile Versions V o l . 2 YUFEI ZHAO , N Young Tableaux and the Representations of the o . Symmetric Group 2 KEITH CONRAD e Congruent Number Problem A Student Publication of Harvard College Website. Further information about The HCMR can be Sponsorship. Sponsoring The HCMR supports the un- found online at the journal’s website, dergraduate mathematics community and provides valuable high-level education to undergraduates in the field. Sponsors http://www.thehcmr.org/ (1) will be listed in the print edition of The HCMR and on a spe- cial page on the The HCMR’s website, (1). Sponsorship is available at the following levels: Instructions for Authors. All submissions should in- clude the name(s) of the author(s), institutional affiliations (if Sponsor $0 - $99 any), and both postal and e-mail addresses at which the cor- Fellow $100 - $249 responding author may be reached. General questions should Friend $250 - $499 be addressed to Editors-In-Chief Zachary Abel and Ernest E. Contributor $500 - $1,999 Fontes at [email protected]. Donor $2,000 - $4,999 Patron $5,000 - $9,999 Articles. The Harvard College Mathematics Review invites Benefactor $10,000 + the submission of quality expository articles from undergrad- uate students.
    [Show full text]
  • Methodology and Metaphysics in the Development of Dedekind's Theory
    Methodology and metaphysics in the development of Dedekind’s theory of ideals Jeremy Avigad 1 Introduction Philosophical concerns rarely force their way into the average mathematician’s workday. But, in extreme circumstances, fundamental questions can arise as to the legitimacy of a certain manner of proceeding, say, as to whether a particular object should be granted ontological status, or whether a certain conclusion is epistemologically warranted. There are then two distinct views as to the role that philosophy should play in such a situation. On the first view, the mathematician is called upon to turn to the counsel of philosophers, in much the same way as a nation considering an action of dubious international legality is called upon to turn to the United Nations for guidance. After due consideration of appropriate regulations and guidelines (and, possibly, debate between representatives of different philosophical fac- tions), the philosophers render a decision, by which the dutiful mathematician abides. Quine was famously critical of such dreams of a ‘first philosophy.’ At the oppos- ite extreme, our hypothetical mathematician answers only to the subject’s internal concerns, blithely or brashly indifferent to philosophical approval. What is at stake to our mathematician friend is whether the questionable practice provides a proper mathematical solution to the problem at hand, or an appropriate mathematical understanding; or, in pragmatic terms, whether it will make it past a journal referee. In short, mathematics is as mathematics does, and the philosopher’s task is simply to make sense of the subject as it evolves and certify practices that are already in place.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of the Formulation of Ideal Theory
    The History of the Formulation of Ideal Theory Reeve Garrett November 28, 2017 1 Using complex numbers to solve Diophantine equations From the time of Diophantus (3rd century AD) to the present, the topic of Diophantine equations (that is, polynomial equations in 2 or more variables in which only integer solutions are sought after and studied) has been considered enormously important to the progress of mathematics. In fact, in the year 1900, David Hilbert designated the construction of an algorithm to determine the existence of integer solutions to a general Diophantine equation as one of his \Millenium Problems"; in 1970, the combined work (spanning 21 years) of Martin Davis, Yuri Matiyasevich, Hilary Putnam and Julia Robinson showed that no such algorithm exists. One such equation that proved to be of interest to mathematicians for centuries was the \Bachet equa- tion": x2 +k = y3, named after the 17th century mathematician who studied it. The general solution (for all values of k) eluded mathematicians until 1968, when Alan Baker presented the framework for constructing a general solution. However, before this full solution, Euler made some headway with some specific examples in the 18th century, specifically by the utilization of complex numbers. Example 1.1 Consider the equation x2 + 2 = y3. (5; 3) and (−5; 3) are easy to find solutions, but it's 2 not obviousp whetherp or not there are others or whatp they might be. Euler realized by factoring x + 2 as (x + 2i)(x − 2i) and then using the facts that Z[ 2i] is a UFD andp the factorsp given are relatively prime that the solutions above are the only solutions,p namelyp because (x + 2i)(x − 2i) being a cube forces each of these factors to be a cube (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • L-Functions and Non-Abelian Class Field Theory, from Artin to Langlands
    L-functions and non-abelian class field theory, from Artin to Langlands James W. Cogdell∗ Introduction Emil Artin spent the first 15 years of his career in Hamburg. Andr´eWeil charac- terized this period of Artin's career as a \love affair with the zeta function" [77]. Claude Chevalley, in his obituary of Artin [14], pointed out that Artin's use of zeta functions was to discover exact algebraic facts as opposed to estimates or approxi- mate evaluations. In particular, it seems clear to me that during this period Artin was quite interested in using the Artin L-functions as a tool for finding a non- abelian class field theory, expressed as the desire to extend results from relative abelian extensions to general extensions of number fields. Artin introduced his L-functions attached to characters of the Galois group in 1923 in hopes of developing a non-abelian class field theory. Instead, through them he was led to formulate and prove the Artin Reciprocity Law - the crowning achievement of abelian class field theory. But Artin never lost interest in pursuing a non-abelian class field theory. At the Princeton University Bicentennial Conference on the Problems of Mathematics held in 1946 \Artin stated that `My own belief is that we know it already, though no one will believe me { that whatever can be said about non-Abelian class field theory follows from what we know now, since it depends on the behavior of the broad field over the intermediate fields { and there are sufficiently many Abelian cases.' The critical thing is learning how to pass from a prime in an intermediate field to a prime in a large field.
    [Show full text]
  • Dedekind's 1871 Version of the Theory of Ideals∗
    Dedekind's 1871 version of the theory of ideals¤ Translated by Jeremy Avigad March 19, 2004 Translator's introduction By the middle of the nineteenth century, it had become clear to mathe- maticians that the study of ¯nite ¯eld extensions of the rational numbers is indispensable to number theory, even if one's ultimate goal is to understand properties of diophantine expressions and equations in the ordinary integers. It can happen, however, that the \integers" in such extensions fail to satisfy unique factorization, a property that is central to reasoning about the or- dinary integers. In 1844, Ernst Kummer observed that unique factorization fails for the cyclotomic integers with exponent 23, i.e. the ring Z[³] of inte- gers of the ¯eld Q(³), where ³ is a primitive twenty-third root of unity. In 1847, he published his theory of \ideal divisors" for cyclotomic integers with prime exponent. This was to remedy the situation by introducing, for each such ring of integers, an enlarged domain of divisors, and showing that each integer factors uniquely as a product of these. He did not actually construct these integers, but, rather, showed how one could characterize their behav- ior qua divisibility in terms of ordinary operations on the associated ring of integers. Richard Dedekind and Leopold Kronecker later took up the task of ex- tending the theory to the integers in arbitrary ¯nite extensions of the ratio- nals. Despite their common influences and goals, however, the theories they ¤Work on this translation has been supported by a New Directions fellowship from the Andrew W.
    [Show full text]
  • Sir Andrew Wiles Awarded Abel Prize
    Sir Andrew J. Wiles Awarded Abel Prize Elaine Kehoe with The Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters official Press Release ©Abelprisen/DNVA/Calle Huth. Courtesy of the Abel Prize Photo Archive. ©Alain Goriely, University of Oxford. Courtesy the Abel Prize Photo Archive. Sir Andrew Wiles received the 2016 Abel Prize at the Oslo award ceremony on May 24. The Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters has carries a cash award of 6,000,000 Norwegian krone (ap- awarded the 2016 Abel Prize to Sir Andrew J. Wiles of the proximately US$700,000). University of Oxford “for his stunning proof of Fermat’s Citation Last Theorem by way of the modularity conjecture for Number theory, an old and beautiful branch of mathemat- semistable elliptic curves, opening a new era in number ics, is concerned with the study of arithmetic properties of theory.” The Abel Prize is awarded by the Norwegian Acad- the integers. In its modern form the subject is fundamen- tally connected to complex analysis, algebraic geometry, emy of Science and Letters. It recognizes contributions of and representation theory. Number theoretic results play extraordinary depth and influence to the mathematical an important role in our everyday lives through encryption sciences and has been awarded annually since 2003. It algorithms for communications, financial transactions, For permission to reprint this article, please contact: and digital security. [email protected]. Fermat’s Last Theorem, first formulated by Pierre de DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/noti1386 Fermat in the seventeenth century, is the assertion that 608 NOTICES OF THE AMS VOLUME 63, NUMBER 6 the equation xn+yn=zn has no solutions in positive integers tophe Breuil, Brian Conrad, Fred Diamond, and Richard for n>2.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Stickelberger's Theorem
    A History of Stickelberger’s Theorem A Senior Honors Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for graduation with research distinction in Mathematics in the undergraduate colleges of The Ohio State University by Robert Denomme The Ohio State University June 8, 2009 Project Advisor: Professor Warren Sinnott, Department of Mathematics 1 Contents Introduction 2 Acknowledgements 4 1. Gauss’s Cyclotomy and Quadratic Reciprocity 4 1.1. Solution of the General Equation 4 1.2. Proof of Quadratic Reciprocity 8 2. Jacobi’s Congruence and Cubic Reciprocity 11 2.1. Jacobi Sums 11 2.2. Proof of Cubic Reciprocity 16 3. Kummer’s Unique Factorization and Eisenstein Reciprocity 19 3.1. Ideal Numbers 19 3.2. Proof of Eisenstein Reciprocity 24 4. Stickelberger’s Theorem on Ideal Class Annihilators 28 4.1. Stickelberger’s Theorem 28 5. Iwasawa’s Theory and The Brumer-Stark Conjecture 39 5.1. The Stickelberger Ideal 39 5.2. Catalan’s Conjecture 40 5.3. Brumer-Stark Conjecture 41 6. Conclusions 42 References 42 2 Introduction The late Professor Arnold Ross was well known for his challenge to young students, “Think deeply of simple things.” This attitude applies to no story better than the one on which we are about to embark. This is the century long story of the generalizations of a single idea which first occurred to the 19 year old prodigy, Gauss, and which he was able to write down in no less than 4 pages. The questions that the young genius raised by offering the idea in those 4 pages, however, would torment the greatest minds in all the of the 19th century.
    [Show full text]
  • A Letter of Hermann Amandus Schwarz on Isoperimetric Problems
    Research Collection Journal Article A Letter of Hermann Amandus Schwarz on Isoperimetric Problems Author(s): Stammbach, Urs Publication Date: 2012-03 Permanent Link: https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000049843 Originally published in: The Mathematical Intelligencer 34(1), http://doi.org/10.1007/s00283-011-9267-7 Rights / License: In Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Permitted This page was generated automatically upon download from the ETH Zurich Research Collection. For more information please consult the Terms of use. ETH Library Years Ago David E. Rowe, Editor n 1995 (or thereabouts), Eli Maor, then at Loyola A Letter of Hermann University, discovered a little booklet at a used book fair IIin Chicago containing a reprint of a paper published by Hermann Amandus Schwarz in 1884 [Sch1]. Interestingly, it Amandus Schwarz also contained an original letter by Schwarz written in the old German script. The letter, dated January 28, 1884, began with the words: Hochgeehrter Herr Director! Maor could decipher on Isoperimetric enough of the text to realize that it dealt with isoperimetric problems, which further awakened his interest. With the help Problems of Reny Montandon and Herbert Hunziker, he contacted Gu¨nther Frei, who was able to read and transcribe the old URS STAMMBACH German script. Thanks to his detailed knowledge of the history of mathematics of the 19th century, Frei was also able to provide a number of pertinent remarks. Unfortunately, before completing this task, Gu¨nther Frei fell gravely ill. The text of the letter together with his remarks was then given to Years Ago features essays by historians and the present author, who agreed to continue the work.
    [Show full text]
  • Kummer, Regular Primes, and Fermat's Last Theorem 1
    KUMMER, REGULAR PRIMES, AND FERMAT'S LAST THEOREM ILA VARMA CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Abstract. This paper rephrases Kummer's proof of many cases of Fermat's last theorem in contemporary notation that was in fact derived from his work. Additionally, it develops a reformulation of the proof using class field theory from a modern perspective in a manner similar to the tactics used for the complete proof, and describes how Kummer's proof strategy can generalize to solve the theorem for a broader set of primes. 1. Introduction Ernst Kummer was a 19th century mathematician who came across Fermat's last theorem in attempts to generalize the law of quadratic reciprocity and study higher reciprocity laws. While he described those as \the principal subject and the pinnacle of contemporary number theory," he considered Fermat's last theorem a \curiosity of number theory rather than a major item" [1]. A priori, this was not an unreasonable opinion of a problem that could be understood by a 12-year-old. We state this mere curiosity below. Theorem. For any integer n > 2, the equation xn + yn = zn has no non-trivial solutions in the integers, i.e. if x; y; z 2 Z satisfy this equation, then xyz = 0. Despite his disinterest, Kummer made the first substantial step in proving a part of Fermat's last theorem for many cases. This came only a few weeks after Gabriel Lam´eincorrectly announced that he had found a complete proof [1]. Lam´edid make the breakthrough in attempting to decompose xn + yn into linear factors by introducing the complex numbers satisfying ζn = 1, known today as roots of unity.
    [Show full text]
  • Algebra and Number Theory1
    October 22, 2000 Algebra and Number Theory1 1 The Emergence of Algebra In 1800 Algebra still meant solving equations. However, the effects of the new subjects of analytic geometry and calculus contributed to an enlargement of algebra. The Greek idea of geometrical algebra was reversed into algebraic geometry. The study of algebraic curves led to new structures allowing unique factorizations akin to prime number factorizations. The nagging problem of solving higher order, quintics, etc. was still present as it had dominated the 17th and 18th centuries. Many great mathematicians, notably Lagrange expended considerable efforts on it. The feeling was widespread that no solution by radicals could be achieved. Indeed, by 1803, Paulo Ruffini has published a proof to this effect, but the first rigorous proof is now attributed to the Norwegian mathematician Neils Abel in 1824,26,27. For a time the theorem was call the Abel-Ruffini theorem. Ruffini made a substantial contribution to the theory of equations, developing the theory of substitutions, a forerunner of modern group theory. His work became incorporated into the general theory of the solubility of algebraic equations developed by Galois. New approaches were inspired by the successes of analysis and even undertaken by specialists in analysis.2 By the beginning of the 20th century Algebra meant much more. It meant the study of mathematical structures with well defined operations. The basic units were to be groups, fields and rings. The concepts of algebra would unify and link many different areas of mathematics. This process continued throughout the twentieth century giving a strong algebraic flavor to much of number theory, analysis and topology.
    [Show full text]
  • Die Entwicklung Des Faches Mathematik an Der Universität
    UNIVERSITATS-¨ Heidelberger Texte zur BIBLIOTHEK HEIDELBERG Mathematikgeschichte Die Entwicklung des Faches Mathematik an der Universit¨at Heidelberg 1835 – 1914 von Gunter¨ Kern Elektronische Ausgabe erstellt von Gabriele D¨orflinger Universit¨atsbibliothek Heidelberg 2011 Kern, Gunter:¨ Die Entwicklung des Faches Mathematik an der Universit¨at Heidelberg 1835 – 1914 / vorgelegt von Gunter¨ Kern. – Heidelberg [1992]. – III, 167 Bl. Heidelberg, Univ., Wissenschaftl. Arbeit, [ca. 1992] Signatur der Bereichsbibl. Mathematik + Informatik: Kern Der Text der oben genannten Arbeit, die ca. 1992 als wissenschaftliche Arbeit im Fach Geschichte fur¨ das Lehramt an Gymnasien vorgelegt wurde, wurde mit Hilfe von Text- erkennungsprogrammen aus einer Xeroskopie wiedergewonnen. Die Publikation steht bei den Fachbezogenen Informationen / Mathematik der Universit¨atsbibliothek Heidelberg un- ter http://ub-fachinfo.uni-hd.de/math/htmg/kern/text-0.htm in HTML-Formatierung zur Verfugung.¨ Die Erlaubnis des Autors zur Ver¨offentlichung auf den Internetseiten der Universit¨atsbi- bliothek Heidelberg und das Einverst¨andnis des Landeslehrerprufungsamtes¨ Baden-Wurt-¨ temberg liegen vor. Die neue Druckausgabe des Werkes wurde mit dem Satzsystem LATEX erzeugt, das den Seitenumbruch des Originals nicht erhielt; die Originalseitenz¨ahlung ist jedoch am Rand in runden Klammern vermerkt. Die auf jeder Seite getrennt gez¨ahlten Fußnoten der Originalarbeit wurden fur¨ die Neu- ausgabe in Endnoten umgesetzt und als Anmerkungen bezeichnet. Der Z¨ahlung der Fußno- ten wird die Seitennummer des Originals vorangestellt. Auf diese Weise konnten s¨amtliche Querverweise ubernommen¨ werden. Gabriele D¨orflinger Fachreferentin fur¨ Mathematik Universit¨atsbibliothek Heidelberg Inhaltsverzeichnis I.1. Einleitung 5 I.2. Zur Quellenlage . 5 II. Die Mathematik in Heidelberg im 19. Jahrhundert 6 II.1. Die Phase der Stagnation — Das Ordinariat Schweins (1827 – 1856) .
    [Show full text]