SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · math/0305022

"Algebraic truths" vs "geometric fantasies": Weierstrass' Response to Riemann

Abstract

In the 1850s Weierstrass succeeded in solving the Jacobi inversion problem for the hyper-elliptic case, and claimed he was able to solve the general problem. At about the same time Riemann successfully applied the geometric methods that he set up in his thesis (1851) to the study of Abelian integrals, and the solution of Jacobi inversion problem. In response to Riemann's achievements, by the early 1860s Weierstrass began to build the theory of analytic functions in a systematic way on arithmetical foundations, and to present it in his lectures. According to Weierstrass, this theory provided the foundations of the whole of both elliptic and Abelian function theory, the latter being the ultimate goal of his mathematical work. Riemann's theory of complex functions seems to have been the background of Weierstrass's work and lectures. Weierstrass' unpublished correspondence with his former student Schwarz provides strong evidence of this. Many of Weierstrass' results, including his example of a continuous non-differentiable function as well as his counter-example to Dirichlet principle, were motivated by his criticism of Riemann's methods, and his distrust in Riemann's ``geometric fantasies''. Instead, he chose the power series approach because of his conviction that the theory of analytic functions had to be founded on simple "algebraic truths". Even though Weierstrass failed to build a satisfactory theory of functions of several complex variables, the contradiction between his and Riemann's geometric approach remained effective until the early decades of the 20$^{th}$ century.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Umberto Bottazzini. 2003-05-01. "Algebraic truths" vs "geometric fantasies": Weierstrass' Response to Riemann. https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0305022

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Perspectives on the unit distance problem

This is a survey on an old open problem in combinatorics called the unit distance problem, and the field of mathematics around it, called incidence geometry. What do we know about the problem? Why is it difficult? How does it connect with other parts of math?

math.HO

A Categorical Approach to Euclidean Ratios and Proportions

A categorial approach to the non-metric geometry in Books V and VI of Euclid's \textit{Elements} is presented. Specifically, we introduce a diagrammatic syntax that can be overlaid immediately on his diagrams, thus bridging intuitive presentation with fidelity to Euclid's arguments. This syntax makes complicated definitions like V.5, and indeed the arguments throughout books V and VI, including arguments about similar figures, intuitively clear. We show in an appendix that this syntax can be used to solve a puzzle regarding ancient mathematics. Finally, we offer evidence that this approach to Euclidean diagrams is rooted in the Aristotelian tradition itself, and that a similar syntax was utilized, in antiquity, for related questions of numeric and proportions. Thus the syntax is plausibly faithful to Euclid's own thought-world, and not an outside-imposition.

math.HO

Some Early Results by Tutte Regarding the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture in 1948

OpenAI recently announced a proof of the Cycle Double Cover (CDC) Conjecture. Most media reports have characterized it as a 50-year-old open problem. In reality, according to a 1987 letter from Tutte to Fleischner, the Cycle Double Cover Problem has been open for at least 80 years. Two early results regarding the CDC conjecture were established in one of Tutte's 1949 publications.

math.HO