Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
SHBR5
. LMHM
B nOrOllE
3A
/{PACOTOl
H3DTBbBU
o)Q[#H lllAPI1H
lN ML bLKLM
|LK bLUY
bg
v. om|gu
T,Qlottd from ,h. Run/a"
bV
Ceo, Yankov.kv
.:ta PULI H MOW 1V
513.81(021)
a:-~from the 19 nu!Sian Edition
U PmvIuko.u Q@
CONTENTS
LWDIBf
1. Before Euclid-Prehistoric Timu . 7
2. Euclid. . . . . . . 26
3. The Fifth Postulate. 57
4. The Age of Proof . The Beginning 81
5. Omar KhaY!lam. . . . . . . 92
6. The Age of Profs. Contiled. . _ 129
7. N onEu.clidean CtIIt/r!l' The SOI'I'
tion. _ . . . . . . . . . . .
155
8. Nikolai Tvanovich Lbehevky 198
9. Non-Eulidean CeorMtry. Some /1-
lutrations . . . . . . . . . . . 230
10. New Ideal. Riemann. Non-contra
dictorin . s. . . . . . . . . . . 246
11. All U M:ted FiTle. The Central
Theory of Relativity 269
12. Einstein . y y q y 4 . . 31
5
Logfzr
BEFORE EUCLlD
PREHISTORIC TIMES
lru bginning of this story goe back to
M immemorial.
Where was it, when and how did geometry
into being? Where, how Dlld when did it
tL sbape nnd become a science? Who was the
ery frst to propos the axiomatic structure 01
gometry?
We do not know, and most likely never will.
It i generally believed that he was 8 Greek.
But perhap tbo glori led pric ts of Egypt or
lh renowned chaldenl1 magi are tbe true fath
r of sience.
However all that may b, geomotry arrived
in Greee in tbe seventb century before tbe
Christian era.
It wos tbere and then that the Greeks, admir-
ers ot cold logic and the cxqul ite elegance of
pore intellect, lovingly polisbed to a brilliance
(or perhaps originated) one of the most beauti
ful creations of hum6l tbought-geometry.
Elegance indeed, yet actually tbe matter was
far more involved and intriguing. One thing is
certain, and that is tbat geometry sprnlll from
practical needs.
Tbe development of logic (nod consquenLly
geometry as woll) 'as.Ouonced 1.0 om utenl
by tie. Greeks' dovoLion to law and lratQry,
But in Egypt, too, geometry was important t
1
m8n 0h8 Qtac\caW0tdV8t mQ0tan. nd
a8 0t 8nd8 8 \ga08 and c0ut QtdD
h8 Lt88K8 W8t8 at D8hnd \h8 c0uD\t 0 \h
Qhata0b8.
8d Wh
.
\h
88. hI
D0u a
man 8at8
It 8 a8 dtamac a8
l IS D8tucOV8 a d8tecS8 8\0t W\h an un8X~
Q8c\8d Du haQQ 8ndng.
0W 0t h8 80t .
L80m8t, W D8V8 b8gan Wh \h8 0nc
8ch00. 0 D8 m0t8 Qt8c8 8 0uDd8t W&5
ha88 0 M8u8 Wb0 Wa8
D88V0d !0 haV
Vd c088 0 a hundt8d 8at9 [81h8t t0m 60
0 50 0t 60 0 546 B.C.).
Y8 d0 88m 0 Kn0W V8r much aD0D hm.
Y8 K0W 0t 8ut8 h had b8 \18 0 0n8 0
h b8V8 bag88 0 Lt88c8 W8 a80 K0W ha
1u acc0tdauc Wh b 8&D8h8d tcK0nng h
_
a8 h8 t8 Qh00Qh8t h8 ht8 mahma~
CIa
.
b 0t8
.
a8\t00m8t aDd g8n8ta, h8
frt 1n R 8CIBnc88 n Lt88. Y8 mgh 8a
\ha h8 Wa8 0 h Lt8K8 Wba )0m0D080V Wa8
0 h8 uau8. 1 b.
8 a 0ung man h8 m08 K8 mad8 h8
W
l
deliberations. However, the Cntrai mathematI
cal shool of the 6th and 5th Cnuries B.C.
was the Pythagorean school.
The authentic biographical iniormulion about
Pyhagoras boils down, in ".sence, to a {Q\
sories. In tbis respt, he is mucb like Thales
of Miletus. The obsurities bin wilh his origin.
Rrtrand Rusl sums the maUer up by %y
10
me blieve him to he he SOn of 8
ycUten named Mnesarch, others the 500
g Apollo, and adds that the reader
h pick.
further believed that Pythagoras lived
long a life as Thales-something in tho
_ .of one hundred year (perhaps 569 to
.\n Tbales, he spent some twenty years
Egypt imbibilg wisdom, but later (here he
_. Thales) ho lived about ten year in
ylonia adding still more to hIs store of
ledge. It is also claimed tha he travelled
India, but nobody seems to believe it.
Boxers claim tbat Pythagoras took boxing
laurels in the Olympic games, but the source
of ueh claims is nover indicated. I have ooth-
10 support them either. M in the cas of
al , the exciting thing is he unexpected
mbination of philosopher, mathematician and
bxer.
Pythagoras may not have done much in box
ing, but in politics he did, and very actively,
though not at all successfully.
The cititeos of the Sicilian tOW 01 Crotona,
where he fouoded his shool after his wande
rings in distant lands and also go the town
involved in an exhausting war, finally asked
him to leave together with his school. Which
he did in rather much of a hurry, which was a
reasonable thing to do.
A a mathematician and scholar he was a
giant, bu nevertheless he do no call forth
grat admiraUon. His Pythagoran order of phi
lospbers and mathematician is Buch too O-
1 1
mioisent of a barracks and Pythagoras bimslf
suspiciously resmbles a fUhrr, tbough much
mOre cultured than any of those of the twen
tiet, h century.
It is precisly Pythagoras himslf-most likely
in a campaign to build up bis authority-who
built up and popularized the idea that his lov
ing father was the fair-haired eIulgent Apollo.
Actually he became the true rather of tbe pre
sotly popular custom of attributing to himself
the scientiOc results of his pupils. Thero, the
matLer was quite official. There existed a lat
according to which the author of all the mathe
matical studies of tbe school was to be named
Pytbagoras.
Though one might ropeat that such things Me
done right aod left loday, the pas ago of 25
centuries has greatly soltened and civilized tbo
customs. The eSence is the same, but tbo form
bas become enobled.
Pythagoras is tbe unsurpassd leader bere b
cause be handled matters so tbat his faithful
pupils claimed him author of work done long
after his death. Quite undertandably then-that
bing the state of afairs in the Pythagorean
school-that the mo t cogent of all argumonts
was a simple reference to The Authority Him
sell.
Tbat is exactly how the wording went: "He
said so Himscll". After which any disussion
was totally out of place-evon dangerous.
He and his dear pupils also held in seret
their methods for solving mathematical prob
lems. Too, ho compiled lor the membrs of
his order a long list of taboO! .
1 2
qlole Irom the rule of good manner of
gntlemen of the ythagoreS
?
Club:
&1. Retrain from UlDg beans ID your food.
. Do not pick up what has fallen.
3. Do not touch white roosters.
-4. Do not take a bite from a whole bread.
a;. Do not walk on a highway.
M. When removing a pot from
.
the lre, dg
Bt leave trace in the a hes, but ID'X the asbes
.
The list could b extended. IL was this bun
h
that rO K to Iower in one Greek town, then "'
another, implanting the cult ol
,
Pythag
ras ao,
accordingly, demanding compliance WIth their
tatutes. With melancholy, Bertrand Rusel re
su tbat those wbo were not reborn in the new
laith thirsted for beans and so sooner or later
ro W up in arms.
.
It is also told that he preached to the arumals,
for he made little distinction betwen them and
human beings.
But the Pythagorean scbool advanced geo
metry and mathematics in general. Very much
in fact. All of this taken togetber is not a
bd illustration of the danger 01 idealizing rep
resntative of the exact sciences and of the
intellect generally.
Incidentally, to us, Pythagoras is
.
mainly a
mathematician. Yet he himslf and h,s contem
poraries look the view that his profesion w
s
that of a prophet. That was of coure thelf
busines, they were closer to ev
nts. But,
s
we know, every prophet must b ID part mag'-
cian, demagogue and charlatan.
&
Pythagoras was apparntly past master '? each
leld. The pupils tried hard too. AccordlDg to
\3
One stor
r
, one of his hips was 01 gold, to another
tbat rehable people saw him at two diferent
place at the same time, to a thlrd that when
he was wading across a stream, the water over
flowed the banks crying Long Live Pythago
ra
J"
True, the Greeks had a goodly number of reasonable people.
?
e
s wa
very trict in his portrait of Py_
thagoras, multlJlle knowledge without reaSOn ".
1 4
leave Pythagoras, but before dong so,
ne more curious story by one of hiS hOD
admirers. How devious indeed are tbe path
of %ience. Quite naturally, geometry, like
-
braches of knowledge, was most carefully
ealed from the com moo people by tbe Py
reaos. Who knows, perbaps to tbis day no
would know of geomet ry (outside the Py
greaos) if it weran't for ....
But here is lhe legond as to how the Pythago
.. ans account for the spread of geometry. One
of them is to blamc, for he lost tho money of
the community. After that calamity, the com
munity permitted him to carn the money by
teaching geometry, and geometry waS given tho
name "the legend of Pythagoras".
A curious thing is that there sems to have
ben a geometry textbook by that name.
As to the story itsolf, if there is a grain of
truth in it at all, then, though I do not consider
mysell a malicious peron, 1 would bo p
I
asd
to lear tbat the truant Pythagorean had not
lost the moncy alter all but had spcnt it in a
spree in the local port tavcrn s\
iling wino,
eating a while roostor With bans, bl tl lg a whole
roll of whi te hread and si nging drunken ongs
on the high way.
Another man contributed greatly to geometry,
and again to my taste he was an anpleasant
character.
Ris namo was Plato (428 to 38 B.C.).
I n his views, in his methods of setti
g up a
sehool and in his love of slf-advertisement,
|lato much resembles Pythagoras. But befo
e
I S8Y why I do not like him, let me elplaJD
15
t . mot signifcant contribution to geo
_u i.
He i considered-and perhaps justly so, for
I am not a specialist il the field-one of the
gatet philoopher of Greece. Indeed he did
a geat deal for the development of mathema
tic and valued it highly. At the entrance to
his Academy he had, hewn in stone, the inscrip
tion: "Let no one destitute of geometry enter
my doorl" The point is that Plato helieved
that "the study of mathematics hrings us closer
to the immortal gods", and educated his pupils
in this spirit, adding mathematic where it Was
needed and where it wasn't. Some of his pupils
bcame brilliant geometers. Plato bad numerous
pupils and they naturally spred numorollS
stories praiSing the teacber.
It was apparently Plato who frst made the
explicit demand that mathematics generally and
geometry in particular b constructed in deduc
tive fashion. To put it diferently, all the pro
positions (theorems) must b rigorously logi
cally deduced from a small number of basic
statement callod axioms.
This was a momentous step forward.
By tho time Plato arrived on the scone, geo
melry had developed extonsi voly.
A multitude of extromely complicated pro
blems had been solved and highly involved theo
rems proved. What was apparently lacking was
a clear-ut general scheme of construction. As is
froquontly tbe cas in science , tho developmcnt
of geometry was spurred tremendously by three
problems that adamantly refused to suc
cumb.
16
:: we have gone this fur, I will staLo tbe
It
Ims:
reqUired, witl, lhe aid
.
of compass ad
.M-edge alone (no olher lostruments -
I, i'
al to t e
-
of a given circle (squaring the
ltcle);
f (3) construct a cube of volume tWice tt O
a given cube (duplicating the cube, the Del
phian proIJlem ").
.
til H Was only at tho end of the Ulneteen cen
tury that i t was proved that, thus ]oed
l
, n
of tbo pl'ohlems is sOlvable, thoug l
.
a
I aro readily rosolvable if othor gcomt"I C
e instruments are omployed. Thoy
.
call a so
.
hndled by utilizing arcs of a ellcle or lOI
dilerent from a straight Iille.
.
But the Greek rules only permitted compass
and straight-dge.
. .
t b Plato even substantiated Ihls reqw
:
eme
.t some sort of reference O the authon ty 0
gO
at is why not one of the problems _s
solved, but in tbo elort geomotry was grea y
2-1M
1 1
expanded. Too bad we have no place or time
for the numerous exci ting stories that go alollg
with these problems. But we will recall a legend
to show that we are objective in onr attitnde
towards Plato. Qne of tbe versions of this story
makes him out a very reasonable man.
Eratosthenes relates tbat once, on tho island
01 Delos an epidemic 01 plague broke out. The
inhabitant. s of the island naturally turned to
the Delpbian oracle who orderod to duplicate
tho volume of the golden cubical sacrifcial
repository to Apollo withont altering its shape.
Plato was asked to advis.
He did not resolve the problem but interpre
ted the oracle as meaning to say that the gods
were angry with the Greeks for tho endless
internecine wa.s and deired that tho Greeks
should give up warfare and engage in the scion
ces, particularly geometry. The plague would
then vanish.
Legends or no legends, Plato as philosophc,
and man is in my opinion extremely unpleasant.
It is not even the fact that he was supporter
of tho 1Il0st rabid idealism and on every occa
sion appealed to the gods. What is wors, he
built up a thco,'y 01 the state taking as his mo
del nearby Sparta-a real haven of fa <ism.
Too, tho bnsic planks 01 his utopia fully con
form to the demands of nazism.
He spent his whole life fghting tooth aud
nail against democlacy in political life and
against materialism io spiritual life.
He not onJy scourged the materialist-thinking
philoophers abstractly io his philosophical writ
ings, but, demonstrati og a very practical ap-
1 8
O matters, olten employed political de
l W0D~B beloved weapon io all ages-to
!ientifc opponents.
i eVOD a story that be bought up the
of hi bitterest enemy Democritus so as
oy them.
Doritus is a special topic of discussion.
U one agres that the source of our modern
'cs is to b sought among the Greeks (and
is most likely the case), then the distaoce
C ered is great ltldeed-something like two tho-
d years. From Aristotle to ewton. The
i primal elements of Aristotle-air, water,
h and fre-marked ooe of the frst attempts
defne the concept of the "elementary partic
of physics,
True, the Greeks did not know physics in
& modern snse of the word, At the heart
.f matters wore spculative argumonts, oot ex
primont. But this is not so important to us
WW.
Perhaps it is the almost total absnce of ex
priment tbaL brings out the utteriy amazing
conjecture of tbe sly philosopher Democritus of
Abdera.
Roughly half a century before Aristotle, he
blieved that all substances consisted of minute
indivisible particlos-atoms-and that tho diffo
rent properties of ubstances were determined by
lhe dWerent qualities of the atoms themslves.
In a given substanco, however, all atoms were
identical and devoid of any individuality,
These views are so clos in spirit to modern
conceptions that one of the founders of quan
tum mehanics, Erwin Schrodinger, took great
1 9
pleasure in startling his listeners with tho ele
gant parado : ''1'he frst quantum physicist was
not Max Planck bllt Domoritus of Abdora."
Most Iikoly, Demoritu would hav been most
amazed to hoar this fattering comment, yet one
must agree that Scllridinger surely has certain
rights when it com to discussing quantum
theory.
The fate of Demoeritus
'
viow is remarkable
in yet another two ways. FirsLly, not a single
one of his writings has come down to us. Ei
ther Plato inded succeeded in his neat IitLio
methods of sciontifc discussion, or simply tho
books woro lost througb tbe age; at any rate.
to our misfortune, the idea of one o[ tbo fr t
materialists in the world can be judged only
on tho basis of extract and later retellings.
econdly, the frst Iopillar-scionce treatise (and
Iopularizers 01 cience should never forget this)
waS devoted to a di cussion o[ his ideas.
What is more, the book in question st a
world record, lor the pom is of extreme length.
I am of couro alluding to tho pom 0" the
Nature 0/ Things (D fffR natura) by Titus
Lucretius CartlS, which was wrilten somo threo
hundred years after tho death o[ DemocrHus
two thousand years ago.
By tho way, J)cmoritus had it ralher good
neverthel ,because traces of many otber scho
lars (particularly among tho materialists) have
been I t completely. For in tance, thero is still
great doubt about whother DemocriLus' teacher
Leucippu over livod. Then o[ course iL is en
tirely conjecture whether Leucippus was eo-au
thor Or author of the ideas of atomism.
20
we have the version that the teaching
oriLus was borrowed from some ehaldean
. granted to hi father by the Perslan king
Xe
And if we may permit ourselves a bit of mora
.
,it is worth noting that in science ideas
incomlarably longer-lived than the memory
. tb who ongnder tbem. Incidontally most
nti t in any brauch of knowledge can
'
grasp
. t anything oxcept this not-too-unexpected
H.
But whover was tho founder of tho atomi tic
ery, and wbeth r quantum mecbanic has its
U ill DemoriLu or tbo cbaldeans the views
f the atomistic school aro roughly s [ollows.
The world consist of atoms and void. The
atoms are unitary and indivisible. Thoy B
elementary and qualitatively invariablo. Atoms
do nol succumb to aoy kind of out ide actiOn
hatseve
e lust
eternal a friendship, drank h avlly reJoICI?g,
cd each other's hand in a frm
.
masuhne
'e and went their ways . .
.
to hogm slaugh-
& and lghting among themslvo.
.
Tho Limes were exciting. Kings grow up like
anshrooms alter 8 rain und wore wiped out
jut as quickly, The lawful heirs, with n
m
?
re
guilt than thoir Ol'igil
. en 0 cours it ra}
.
even be asumed that ther wa 10 e of puttlOg .Ihe wism0n O some killd of pra"Ucal nse, ThIS was rathol' doubtful tho h
L
I
el
r
us put aside guc work an+
g
nte facts
on y
acts.
.
28
10 the third and econd cenluries B.C., Ale
Bdria had become the pl'inciral ceotr or learn-
of the Hellenistic world. And tho most
Q&gnifi cen! institution of learing was the cel
Hrated M U ur of Alexandria ,th i famous
library. Unfortunately, it was plundered many
times, and to complete matter, all 70,00 scrolls
prished in a fre started i n the s\enth century
by some furiou8 Ara bian caur.
I ncidentally, it sems that the calif \as rally
Dot sO much to blame. The frst one to hllve a
band in it was the great Caesar-Gains lulius
Caesar, a fairly decent writer of pros and al 0
and mainly a general and political demagogue
with boundless ambition.
Too, there 8W 0Xtremely w0ighty reasons to
blinve that in the main the work was that of
the early Christian church (at that time, extre
moly tolerant of other faiths), which got out
ahead of the simpleton calif by about two bund
red or sO year . All the calif bad to do was clear
away the remain
.
However that may be, the
very hest work of the Ptolemys awaited an
unpl0a ant fate
_
At any rale, if we are to remember tho Plole
mys for what good lhey did, it is for their
patronage of learing.
Human history has known many kingdoms
and more kings. It may be that historians will
trace the relationships of the doings of one and
another salrap and subsquent evonts. But the
living memory of tho people carrie along a neg
Iigiblo percentage of all tb is crownbaring horde.
And what memory there is, is mo t often bad.
Those that sIand out most-lheir luck-are
29
l
cut-throats and adventutists like TamerlaDe or
apoleoD.
But tho role thoy play today in Our lifo is
practically nil.
Since I bave delved ralher deep in thes an
cient varations on the topic of the frail ty of
earthly kingdoms and their glory let me COn-
clude with a parable.
'
Some few deades prior to the invasion of
Mexico by tho Spanish, a certain Aztec leader
wi lh totaily
.
unpronounceable name (let us
call hln X) uUlted all the tribes into a king
dnm, thus to Some exlVnt eliminating lhe feu
dal fragmentation of tho land. It Was naturally
thought that tho kingdO and bis dynasty
would last for long centuries. X hinlsell rulud
long and happily.
But Moxico was 8Oon visited by the gangsters
of Crtez, and all that was left of the Aztec
empire was the ruilS of what were onco magni
fice
t cities. But
.
lbat is only half tho story.
KlDg X (the caslka, to b pl'eeise) quito natu
rally had a harem, for King X adored lhe fe
male %X.
He
,
as inded an extraordinary man, a lalen
ted Il"lcal poet. Most naturally, he wrOle potry
for his nu0roIls wives in between allcniling
to
.
the a(als of State. It is his ongs that can
stIJJ-today-be heard in Lho viUages of Mexico.
We may rejoice onco again that genuine works
of
,
without stretching tho point very far, be consI
dered the logical culmination o[ the whole story
of the ffth po tulate.
.
.
,
But what strikes me as most mtercsltn
.
g
.
In
this story, is nOI geometry or te relatiVIty
theory. Ultimatel), the entire ep
c about the
lfth postulate is jut as m
c wltn to the
power of human tbought a It IS to tbe remar
kable almo t fantastic narrow-mindedne of
mathmaticians. No wonder, incidentally, that
fax Planck permitted himself tho perhaps ove
rly categorical but, generally, correct stateme
t
that "in comparison with the theor
of relatl
vi ty, the construction of
.
nO
,
n-Eucl\{ean geo
metry is nO moro than cblld s play
.
Let us,
howover, not be too juhilant. The i mportant
thing is somulhi ng olse.
The most important thing, tho most in t
.
u
clive thing, and if you l i ke,
.
tho most touchl
.
ng
thing is that this slory, whIch we nOw bgIn,
34
.bolic
.
It is an i l I ustralion o[ one of the
qualities that mark 01 human beings from
other primales and unite all races inlo a
Ie species. The reader has guessd whnt tho
or is about: he sings the praiss of the endeav
to fnd out what the world is like in which
live, how our univers is constructed. And
. fnds that the internationalism of earthlings,
t internationalism of epochs, countries and
pples will et roally sland against lhe just as
teral coalition of narrow-mindednes, the broth
ehood of satraps, go-getters, conquerors, clim
b, grabbrs, and the worst portion of sports
fans.
I f one could imagine for a momont the fan
tastic picture of Euclid, Omar Khayyam, Gaus,
Lobachevsky and Einstein al l in One room to
gther, it is hardly likely that ikolai Loba
chevsky would feel the need to sek out acquain
tances or, {or lack of a topic of conversation,
to say, "bow about a couple of jokes. "
But on the other hand, one has to admit,
albeit grudgingly, that the jokes of Euclid's
time (with slight modi lcations for loal colour,
"
35
of conrse) al most fll l l y exhaust the spiritual
arsnal of very many of OUI' cOlllcmporal"ies.
I ncidentally, i t is nOL worth ideal i zing eiL Ior
learning or the priests of learning. Hundred
upou hundreds of brilliant minds have turned
out to be quite amoral personages.
And perhaps one ot tho most attractive fea
tures ot this whole story is that just as non
Euclidean geometry l ogical l y cul minated in the
general tboory of relativity, so the galaxy of
mathematicians-as a rule, not only remarkably
talented but bumanly i nteresting people-onds
with Einstein.
But let U5 return to Encli dl
To begi n with, a few words-t. he stronger,
the botter-about all the beasts that liqUidated
the Alexandrian l i brary. If it had not ben des"
troyed, we would now know scores of ti mes mor
about tho Greok and Roman worlds than We do.
We would probably know abont Euclid as
well. But, unhappily, as of today practically
the most flmdamentai sonrce on Euclid is Pro
cl U Diadochus of Constantinople, a geometer
who wrote exceedingly detailed Commntary
00 the lrst book of tho Elements. Si tlce we are
rMerring to sources, a slight remark will not
bo amiss.
When we turn to tho history of antiquity,
the effect is somewhat l i ke that of regarding a
chain of mountains from an aeroplane. Every
thing is smoothed over, distances contract, and
small features vanish. Only the general overal l
picture remains.
Involuntarily we look upon all Greek mathe
maticians as almost contemporaries. ote, then,
36
Plus (412-85 A. D. ) lived sven hundred
after Euclid, a span 01 lime much greater
I &t which sparates us from Ivan the
-Lle. Quite obvious then that the facts at
Pl' disposal concerning the life of Euclid
fragmentary and haphazard.
r i another author who Ii ved a few deca
bfore Proclus. He was tho Alexandrian
ematician Pappus. He wrote of Euclid des
ail him as mild, modest and, at tho same
, independent. Both relate the incident with
lemy. "Exact" biographical daLa are mostly
on the remarks 01 an unknown Arabian
@thematician ot the tweHth century: "Enclid,
of Naucratus, tbo SOn of Zenarchus, known
lhe namo of GeolneLo', a sCholar of olden
, of Greek origiu, lived in Syria, born in
y . . . .
That is all.
The man disolved ill tho ag without a trace.
What remains is his work.
We repeat, the E lemnls is a book wi thout
parallel. For over two thousand years it \a
t prinCipal and practically solo manual 00
37
geometry lor sholars of boLh the Occidont ani
tbe Orient. As late as tho end of the 19th cen
tury, many English schools taught geometry OD
the basis of an adapted edi tion of Euclid's
E lemen/so There can hardly b a more el oquen'
witness to its popularity. In this sens, only
the Bible can compete with tbe Elements 01
Gmetry. But unlike the Bi ble, tbe Element.
are a rigorous system of logic. To b mOre pre
cise, Euclid ever stlived towards such a system.
We can presuDle tbat Euclid was a fol lower of
Plato and Aristotle. Plato, as you real l , deman
ded a strictly deducti ve construction of matbema
tics. A t tho fOlmdation were axioms: tbe basic
propositions that were accepted without proof;
from thon on, everything had to follow with
utmost rigour from these axioms.
Tbat was the ideal that Euclid attempted to
accomplish. Attempted, becaus from the view
point of today l i teral l y his whole axiomatic" i s
unsa tisfactory.
But that is elY to say now, after 2 centuries
of investigations. I n its day, Euclid's logic left
an overwhelming i mpression.
Attempts had ben made before Euclid to
describe geometry on the ba is of an axiomatic
method. Not bad attempts, eitber. But we can
assuredly say that Euclld's work was the most
succesful, as witnes the unprecedented popu
larity of bis book already i n aneient li mes-a
popularity that brought the book down through
the ages to us.
000 can say all kinds of harsh (a.ad truo) thi ngs
about Euclid's axiomaLics. But one should ne
ver forget that the scheme i lsolf boca me, since
38
WE, the canonical model for COllStrllcting
branch of mathematics. And of cours
It nevor forget that the E lents prosent
elIent piece of writing by a ski l led mastr,
icacious scholar and a magni lccnt tea
That explains and justi fes the univeral
.: : lion of mathematicians for Euclid and
Ints. Let Il8 add tbat tbis book brought to
6ld of mathemat.ics scores of yolmg men who
bame the world 's greatest mathomaLi-
w
T elet of Euclid bl been amazing througb
tbe ages and throughout the worl d. Take
of tbe most prominent mathematicians of
Renaissance, Cardauo, who, it mu t be add-
was a rabid adventurist (not to say scOun
) but thore is no getting around bis mathemn
talent and cul ture. Here is how he admired
Enlid's Elements.
"he irrefutable strengtb of their dogmas and
their perfection are so absolute that not a single
ork can justifi ably b compared with tbem.
a consequence. thore is such a light of truth
rncted i n them that, lpparently, only he is
capable of distinguishing tbe true from tbe false
in the intricate problems of geometry who has
mastered Euclid. "
I n the middle of tbo 19th century an outstan
ding geometer had this to say: "There bas never
ben a system of geometry, which, in its esn
tials, has difered from the plan of Euclid;
and until I see such wi th my OWll oyes, T wi l l
not believe that such a system can exist. "
True, i t must b said that in the middle or
the 19th century, that geometer could hn vo rea-
39
soned more progresi vely and tbes words, 8 id8
from worship of Euclid, demonstrate tbo au
thor's 0wn hid8bouDd c0nsrvat sm.
8 c0uld go on citing numerous 0ther w
iugs in the sam8 vein, but we will confine our
selves to what is probably the m08t brilliant
demoWstratioD of the er ct tbe Elements had On
literall y al l felds of thought. Bonedict Sp noza,
celebrated philo opher 0the Western world, bor
rowed tbe entire plan of his basic work, Ethics,
from Euclid.
Perbaps tbo autb0ri ty of Spinoza is not con
vincing en0ugh to some readers. I f it isn't, let
100 menti0n Isaac ewton.
His fundamental work, tho Prillcipla (Th
Mathatical Prillclpies of Natural Philosphy)
copi 8s Euclid botb i n title and 0ul D8.X0m8
0tm the startiDg point from Whcb all els
u0W . h0 simi laIity may bo conti nued b
cause N8wt0Ds axiomatics tured out to b
j ust as epbemeral as did Eucl i d's.
Ono fnal Q8c8 0 i nformati0n. By the y8ar
18, tbe Elemelts had appeared n 46 edi
tions.
Perhaps a word is in order, at this poi nt,
about the axiomatic method itslf.
It was only at the begi nning 0 this twentioth
century that we achievod a perfectl y clear and
rigorous understanding of deductive shemes. In
the maio, m0tt 0t tbis goes to tbo great Ger
man mathematician Hi l bert.
I n a rough and greatly Si mplified form, tb8
matter stands as follow5. We confine ourslv8s
n what follows to the concrete material of
g80metry so as to avoid too many abstractions.
4
Stago 1. A List of the Basic Concepts
F0undat ioDBasic Concepts (basic clements).
Tbese arc the r"sul L of a prolonged experimen
tal study of nature, a study bolh i ntri cate and
confusd and nebulous and more.
Stemming therefrom is a certain abstract t8-
fection of actualit.y, resulting in the Basic Cn
cepts. NOlhing at aU is said u them in Ihe rdo
malic . They como ready-made, as 0umight 8a.
Tbis is nalural enougb. 0 defne tbe BaSic
Concepts or notions, one needs otber, fresh nO
l ions, whicb i n turn with tbe aid of. . . and so
on ad i nfnitllm. Lu8 has l0 st art somewhere.
As tbo French say, "in order to mak8 a dish
0 rabbit stew, 0lI8 at leasl has to find a cat".
So we have the Basic NOlions. Mal homalicians
havo a delightful way of putling il : these are
8l8mentary entHies thaI are 1101 defned, they
are si mply stated. A sligbt supplomont, by tbe
way. I n tbo modern axiomatics of geometry,
the Basic Cncpls al'o djvided inlo Iwo groups:
(a) basic i mages;
(b) basic relations.
41
General ly speaking, loday there are at Jeast
two essenLially di ferent axiomatic schemes. In
what follows we wi l l use the scheme in which
the Basic I mages 8 as follows:
(1) point, (2) straight lioe, (3) plano.
ow Jet us see what tbe Basic Rolltions are.
They arc formulated as:
( 1 ) to belong to, (2) to lie between, (3) moLion.
The Hasic Concepts have been established.
We can now slart the second stage.
Stage 2. Basic Axioms.
For our Basic Concepts we make a st of
a srtions tbat arc accepted without any proof.
Thos are axioms. Speaking in strictly formal
fashion, i t is only tho axioms that fll our Ba
sic Concepts wi lh li vi ng content. Only they
i mpart life. Wilhout the axioms, the Basic Con
cepts are devoid of any con lent. They are noth
i ng. Amorphous ghosts. The adoms defn the
rules of the game for these "ghosts". They out
line a logical ordor. The malhematician call say
only one thing about his Basic Concepts, that
they obey such and sucb axioms. That and noth
ing elsl And al l bcaus tbe mathematician
does not know what be is talking about. He
demands only ono tbing: that his axioms bo
satisOed.
That and nothing elsl
Whon the axiomatic method has ben elabo
rated to perfection, geometry, speaking formally,
is converted into an abstract game of logic.
Tho notions of point, straight lioo, plane,
molion can mean anytbing, any entities.
42
Let us constroct a geometry for them. We
will then call our goometry Euclidean geoWet ry
i f the axioms establislled [or the "Ioul " geo
metry of Euclid are fulllled.
For example, one, and only one, straight line
call be draw" through two distinct paints. This
is nn axiom formulated in ordi nary languago.
I f we were to adhoro trictly to tbe termino
logy just introduced, we would have to make
the statement:
only on. straight line ciln belong to two dif
rent point .
And so on i n the same spirit. On the basis
of this axiom, a good exercise is to prove tbe
theorem: 'Two straight lines have only one
pOint in common.
At the presnt ti me, lve groups of axioms
aro disti nguished i n Euclidean geometry. They
8O
( 1) axioms of connetion;
(2) axioms of order;
(3) axioms of motion;
(4) the axiom of contionity;
(5) the axiom of parallel Ii nes.
There can hardly b any use i n enllerating
ali these axioms, we wiII put them i n the appen
dix, for, 85 Herodotus Once said, nothing gi
es
such weight and dignity to a book as an Appendlx.
We sball have occasion to return to the axioms
a number of times. Meanwhile, we take up
Stage 3.
Stgc 3. Th. Basic DejnWons Enumerate.
With llle aid of the Basic Concepts wo con
struct moro complicated ones. For in laoce, an
43
angle is a fgure formed by two hal/-lines (rays)
ema/MUng from a single point.
A careful reading of this phrase will make
it clear at once that one complox concept (na
mely, ray, Or halI-lino) is used in the defnition
o( an angle.
Obviously, we should have given the defni
tion of this notion earlier with the help of the
Basic Concepts. This is rather easy to do. The
reader cau check to see how much he is now
i mbued with the spirit of deducti on SlId
armed with a list. of axioms, can try tsolv
the problem.
II it turned out that i n employing the Basic
Concopts, it was i mpossiblo to defne a ray,
thon One would have to place t bis notion i n the
category of Basic Concepts.
In general , all remaining notions and defni
tions aro introduced wHh the aid of the Basic
Concepts, and also (take note I) of those axioms
which are estabU hed by U (or the Basic Cou
cepts.
There remains the last,
Stage 4. Statement 0/ Theorems. Pro% / The
orems.
With regard to our concepts (basic and non
basic) we express propositions, theorems, which
wo prove.
That, properly speaking, fOl'ms the subject
malter of geometry.
[ should like to repeat onco again that when
stated in thos terms, geometry is converted
into an ahsolutely abstract game, like, say,
ches.
44
'rhcre, too, we have Basic Concepts, called
chessmen. The axioms are t he coll ection of
rules o[ t he gamo. Finally, t be.'e are theorems.
Actually, only One theorem: bow to checkmate
the opponent.
In solving this "theorem", a player proves
dozens o[ lemmas (auxiliary theorems) i n the
course of a game, each time slecting the bt
(in his opinion) move in a givon position.
Incidentally, there is a di ference botwoeD
games and g ometry. It consists ill the lact that
the partners very often produce incorrect proof.
In chess, (or example, no strict logical criteria
for evaluating every movo or posi tion have yet
been evolved. I n geometry they have. Here, i t
i s always possible to establish whether 8 newly
formulated theorem rontradicts earlier theorems,
and hence runs countor to still earlier ones,
aud consequently . . . Unravelling the roll to the
end, W arrive at two possi bilities: either we
have erred in our reasoning, or the theorem
just formulated is erroneous.
The formar possi bility is of little intarest to
scionce: the only thing it shows is that we have
handled the mathomatics poorly. "ut i o the
latter cas there is o(teo a definite and very
i mportant result. I f we have bcome convi nced
that our !lypotbe is (theorem) is wroug, then
other theorems are right, namely tbos which
contradict our OWII. I f thero is only one sucb
contradicting theorem, then wo have proven i t
by our reasoning.
This last paragraph, though perhaps rather
nebulous and abstract ill form, is an explana
tion of a scheme tha is very common in geo-
45
metry (and mathematics generally). I t go by
the name oC reductio ad absurdum, Or indiret
proof.
Coming down to earth again, lel U8 lake a
speci fc cas to prove.
Let there be two perpendicular dropped onto
& straight l i oe. Using radian measure of angles
aod writing in place of 90 degrees, wo lnd
two, and only two, varianlS: either they meet
al some point C or they do not intersct at all.
Let U prove that the scond theorem is correct.
We do so by the mothod of reductio ad ahsurdum.
Asume that tbo first supposition is ful flled
and that the two porpeodicular l i nes intersect.
Then wo have a triangle ABC (for trianglo we
will U the symbol 6, Cor aogle the symbol L).
The remarkable thing hore is that the exterior
L B is equal . to lhe ioterior LA. And of cours
tbe exterior LA is equal to the i ntorior LB.
But there exists a t heorem (we will take it
to b true): "An exterior angle of a triangle is
always greater thnn any interior aogle not ad
jacen t to i t . "
Our triaogle dos not satisfy this theorem.
Hence there can b no such triangle. Consequeot
Iy, wo are in error.
A check of the reasoning shows that everything
is correct. I 1ence, the error was made at the very
bginning, when i t was asumed tho perpendi.
cular lines intersect.
Thus, perpendicular lines do not intersct.
That has bon proved rigorously. Euclid called
nOniotersctiog lines parallel lines. For the time
being wo too wl U tnis terminology.
4
C
To summarize, then, we have foulld lhat two
straight lines perpendicnJnr to a common straight
line are parallel. We shollld also prove that
the straight lines do oot intersct in the lo
wer haH-plane either. But that would simply
bo repeating the preceding proof, and our time
is limited.
r n carrying Ollt the proof we relied 00 the
theorem of the exterior angle of a triangle.
The alert reader will of COII1 se thal tho whole
example is very i mportant for what is to fol
low, and so without any more digressions we
will prove this theorem too. I t is oC ullimat
importanco to u, and to the entiro story invol
ving the flth postulato.
True, the postulate i tslf has not yet beeo
formulated in any way, but tho whole story
of the ffth postulate started with this very
theorem.
Let thero h a 6 ABC. Lookl The exterior
angle C" is clearly indicated by tbe arc. We
47
hall provo th.L it is greater than any interior
angle not adjacent to i ] that i lo say, @Udvl'
lhan LA and g/ealer than LB, We slart wilh B,
Divide side BC by the point D into two equal
parts and draw a straight line through A and D,
On this line, mark of a segment DE equal
to AD and conned points E and C by a straight
line.
The triangles A BD and DEC aro congruent.
Indeed, segments AD=DE and BD=DC as gi
von in the COD truction. The anglos CDE and
ADB are equal because they are vertical anglos.
Hence, tho triangles 0D congrUent on tho
basis of a familiar critorion.
But then LB (or angle ABC) is equal to
angle BCEI And notel Angle BCE is only a
part of angle C,,,.
Thus, the entire angle C , is greater (natu
rally greater, for the whole is always greater
than One of its parts) than angle B.
Some doubt remains about angle A. It i s
immediately felt that our construction will not
b of any particular help, since i n the fgure
angle A is cut into two parts. I t would be good
to put it in the position of anglo B. Perhaps
we should draw a straight line from the vertex
4
B and repeat our construction and proof. But
then angle C , will be located othemise.
A complete analogy would result if we pro
longed the side BC and regarded the new angle
N.
Angle N is of cours greater than angle A .
Wo have jut proved as much.
An inspirationl Angle N equals angle Cm
becaue they are vertical angles.
That is all.
An exterior angle of a triangle is greater than
any Interior angle not adjacent to it. We havo
proven this and we can now cros out the
doubt we had on page 46 about the validi ty of
the theorem.
I f we go over the path traversd with excee
ding care . . . And if we check to see which axioms
have been utilized in the proof of the theorem
of the exterior angle. . . To do this we would
of course have to verify the axioms that were
usd in proving tho theorems of the congruence
of the triangles and the equality of vertical
aogle.
Now if all that were done, we would find thaL
W have utilized practically all of the axioms.
9W
49
But nowhere have we taken advantage eilher
of the very nolion of noninterscting (parallel)
straight lines, nor (all the more sol) of theo
rems Or axioms concering such straight lioes.
The reader can ea:ily veIify this by taking
the list of axioms and analyzing all the Con
cepts that are needed for the theorem of an ex
terior angle aod for all auxiliary theorems.
Our detour has been too long and it is ti me
to return to the axioms.
First, let us fgure out what logical require
ments tbey must satisfy.
Only two: (1) completeness and (2) indepen
dence.
The frst signi 6es tbat tbere must be a suf
fcient number of axioms to prove or disprove
any possi ble a srtion concering our pri mary
Basic Concept or the more Complex Concepts
built up from tbem.
The scond implies that we did not take too
many axioms. We have just exactly the number
we need. And Dot a si ngle one of Lhe axioms cno
be proved or disproved with the aid of the
otbers.
50
.
Both these demands may be formulated in a
sIngle statement. The axioms must be necessary
and suffcient.
Nosi ty is a requi rment of completenes.
Suffcien
7
y is a requirement of independence.
To put It very roughly, the requirement of
necesity and suffciency signify that there must
be exactly the number of axioms as is needed
neither more nor less.
'
Now [or one very important refnement.
From the independence of the axioms ther
foUows straightway their consistency. I ndeed,
if in our development of geometl'y we at Sme
stage arri ve at a theorem that contradicts the
rest, this "ill be a clear unpleasant indication
that there is something wrong in the foundation.
Namely, that one axiom (or sveral) contradicts
the rest. And if there is an inconsistency that
R0 they are not independent.
'
Actually, all thes logical arguments ar ex
tremely simple. But i n a lt reading they may
appear rather I nvolved. My Sugstion is for the
reader to go over them once more.
For tho present I would emphasize once again
!hat the rquirement of independence of axioms
S stronger and mor rigid than the requirment
of consistency.
The axioms may be consistent but fom- this
consislency it dos not yet c1ealy lollow
A
that
One of them might not be a corollary of the
other. Perhaps it is a theorem. Naturally when
a matematician proposs a system of geoametri
cal axlOIS, be IS obliged to prve their indepen
dencel Let us stop our chain of rea oning at l itis
paint. There will be time and opportunity to
4"
51
retllrn to them again. We will not mis the op
porttmity and will not los time either, of that
I am certain.
.
Although everything that has iu
;
t
.
ben wrIt
ten is rather simple, and I am posItive the rea
der thinks 8 tOO, Ellclid did not know any of
it. Intuitivaly ha felt it all, ut he could not
formulate it in a clear-cut logical sheme.
Now a rigorous statemant of the
roblem
.
of
the independence of axioms or tho flgorou l l1~
trod uction of tho Basic Concepts was generally
beyond the ken not only of the Greeks
.
but of
mathematicians in all ages and peoples fight up
to the f9th century.
.
Both the axiomatics and tha proofs provIded
by Euclid are actually a rather varkol
.
oured
mixture of intuition and logical lacunae-If ona
regards them from tho standpoint of today.
Yet on the otber hand, Euclid advanced s
far aad s crucially along the road to rigorous
logic that all othe
textoos, and all other
"elaments" current I n antIquIty palad comple
tely when compared with the E lemn/so
.
When the Greeks spoke 01 Homer they sImply
said the "pot", and when the Greeks recall
Euclid they said the "maker of the E lemenls .
All redecessors on the deductive pathway of
gemetric constructions were forgottn .
.
There remained the Elements and their crea-
tor Euclid.
.
Although the thirteen books writtn by Euclid
are believed to contain mainly the
.
re
ults of
others, and lor this reason the questIOn IS often
debated as t whether ho may be clasd
s one
of the greatest mathematicians, ho was WIthout
52
doubt a t<acher of tho Irt magnitude
.
We may
also add that he was apparnLly an inspird and
veraLiIe scholar, for in addition to the Ele
ments he also wrot E ilnl of Music, Optics,
Catoptrica, Data Phaelorn (a work on astro
nomy), Introuctio haonica; then also works
that came down to us aod disappeared: the Po
rlsms (in three boks), Conics (in four books),
Pesti v (in two books) , Sur/acLoci, On di
vision and a Bok 0/ Fallacies.
A very impressive list.
Most of the books, it is true, make no original
contributions, but the output of work is tremen
dous. Incidentally, the Data was highly valued
by Newton, which is a rather solid recommen
dation. Euclid apparntly advanced substantial
ly the highly complex and exciting division of
Greek geometry devoted to the teaching of co
nic stions. Howover, he did not include thes
results in the Elemnts, since there was a cnr
rent view that this branch was unworthy of
"pure mathematics, whos aim is t bring man
closr to god o
53
It was again Plato who decided why precisly
the theory of conic sctions did not bring one
closr to the divine. The point was that Plato
viewed as heresy the W in geometry of any in
struments other than tho compas and the
straight-dge, or-what is Iho same thing-the U
of loi other than the circle and the straight line
(which loci were neded in the study of conic
sctions). Plato pasionately denounced the bril
liant geometrician Monaechmus (incidentally his
friend), who demonslrated that the slution of
the notorious problom of duplicating the cube,
also thaI of tristing an angle, is found rather
simply if U is mado of new geometrical instru
ment.
PlalO maintained that all of that "spoils and
destroys the good of geometry, for geometry thu
strays away from incorporeal and mentally per
ceivable things and moves towards the snsorial ,
making U of bodies that are needed i n the ap
plicatioo of instruments of vulgar handi
craft".
Obviously this rbuke frightened poor Euclid,
and his work on conic sctions vaoished without
a trace.
There would sem to be smething in the E I
mnt. dealing with regular solids (polyhedrons)
that blongs to him. I n the thirteonth bok it is
proved that there exist only fve diferenl types
01 such solids. This is a brilliant, unexpected,
celebrated . . . clasical result.
Generally speaking, there is much in the Ek
mnts other than geometry. They contain certain
esntials of the theory of num brs and the geo
metrical theory of irrational quaotities. The thre
54
l
f O0"
tor of the Elements".
Of al l possible stalements of the ffth postu
late, Enclid chos the most i ntricate and cum
brome one. 'Vhy? To answer, let U se how
he conslructs geometry.
After tbe axioms aod postulates, Euclid na
turally proves theorems. He proves 2 theorems
straight 01 without once using tbe fth postu
late. I t is ool nceded. All 2 8 indifferent to
tbe ffth postulate, lor, B they sy, they rofer
to absoluto geometry.
Among tho twenty-.ight there is also a theo
rem of the exterior angle of a triangle. In Eu
clid's list it is No. 16. The list terminates with,
as you can easily i magine, No. 21 aod No. 28.
Thes theorems contain the so-alled "diret the
ory" of parallel lioes. We shall prove them to
gether.
Let two straight l i nes b intercted by a
third at points P and P ,.
It is assrted that il angl A eals angle A "
the straight lines are parallel.
"
,
.
~
58
Working hy the reductio ad absurdum method,
we frst asume that the straight lines interct
at poin t C. Then we get a triangle P P, C, whos
exterior angle A , is equal to the intrior angle
A not adjacent to it. But this is impossible.
The theorem "An exterior angle of a triangle is
always greater than any i ntrior angle not ad
jacnt to W' dos not allow this to ocurl
I lence, tbo straight lines cannot i ntersct when
produced LO tho right.
There is a sond posi bility. The straight li
nes i ntorst at point C ,. Then we get the trian
gle PP,C, for which angle B is an exterior ang
le and B _ is an interior angle not adjacent to
B.
But LB=LA; LB, =LA " they being ver
tical angles.
But LA =LA , (by hypothesis); benco, LB=
=
LB
,
.
Actually that complets the proof.
For the hypothetical triangle PP ,C g angle B
is an exterior angle and B, is an i nterior one
not adjacent to it. And tboy ar equal. Which
is i mposible. Cnsquently, the triangle PP,C,
cannot exist. Henco, tbo straight lines do not
intert i n point C; eitber.
That completes the proof of the theorem .
It is obvious to tho roader that B and B g
were introduced so that for the hypothetical trian
gle PP,C, we could completely duplicate the
situation that immediately aros for triangle
P PI C (tho lrst triangle).
Now, so as to completely repeat Euclid, let
u introduce four more angles into our drawing.
A glance at the fgure will indicate which ones.
59
From the equality - A = LA there straight
way follow a whole family of equalitie.
1 . LB=LA ,; LC=LD, ; the angles ar
called "oppo ite exterior angles".
2. LA =LB,; LD=LC,; thes a called
"opposite interior angles".
3
. LD=LD, ; LC=LC, ; LB=LB, and,
naturally, LA = LA _. All thes angles afe
called corresponding angles.
LDt LB, =",
L
A LC, = ",
L
C LA, =1,
LB
+
LD, ".
Her, we have interior and exterior agls on
On si.
Obeying the generally accepted order of things,
I listedall twelve equalities and now regrt it.
So many can easily obscure a clear matter. Any
single ooe would suffce. Tha other eleven are
immediately obtained if even one is valid. We
60
startd with the equality LA = LA . But any
other ooe would ba ve beo perfectly suitable.
We proved that i f aoy one of the twelve equa
lities is ful flled, then the straight lines B pa
rallel. This is the esnce of Euclid's two the
orems, No. 27 and No. 2.
Jncidentally, it is worth rcalling at this
point that the theorem about tbe parallel oature
of two lines perpendicular to a common straight
line-tha frst theorem proved in this book-is
a special cas of Our theorem of parallel lines.
Upoo proviog a theorem, the geometer always
investigates the convers. In tha convers, one
proces from that which is proved in the dirct
theorem, aod, naturally, the attempt is made to
prove what is already given in the direct theorem.
One of the most common logical mistakes of
bginners is conneted wiLh direct and conver
theorems. It Is casually thought by many that
the conver of a theorem lollows diretly from
the theorem itslf.
To disprove this, let me cite the familiar rea
sning of Captain Wrungal of child.ood fame
which I have kept in my memory all thes
years lor just such a cas.
t6cf 60tc.m
Any bering is 6sb
LY theem
(Tbe tberm 0 Capin
Wrng.l)
Any fsb W a bering
In keping with certain traditions of popular
sience literature, one adds at this pOint that
the above example is just a joke. But I won't
bother to do that.
61
Example taken from geometry (Euclidean):
r% tht0tf0
I . If B 'be lri.ngle
ABC and A,B,C, the
,ide AB=A,B,:
AC -Aiel and
LA = LA,. the.
" ABC = "A,B,C,.
I I. Two linos perpndi.
cular to M common
stright lino g-
Wc.
I l l . II " ABC i. similar
to b A, D,C then
AB AC
AlB,
=
AlGI'
L0DVt0 lhf0tfm6
. If " ABC=" A,B
I
C"
lu0n lb0 side
AB=A,B,.
AC =A,C, and
LA=LA, .
I I . l two Q!lel M
gbt liDO cut by
a trnsveral. tboy
arc prpndicular t.
l,
H. l h [uQHluu
AB w
AI
B
I
-
Aiel
hold. lor lb0 triang
Ics ABC and AIBIC
l.
then the triangle
T simi lar.
In Example IV, 0 shall co1ebrate by combi
ning lour difcrn theorems into one.
IV. If " ABC l8 an i m I . II in " ABC
elo trianglo
|
, LA = LC:
(AB - BC), Ihen: 2) lb. a1li1udes or
|
L
A
-LC:
the mediaD or Ibe
2) tbe altitude or bitor 01 I bo aug
Lhe medians. or tho les A and C m-
bietor of Lbo ang- m. then Lbe ltmuge
les w and C Bg- ABC & .n isosceles
aI triangle (AB = BC)
In thes examples, al l the direct theorems are
correct. I t is lelt to the reader to fgure out wheth
er the convers theorems are also valid.
It is a curious Iact, incidentally, that vory
olten, though the COn vers is qui te correct, it
62
is Iar more complicated to lnd its proof than
the proof 01 the direct theorem. Naturally,
there is such 8 cas in our examples as well.
Theorm 2 (Example IV)-the equality of bi
sctors i n an isosceles triangle-has a simple
prool, whereas the convers (which is an absolu
tely correct theorem) is somewhat 01 a tricky
geometrical problem.
With the theorem 01 parallols Ilroved, lot us
try the convers. We lormulate it as lollows:
Dlr t Mmm 0
pranela
1/ tt U"I cut bv
thid 4I d the Tend, il
.A + .C, _ W (or a.v
one Df th JZ eqUlittt.
gfven <arller ts fulflled) ,
lhn. lh Unu au parallel.
Con,",* tbeore" 0
geM
II two Unc. dre prallel,
thIr 1M ,"terud".
them will
PM
LA +LC, =l (oranv of
the JZ equalitie, liven
.arller will m ''' l'f.d).
The convors theorem of parallel lines was
laken by Euclid os the Fiflh Postulato, though
Euclid's lormulation 01 tho fIth po tulate is
somewhat different.
Recall tho defnition given at the start of this
chapter. I t is well worth the trouble. Here it is.
63
Postulate V. 1/ tw lines ae cut by a trans
vrsl and the sm 0/ th illtelor angles on ole
sid 0/ the transvsl is less thn a slraight an
gle (thaI is, the sm LA+LC1 is less lhal
2" (180,, t t lins will met i/ pr
a will met on Ihat sid of Ih Iransvrsl.
Both the purposfully cumbrsme way in
which Euclid introduced the ffth postulate and
the fundamental 2 theorms which preceded it
and which were proved quHe independently of
it, all go to demonstrate the amazing intuition
of Euclid or of the one he borrowed the idea
frOOl (if that persn existed).
I shall try to explain myslf and suhstantiate
my claim. This is all the more pleasant a task,
since it will be quite impossible to refute what
I have to say. There are no facts at all, thus
opening wide all opportunities for an historico
psychological investigation.
Let us examine the initial data.
By the time the Elemnts were writteo, geo
metry had already grown int a mature, well
elaborated science.
Behind it lay thre hundred years of develop
ment and dozens 01 intricate problems solved,
aod sveral tough uoresl ved ones like the du-
W
6
plication of tho cube. Thanks to Plato and Aris
totle, the deductive scheme was established, had
gained recognition and was lourishing.
The historian or geometry could already revel
in two %M names of celebrated mathematiciaJ.
1 give this numbr meaning thos scholars whos
names have come down to us. For each one
of them there ar undoubtedly at least ten go
melers of lesr magnitude whos names never
roached us.
Practically all were in agreomont that geomet
ry shoud develop 00 the basis of axioms. Ob
viously, the majority were io full accord with
Aristotle in that axioms and tho basic notions
should satisfy the requirement of being obvious.
As Aristotle put it, the formulation of the axi
oms themslves is a matter of too grat a res
ponsibility to entrust to mathematicians. I t is
the supreme problem.
Naturally, then, only the most worthy were
admitted to resolve it.
Philosophers, in other words.
Whether tbo geomelers belioved Aristotle or
not, is not tho point; the point is that with Aris ..
totlo ono agres.
There can bo no doubt that before Euclid 8
lime attempt bad bon made (and numerous
one) to provo the convrs 0/ t therem 0/ pa
allel lines. And 1 personally think tbat by Eu
clid's time it was clear that two solutions exis
ted:
1 . To prove the convs therem of paallels
on the bais of the remaining postulates of geo
metry, and, by the rule of the game, wi thout
the intrduction of any additional potulates.
65
The adherents of tbis shol mu.t have pr
sumed that the conver theorem of parallels
was nothing more than a complicated theorem
that followed unavoidably from the other pos
tulate.
2. To the (our postulates it is posible to add
a ffth such that the cnvers threm of paal
lels would readily be obtained with its aid. And
this additional postulate might be formulated
in such manner that it would appear natural and
obvious in the extreme.
It is hard to believe that the predeesor Md
contemporaries of Euclid-all brilliant geome
tricians of the age of fourishing learning-could
not conjure up a whole galaxy of equivalent and
"obviou" statements of the fftb postulate. It
is bard to blieve for the simple reason that
some of them pracLically beg to be stated.
Taking the Grst path, it is quite natural that
nO succes was acWaved either at that time or
during the two thousand years following Euclid.
Today, thanks to Lobacbevsky, we know that
success was out of the question. But that is what
we know today.
All the more aUuring was, most apparntly,
the scond posibility: to propOso an equivalent
but simple and natural postulate-to smear over
and co\'er up the unpleasant spot and cal m down.
Numerous commentators of Euclid who dealt
with tho ffth postulate did jut that explicitly
or in veiled form.
I t is imposihle to beliave that such an out
standing mathematician as Euclid who pro!ound
Iy resarched the problem of the ffth postulate
(and tho entire construction of the frst book of
6
tho Elements is witness to this particular atten
tion with respect to the ffth postulate), it is
imposible, I insist, that he did not come ac
ros a number of equivalent and rather natural
formulations 01 the ffth postulate. For instan
co, if We combine the dirct theorem on paral
lels and the flth postulate in Euclideao lorm,
we immediately get:
A now formulation of the filth pstulate,
Through a paint C lying outsid a straight lin
A B in a plaM A BC, it is possible to daw only
One Une tht ds not met AB.
TWs statement is usually attributed to the En
glish mathematician Play(air (18th century), but,
naturally, it was proposd by very many com
montator of Euclid many centuries before Play
fair's time.
"Playlair's axiom" dos look much more na
tural and attractive than Euclid's postulate,
dosn't it?
Here is another formulation. It is usually at
tributed to Legendre, though it too was emplo
yed earlier by Eu.ropean and Oriental geometers.
Legendre's postulate. A ltn perpnicull to,
an a line incline to, a common scant AB, lo
cate In th 80 plan, dnitely met. (Natu-
5
67
rally on the side of the seant where the
inclined line Jorms an acute angle with the 8
cant.)
Again a very pictorial assertion. I n place of
lhe Euclidean postulat we have a special cas.
It wil l readily b seen that this is quite sltffi
cient to provo the fftl! postulate in the Eucli
dean form (the convrs theorem of paral lel
lines). I ncidental ly, for thos who 8 making
their frst acquaintance with gometry, tltis is a
worthy and rather involved problem that merits
ome attention. I will gi ve a few hints and leave
the rest to the reader.
Thos who are not particularly excited about
this proposition can simply skip the mathematics.
But wo will accpt the Legendre postulate-a
line prpendicular to, and a line inclined to a
common scant met-and will prove the ffth
postulate in the Euclidean form, which is the
convs of the thorem of parallels.
First let U prove an auxiliary theorem, a
lemma.
Let two straight lines 1 and 11 be interscted
by a third so that aand the sum a+
+c_ Then, by the direct theorem we know
that these li nes do not met, for they are pa
rallel.
Lt W again investigato the proof of the di
rect theorem.
From point cdrop a perpendicular onto tho
straight line 1.
This can always b done. The appropriMo te
orom was proved witbout a word about parallel
lines_
68
Prove, given our condition (a,
]
), that the
perpendicular ce is located as shown in tbe
drawing.
rove by moans of reductio ad absurdum and
ullllze the theorem on the exterior angle of a
triangle.
We thon have o+u=c . uis tbe un-
known.
Tben we have a+o+u-.
(Recall the hypothesis!)
Now consider +ec
There are three posibilities for the sum of
its angles.
+
+o
+
-
Note: we cannot us the theorem that the sum
of the angle of a triangle is equal to T. This
theorem is a corollary to the parallel postulate.
First examine the hypothesis: ++o+
>
Z
>-
.
.
-
69
Compare this inequality with the equality
LA+LD+LN=r and obtain LN<
.
Now employing Legendre
83
states that white has a winning move. The uSllal
requiremenl in such a position is to find an ele
gaut cOI.ubination of moves. Any dncent ches
player can reslve 9 per cent of such problems
in an hour or s. Yet in 9 cass out of a hun
dred he wouJd never se such a combination in
an actual game.
These remarks ar to forestall any stupid feel
i ngs of supriori ty Over mathematicians 01 earl
ier ages. I t is true that most of the theorms in
volving proof of the ffth postulal< are quite ele
mentary in their logic, and quil< accessible to
grade-school students. What is more, the logi
cal errors of thos who thought they had proved
the ffth postulate are also very elementary. But
tbe elementary nature is ovident ouly today. I n
the very same fashion, twenty years hence ma
ny of the problems that plague sientist< nowa
days will appear ridiculously simple and naive.
That is wbat SO ofl<n happens in physics.
Alter tbis heavy dos of general discusion, i t
i s high time to rturo to the filth postulate.
I have time aod again repeated (the rader
will have to excus mc-I admit I ' ll havo to do
i t again), th.t aU attempt at a proof wer mo
tivated actually by a single factor: a certain
lack of elegance, a lack of beauty, as the artist
would say.
I t rankled and i t rulned the aethetic feelings
of scholar by its complexity. Tho reaction to it
was the same in ancient Grce, in Peria and
in Europ.
How delightful was the indignaLion of one of
tho greatest mathematicians of Lhe Arabic worl d,
Omar Khoyyam.
8
" . . . Euclid thought that the reasn for the in
tersction of straight lines was that the two an
gles (iol<rior angle on One side-Smilga) are
les than two right angles.
"I n s believing be was right, but it can be
proved only with the aid of supplementary argu
ments. (Kbayyam hlieved thaL he had proved
the ffth postulal<-Smilga) . . . But Euclid accep
Led this prmis and proceded from it without
proof. I swear upon my l i fe . . . that here we Ded
tho aid of reason, and that is it right. .. "
"How could Euclid have permitted himself to
enter this statement in the introduction (which
meaDS choosing i t as ao uiom.-Smilga) whe
reas he proved far mor simple fact . . .
Lot U % how the struggle went with the ffth
postulal<. There were thr canonical approa
ches.
1 . A postulat equivalent to the Euclidean ono
was opuly proposd. Thes authors formed a
group called the "modest" or "pesmistic" trnd.
2. Reductio ad absurdum is one of the most
elegant and powerful of logical methods of sol-
85
ving mathematical problems. Here, no new pos
tulatM were i ntroduced.
A theorem was formulated contrary in mean
ing to tho fltb postulate or to One of its equiva
lents; tbis was followed by the elaboration of
diversifed corollaries i n the hope that SOner or
later al l this would lead to a contradiction,
which would ipso facto prove tbat tbe fftb pos
tulate followed from the other axioms, and tbe
problem would be solved.
This is tbe optimistic, presumptuous trend.
3. And, fnally, we bavo tbe group of "eclectics".
They proved some therem equivalent to the
ffth po tulale. And they proved it with the un
witting employment of some other equivalent
of Euclid's postulate.
Trend No. 2, the opti mists, had the hardet
timo. They kept stringing out the chain of their
tbeorms, foundering more and more in tho co
roll aries, and still lnding no contradictions.
From the vantage point of today we realize
that tbis gronp of mathemalicians actually were
proving the initial theorems of non-Euclidean
8
geo
d
is a traditional title lor al l scholr, si nce III
thos days the hierarchical ladder of scientifc
knowledge was apparntly not so involved. Abul
lath means the falher of Falh.
Khayyam was born i o ishaput, which was olle
of the chief cities of glorious Khorassan.
Khayyam-wh:t we have taken as the last
namemeaJl tent-maker. Most l i kely his father
or grandfather was so engaged.
.
I bn I brahim is Ihe SOn of Ibrahim.
Finally, Omar, is the given namo.
In short Omsr Khayyam, who conquered tbo
West in tae 19th century and conquered it as
a pot.
He was lst translated i nto English and camo
out in 25 edi tions last contury. In England and
America admiration for Khayyam developed i n
to 3n epidemic. He was quoted and praisd, and
clubs named alter bi m sprang up everywhere.
Willy nilly we shall h3\e t
delve i no he li
terary side of Khayyam. HIS potry 15 I
.
odeed
beautiful' but his 0 ceptional populanty IS due
possibly
'
to a certai n "marvellous revelation".
It turned out that a thousand years ago, some
where i n Turkey, or India, there l i ved a man
whos thoughts and emotions excited people liv
ing in the modern age 01 the 19th century.
More he cast tbe thougbts arid emotions i n mag
nifcnt potical form, which was i ndeed ama
zing.
True, ill his home land he was bardly at al l
known as a pot.
Thus aros two Khayyams.
In the West was the pot.
94
In the Enst, the mathematician, astronomer
and pbi losopher. Oh East is East aud West is
West.
Who is this Omar Khayyam?
Since I lean mor to tho oriental version, let
us bgin our story of the honourable wi ma.n
and i mam Omar al-Khayyam of Nishapur, may
Allah sanctify his dear sul.
"In the name of the gracious and merciful
Allah, prais Allah, the lord of the worlds, and
blesing unto all his prophets. "
Thus did Khayyam, bound by a rigid tradi
tional form, begin his marvellous "Treatis on
tbe Proofs of Problems of Algebra and al-MuI
qabalah", a mathematical work tbat was roughly
fve hundred years in advance of the mathema
tics of the Occident.
This work of the "greatest geometer of the
East", as that remarkable encyclopacdi t of the
Orient, the Arab l bn-Haldun wrote of hi m la
tor, contains the frst systematic theory of thiro
degre algebraiC equations. It was well known
95
among Arabian maLhematicians and undoubted
ly exerted a tremeudous or cL Oil the develoJ
ment 01 mathematics in the East. I n EuroJle,
the frst and rather nebulous reference to it U
curs only in the year 1 74.
The historian actually only says that it would
sem, by the title of the manusript, which is
in the Leyden Musum, that one may suspect
that it contains something about equations of
tho third degre, but ... "It is such a pity that
none of tbos who know Arabic has 8JY Laste
for mathematics and none of thos who have
mastered mathematics has any taste for Arabian
literature.
When the treatis of Khayyam wus fnally
road, it was found that his results were repeated
(and in many respects surpassd) by no other
than Descartes. I ncidentally, it is possible tbaL
in yet another tratis that has ben lost irre
trievably Omar Khayyam woot much fartlior.
Who knows?
We know of yet anotber treatis of Omar
Khayyam, to wit: "Commentaries On tbe Di ffi
culties in the Introductions to the Books of
Euclid. " Tbis composition of Lhe most glorious
sheikb, imam, Of tho Proof of Truth, of Abnl
fath 'Omar ihn I brahTm al-KhayyamT is in tllree
books.
Again, this treatis, in the beginning, lacks
originality: U[ n the name of Allah, so gracious
and merciful, Prais Allah, tho lord of grace
and mercy, alld peace be unto his slaves and
in particular unto Muhammad, the lord of tho
prophets, and UJ1to all his pure clan."
All this ritual breaks of suddenly just a
96
I ine down: "The study of the sciences and the
comprebension of tbem by means of true proofs
is necesary for him who seks salvation and
happiness. "
Tbat's enough. He ''ho was eager to understand
did. Already too much was said. On went th
soul-slvaging ritual.
"And especially (of cours, most naturally)
this refers to the general notions and laws to
which one resorts io studios of the hereafter,
proof of the existence of tho soul and its eter
nalnes, comprehension of the quali ties tbat are
neessary for the existence of tbe Al mighty and
Ius magnifcence (Khayyam is worried beyond
reason ahout the magni fcence of Allah), the an
gels, the order of creation and proof ol the pro
pheie of the lord, the prophet ( 1uhammad,
that is), to the order and prohibitions of which
bow i n obedience all creatures (incidentally,
tbere was a time-in Medina-when Muhammad
introduced a very rigorous order and the best of
tbo creatures of Allah were ever at attontion)
in accord with the pleasure of the Almighty Allah
and the power of man."
What a Dawless piece of writing, it would
sem.
Yes, it would sem, for the entire paragraph
is one solid heresy, extremely dangerous to any
orthodox preacber of I lam.
Let the worshiper of Aristotle smooth over
his writing with hypocritically pious phrass,
for he will be understood by thos 01 the same
views and thos of other views as well.
Omar's luck tbat, in general, Islam was a morc
tolerant religion than Christianity. On tho ave-
71W
97
rage, that is. There was no burning at tbe ste.
But one could expoct, wh.n needed,
*
SWIft
plUJge of tbe dagger. Very much so, In fact.
Even for just a tiny bit of heresy. On the oth r
hand, one could get around tbat too.
,
Then follows the treatis p,oper. (We shall
havo moro to say about it later on.) Al l the way
along, however, Omar put i n
.
the proper pro
portions of glory to the Al mIghty Allah, and
to his greatest creation, Muham mad, and to tbe
whole l ineage of Muhammad, to the great belp
of Allah and more and more.
Prais the LordI
How merry and nice it was ror his creations.
His creatures I mean. ote however that the
merciful srvants of tbe merciful Christ pushed
the morciful AUah into the backgrouud
.
and
again We begin "in the name of the gracIOus
and merciful Allah".
We I .. ,OW hardly anything at all about Omar
Khayyam, only a few fragmentaq
,
bit" here
.
an
there. By way of complicated
.
astronom
cal
computations on the basis of lDd
roct rdlDg,
tbe dates of his life are, approXlmately, fed
at 108 and 1 131. Or from 1040 to 1 122. Or
from 1 to 1 1 22.
Ho was born in Nishapur. At that time, the
city was located in the emirat
.
of Khoras.
Today, Nishapur is on tho terrttory of Ir
?
n.
Omar wrote his verss i n the litera," PersIan
languag, and his learned studies in Araic.
Since, as linguists explain, both
l
0dern Per
lan
and Tajik developed out of medIeval PerSIan,
we may justifably say, today, tiat Kbayyam
is a Persian poet and a Taji k poet.
98
A few years prior to tbe birth of Omar Khay
yarn, that "egion of tbe "calm and lazing" Orient
was the scene of bitter battles, and the leaders
of the nomad Sljuks (Turk mens) frst routed
the earlier sultans and then st up a collosal
empire alld a nice fresh dynasty of Seljukiall
sul tans.
What followed was rather standurd. Fighting
for the tilrone among tbe aspirants. Tho sultans
fghting feudal lords aud frenzied attempts of
tbe Leudals to rule by themselves, indepeudently.
I R about one hundred and twenty years the em
pire fell to piees completely. But that period
of time, which to history is minuscule, to a
human being is quite enough.
Khayyam l ived in tie empire of tbe Sljuks
and lived quietly for a long time, for he had
8 patron. A strong protetor.
The great vizier izam-alMulk.
Nizam-al-Mulk was possd witb the idea of
a strong state. And he furthered it in many
ways. He apparently believed tlat culture and
learing would strengthen his empire and so,
like thos dear Ptolemys of antiquity, be patro
nized his cholar in many a way.
He himsU was not above l iterary forms and
wrote a ratier srious, fundamental and very
interesting-to historians-work entitled the Book
oj Gvmmellt-a srt 01 handbook ror sultans
who neded training (thoy certainly did). In this
10rk of popularization be engaged the srviceS
of his sholars and in particular thos of Omar
Khayyam.
BuL before Omar enterd into tbe srvice of
Nizam-al-Mulk ho had endured much indeed.
9
When a sullBn is stting II all empire, tbe inlla
hiuots do not havo it easy at all .
There is practically no information about tbe
youth of Omar, other than that he may have
studied in 'ishapur.
The tory gos that "at the age of sventeen
years ho allained profound knowledge in al l fields
of philosophy".
It is said that ho was "a proroundly I. "ow
lodgeable man in li nguistics, Muslim law and
history" and was a rollower or Aviconna (Abu
Ali ibn ina).
It is also rolated that he had a marvellous
memory and that on one ocasion he learned a
whole book by heart after reading i t sven 1lR0S.
Some said that he was a " ago with extensive
knowledge in all felds or philosophy, especially
mathematic ".
I n 0 word, then, all surce (and al 0 the
writings of Khayyam himslf) describo a man
wilh encyclopa die knowledge and a mind of
exceptional gifts and per picacity.
At the bginning, however, al l thes good
points worked mor against him than for him.
He wa compelled to leave Rhors n, and we
lnd Omar Khayyam i n Samarkaud.
Qui te naturally, a patron was neded. And
Omar found him. We do not know how, but
he did. This "marvellous and incomparable judge
of judges the i mam Abu-Tahir, may Allah con
tinue his ris and may Allah ca t aside thos
who are envious and wish him evil".
To put it simply, this was lhe chief judge of
Samarkand, a high-placed official. But only Al
lah realJy knows whether he po8 d evon a
1 0
mi
u
aotlr b m8tt Wlb to Hul taB
w $a00c0 t6t u0u6, 0t 0ll<t, ttul.
The writer of such "radiant" verss is defnitely
not a man with an optimistic turn of mind.
Cmplet spiritual isolation and nO breaks i n
the gloom.
o0 tb8t uY0t0 0W W6 ca The k,
BHu008t crawling cop's W6 liYo an0 08
)l 00t
0t han08 t0 t 0t holp-for It
9 m
00
t08 @ 0u or I .
'Tis all a uB 00aW 0 N@bl& a00 Dais
Wb
hy 00t k00wiug,
D0t vrmr, hko at8t wtlly-aihy oi
00 0ut 0 l, M Wm a00
l&e
kB0w 00l Uhtt
r. "iUy-nilly b0iog.
'
X00 KH0W, my Itteoda,bow l0o@aion m Houae
For & new M8tr@0 00 mK6 Carue:
lY0% 00 Dattun 88M0 t0m m M,
00 took tho naughter 0 tbo Vine t bg0u&.
A, fl lU6 Lu
vry
.
8e and period of buman history,
matrial! lie Ideas have i nspired many think
ers.
In the cas of Kbayyam tbore is nO need, how
ov
ble
.
or profound persn. We can understand and
lustlfy but we cannot agree.
Literary critics do not speak so frankly, per
haps, becaus tbe potry of Omar Khayyam is
frmly placed along with the greats of world
cuI ture and s also is Khayyam the man-canon
Ized.
But if I
y, tho
.
ugh paying full due to his supremo poet
Ical skll.
However, the charm lies in the iact that our
h
.
ypothetical image is but a caricature, and lop
SIded at that. Becaus Khayyam was not a
poc
by profesion. He was a scholar. His
buslOes was learning. Verss? Only for Iecrea.
tlOO.
Houris and wine? If Omar had but i mbibed
a hundredth part of tho wine that fows through
1 1 5
his verss. I f his harem had contained 8 lenth
of tho beauties whos praiss he sang-he would
not have strength left for anything els.
Yet all his contemporaries-well-wishers a
n
of many mathematical historians. Tre algebr
'c
works of Khayyam l-no harm In repeatlDg
it-brilliant. Ho made a thorough study
f the
mathematical legacy 01 the Gre ks. That , n It
slf is quito sme llldertaking requiring year
of work. .
Astronomer. Recall the years he spent sttlOg
up the Isfahan Obsrvatory. You rememer the
constant prolonged astronomical obsrvatIOns he
carried out, the rform of the calendar and the
newly devisd system of chronolog
.
y.
.
Part physicist. He produced a hIghly cunous
treatis on Archimedes' celebrated problem of
King Hiero's golden crown, the problem that
gave ris to Archimedes' law and the tradem
lfa\lshed WIth
Aristotle. This is most evident In hc
v
ay he
refers to Aristotlo-brieDy and lacking lD any
1 1 6
emotion. In place of the name, he writes "phil
ospher".
Philospher and no oriental compliments.
Omar cOd
,
us epithet
.
whon he wanted to.
But he didn t here. Ho did not want emblllsh
ments, the inOation of which he felt s kenly'
he did not want falsly honeyed phrass to sLics
to lamcs that wer rally dear to him.
The philospher was enough.
Generally, wbon Omar gets down to busines
te potical, wurtier, oriental style \'anishc
WIthout a trace. Between the traditional bows
to Allah,
.
Mammad and tho current patron
at the beglomng and end of each piece of writing
we fnd a restrained and resrved text.
'
Re
.
ferences, arguments, draWings, formulas.
Euchd is simply Euclid, and not the prince of
mathem
tici
.
ans
.
Or the beacon of knowledge
.
ApolloDlus IS SImply Apollonius. Ptolemy jusL
Ptolemy. A touch of editing here and there and
the style is that of the twentieth century. Aris
totle is the philospher.
We have strayed a bit. What is interesting
hero is something els. Rocall that "Tho phil
ospher"
.
wrote in a very turgid confusd style.
ny detailed study of his writings is an excep
tionally diffcult job. I ' m sure that today there
are not many specialists i n the histor of phil
osphy that have worked through al\ of Aris
totle '5 leacy in the original Grek. Perhaps only
8 few phtlosphers specializing in the l i fo and
work of Aristotle. ow thore is no doubt that
0
n
ar Khayyam studied aU of the works of the
phIlospher. Yet Aristotle is ouly a small part
of tbe philosophical legacy of Lhe Occident and
1 1 7
Orient that Omar studied, as is s eloquently
witnesd to by references to dozens of divers
ifed fundamental writings.
Speaking of tho volume of digsted literature,
Khayyam is tho envy of any academiciau in
philosphical scionce.
Phi losophy does oot exhaust Omar. He was
als knowledgable in the Koran and fuslim
law.
This is not al l .
He was also an astrologer. We have already
said that Omar knew the true value of astrol
ogy, but a good dos of information has to be
absrbd in order to gra p its rules.
By the way, one of the stories of Omar's
astrological feats makes one think that he was
familiar with the essntials of meterology.
The recolletion is that of an- hami as-Sa
markandi :
" . . . the Sultan snt to Merv to the great hajji
(tbis is followed by a tremendously long name)
to ask the i mam Omar to predict lhe weather
and find out, if they g hunting, whether there
will bo snow and rain on thos days."
Khayyam thought for two day , i ndicated tbe
time, and tben "wont and put the Sultan On
horsback" .
From then on, the action in an- hami 's story
develops liko a standard movie. 0 sOner was
the Sultan ol, than ''black clouds appeared over
the land, the wind blew and snow bgan to fall,
and a fog enveloped the eartl. Thero was geo
eral laughter, and the Sultan wanted
.
to return,
but tho bajji i mam (Khayyam, that IS) told the
Sultan not to worry, for tbere would b no mois-
1 1 8
ture (n the cours
.
of fve days. The Sultan went
on hiS hUntIng triP, the clouds dispersd, and
[or lve days there was no moisturo, and no one
saw any elouds. "
At the end, the narrator adds that Khayyam
as far as be, the narator, knows had no faita
whatsoever in astrology. But e had to b
able to forast tho weather, bcaus that was
one of te sandard demands made by sultans
upon tbelf wlsmen. Consqucntly, he had some
knowle
chus. h, ho
sinned of course, no quesllon 01 It. He smned,
but not excessively.
In any eas his interests arc immeasurably
broader than one might think it one focuss
only on his quatrailS.
.
The amazing thing, howevor, IS that Omsr
never says allyl.hiog about science in his verss.
He wrote an autobiography in lyrics, a confes
sion, you might say, yet not a w
rd
bou
wat
was truly the most important thing In his Ille.
One might think tbat such themos were o
t
side the traditioDs of oriental poetry. Yet WIS
dom and sges were "ery of ton praisd. x|
,
in poetry Omar did Dot care much lor tradltl
ons if he haudled the almighty merc(ful Allah
in such rough fashion. The only thiog lH h,s
poetry that can b regarded as rferring to sien
ce is sma skeptical remarks OD att<mpts at
1 20
learning tho meaning 01 being. Omar Khayyam's
world view is by 00 meanS s misrable and
gloomy.
Tho only way to tie things together is to pre
sume that Omar was simply showing of to llim
sl[ by rojocting all and everything and by not
Inding a Single good word even for mathematics.
Such coquotry is encountered much more f
quently than sme are inclined Lo think. Partic
ularly in tho cas of poets. There is nO reason
to b teo trustlng when i t comes Lo skepticism.
Perhaps more credence can be given to his
third cycle of "civic lyrics". Omar sems to
have been somewhat of an irritable type, with
a rather low opinion of thos about him. But
try to he calm and gOd-natured when surround
ed by knaves, mountebanks, money-grubbers . . .
i f overy single day you lear for the future, i f
i L is only your high po i Lion at the court that
holds in check a pack of thick-skulled scholast
ics ready to devour you in a moment 01 weak
nes, if the position you hold can disappear at
any time becaus 01 a simple slip of the tongue,
or an uncalled-for smile.
Try to bo merry and respect those about you
if every moring you are not suro how tbo day
will ond, if you cannot be like others and if
you have to lio every minute, every sond and
watch others round about you doing the sme
with ovident pleasure. Try all this, and note
too that you have nO one ill whom you can cOn
ldo, for to share such thought is tantamount
to a slf-imposd exile at bst. Try all thes
things, and if YOll have the talent of a poet,
jUlt se wbat kind of verss you will produce.
1 21
But If, while clearly D allting all thes thjngs,
you can continue working i ntensly, remailing
a pesimis, a cyiic and a drunkard only i n
poems, hut i n real l i le spending your time,
energy and oerves i o bili ldiog an obsrvatory,
iovestigating equations of tbe third degree. writ
ing commentaries on Euclid, studying Aristotle
and working wHh pupils... If you are capable
of doing all tbis, heLl I will read your verss
with pleasure. E pccially i f they arc written i n
your ol d age and i f loving pupils remain after
you.
The year 102 was the bginiling of hard times
in the life of Omar Khayyam. In tbat year,
Nizam-al-Mulk-his main patron-was kjlled.
The killing was probably carried out by feu
d.l lords. The murderer was a membr or one
of tbe darkest, most fanatical and strange scts
i n human history: the Ismailians. I recall this
for tbe reasn that th ro is a very curious bllt
obvionsly unauthentic legend to the effect that
Kbayyam, Nizam-aJ-Mulk and the founder of
tbe Ismailisn Sect Hasan Sabbah all studied at
one school and were childhood friends.
I n the same year, Malik-Shah with whom
Omar had been s close also died.
The situation was very had undor the succes
sors, but lalor he was able to arrange his I i le.
A good deal of money was neded for lho ob
srvatory, but tho subsidies were stopped. s
Omar had to Dlake requests her and tbere. Ho
even had to wrile a historico-didaclic lratis,
"Nauruz-Nameh @ whtw, illnong a host of anec
dotes and tale. of eagles, heautifni visages,
steds, aod wino i lbe persistent refrai n that
1 22
J
"MaIik-Shab provided the money for the ob
srvatory, and he patronltcd Dlen of I aang".
But. 1 repeat, things worked out alter all.
First the soo and then tho nopbow of iu,m
al-Mnlk beame viziers. Probably by force of
habit they continued lO support Omar.
Meanwhile. the clergy wer keping B ken eye
0R Khayyam. That he had strayed very far from
orthodox Islam was long since evident. Occasion
ally. the sullen hostility cooled of, but it in
variably boiled up anew. Omar bad to g io
for writing smi-loyal treatiss, but that did
not help very much.
At ti mes he was i ntolerant. When he should
have kept quiet, he entered into discussions
and told sheikhs and imams to their face what
he thought of them. Towards old ag his temper
grw wors, ho was sharp-tongued, and still,
despite hjs glory and high-placed patrons, be
had to make the pilgrimage to Mecca, the hajj.
"And from bis hajj he returned to his home town,
where morrung and eveiling be vi ited the placo
of prayer, hiding his scret which will inevit
ably come to light. He had nO equal in astronomy
and philosophy; in thes felds he was prover
bial. Oh, i f only he had been given the gift
of avoiding i oobedienco to god. "
Thu did tho loyal muslim Djamal ad-Din
ibn al-Kifti write regretfnlly in his Histortes
0/ tM Sages.
I t i s likewis said that towards old age he
ceasd laking pupils and "grudged writing
books" .
Doring the last teo to fiften years he no longer
J i ved at tbe court. He smehow displeasd the
1 23
new Sul tan and ei ther was asked to resign or
was simply dismisd. Perhaps he left of his
Own accord DOt wishing to be asked to go. He
bad no family. The old man was lonely, and
the gratr part of his gloomiest verss were
apparenlly written during this period.
His pupils were, as belore, glad to M hi m,
but he did not sem inclined to receive ther.
To aU this add the fact that Khayyam was
concoited, and "lh the years his conceit grew;
for people of that srt, old age, particularly a
luckless old age, is bard to endure.
That he had a very high opinion of himslf
is acknowledged by his biographer. And his
own treatiss tell the sara story. Evon by orient.
al standards, he would appear to have overdono
the selI-lovation of his persn.
This is how one of his treatiss bgins: "Thes
are the rays that emanat from the throne of
the king of philosophers and the all-inundating
pure light of wisdom of the enlightened, skil
led, outstanding, elevated, sagacious great ce
letial, glorious, worthy lord of the
'
Pror of
Trulh and Conviction, the victor of philosphy
and faith, the phi losopher of both worlds the
10ld sage of bolh Orients Abulfath
'
Ora: ibn
I brlhYr alKhayyarT . . . "
Fourten titles, slf-imposd. After that the
beginning of anothor treatis is a model of od
esty: " . . . the honoured lord, Proal of Truth
philosopher, sholar, sat of faith, king of phil:
osphers of the East and West . . . "
A rather decent description, title-wis, is given
at th bginning of the treatis " anruz-Namch"
whicb was writtell, as you recal l , for the succo-
1 24
1
sors of Malik-Shah: ..... the learned hajji, phil
osopher of the ago, chief of investigatol, king
of scholars . . . "
But i t is curious to not that all "special"
mathematical and phyical-treatiss of Khay
yar begin in a restrained, dry ranner.
Glorifcation appears i n treatiss of a general
nature. It may b that, 10 put i t into modern
lingo, for purposs of publicity he tried to build
up his imag when the treatis could b read
by those that held the strings of power. Natur
ally, such stratagems added yet another humilia
tion to the long list of thos that Khayyam had
to bear. All the more unpleasant to him was this
slf-advertisment. The last piece of ill luck was
that towards the end he experienced real money
dil!culties.
It is doubtful whether he actually lived i n
poverty, as some of his moder biographers
write. Over th& years he held high olls and
most likely had some rsrves. And even t
the very end, despite all tho attacks of the c1er-
1 25
gy, be remained the recognized "king of learned
men". Also, his numerous pupils could uJlport
him i f the necessi ty were real.
So my view is that Omar did not starve and
probably l i ved as prosperously as any small
trader. But expendi tures had to be cut. At any
rate, he complains in a number of quatrains
of poverty and of tbe hard time l i fe was giving
bim:
A, L0VB! c000 00 au0 J Wl0 Mm C0n8QtB
0 88 I08 Mtt cDtm8 0 b0g8 8llt8,
0 Du NalUt it t0 0l8-&ud tbBu
em0ud l u08t tD l08 M88tl9 08
The aged mar was apparently not very happy,
the only thing that remai ned were books. It is
said tbat be died wi tb 8 book of his beloved
Abu Ali ihn-Sina in hi hand.
One need not tbink that he Was always sigh
ing and grioviJlg, but he was a broken man. Ap
parently he did not work during tho last twenty
years of his l i fe, either beaus he had no
strength, or no d0i re. Life was at an end.
He died in 1 128 and even this dato was hit
upon by accidont, thanks to a story reIn ted by
his pupil an- izami 8 amarkandi. I give i t
here i n full, for it is far mOre important for an
understanding of Omnr tbe man than all the
conjetures of bis contemporaries.
An-Nizami 8 amarkandi relates:
"I n 5 ( 1 1 12-1 1 13 A. D. ) the hajji imam
Khayyam and tbo bajji Muzaffar IsfazHri wero
al the court of the Emir Abu a' da i n the quar
ter of slave-trader in Balhn. We met at a merry
meeting. There ( heard that the Proof of Truth
Omar said: 'My tomb shaU b in a spol where
1 26
the north wind will twice ech y ar scatter
fowers upOn i t' .
"I wondered at tho words he spake, but I
kJew that his wer no i dle words.
"Whon in 530 ( 1 1 35/36 A.D. ) 1 arrived in
ishapur, sveral years had already pa sd since
thal groat man covered hi vi ago with the cur
tain of dust, the world was without him. He
was my teacher. On Friday 1 went to his grave
and took a man with me to show me it. He led
me lo lhe graveyard of Hira. 1 turned to the
left and at the foot of the garden wall I saw the
grave. Apricot and pear trees of the garden
tretched their branches over the wall and sprink
lod his grave with so many of their nOwers that
the ground was completely covered. Then J re
called the words tbat I had heard hi m speak in
Balha and I weeped, for nowhere in the whole
world, from One end to tho oth0r, have I sen
the equal of bi m. "
We may be quite Slro that au-Niz8mi was
absolutly sincere. H woul d be hard to believe
tbat thus recalling Omar Khayyam he desired
to elevate his reputation in the eyes of the min
isters of J lam. But when a man is thlts remem
bered by hi pupi ls, olle believes that be was a
good man. That apparently was the most im
portant tbing. One must believe an-Nizami, for
of all tho stories of Khayyam. this one is the
story of a friend. Only i n tbis way can we judge
tbe attitude of thos who spiritually were clos
to him.
Very gen rally, Omar strikingly resmbles Ga
l ileo in temperam nt, in views and in many
features of his l i fe. It is as if two clos relatives
1 27
lived at di lorent corners of the world sparated
by an int rval of 50 yenrs.
r shall oot try to justify this parallel. Anyone
with a litlle pains can do it fOt himslf. As for
me, they are as of one kin. With Kipling r can
repeat that East is East q
Unlike the West, which is the West.
hoQfcr
THE AGE OF PROOFS.
CONTINUED
They wefe many. Very many. No les than
a tboosand.
One way or another, earlier or later, fortune
throw them into company witb the fth postul
ate and they plunged into the luring labyrinth
of theorems.
Not 8 single one found a way out.
Some were confusd from the start, others
ad vanced some distance, but the end was in
variably the same.
Some spent their entire l i ves, others retreated
early. Still other went on until nervous break
down, mysticism, despair overtook them, and
yot others philosophically dispatched their sheets
of sribbled paper to the wasto basket. The end
was invariablo.
A number followed the mirage aod they were
happy in the eonviction that they had escapd.
But the end was still the same.
They had covered the ground of thes that came
before, without knowing that they were travers
ing the same fals pathways. Hope would Da
up at times, and Ooe decisive thust would sem
U have hn enough. But again tbe end was
the same.
Dilettantes, profesionals, naive medioeri ties
and hrilliant mathematicians; Gre.s, Arabs,
Perians, Europoans; thos that stumbled after
9W
1 2
the first few steps and thos that fought on pers
istently and inventively-ror UY0 two thousand
years. They all met the same fute.
The fifth po t\llate was invincible. It was one
of thos problems that semed too hard for tho
human mind to resolve.
It would appear that mathematicians follow
ed to the letter the moUo cut on the grave of
Captain Scott:
To StriW, to Sek,
To Fin an Not to Yiel
Like the snowy wasles of the north, the ffth
postulate devoured one after the other.
Most left no traces after them. But there were
Bore who perished nohly, leaving much to rem
emher them by.
In tbe graveyard of victims of the "ffth" there
is one of exeeptional bonour, Henri Logndre.
Legendre was probably the greatest of tbe
matbematicians hypnotized by tbe ffth postul
ate. He was engagod in the problem for many
long years, attacking the monster from one side
and from anotber. He found evidence and then
had to reject it, he proposd proef after proof,
pasing from confdence in suC to depair,
still hoping fer luck, but at tbe end he had to
admit tbat no exact solution had been found.
The acknowledgement is found i n the very title
of his summarizing work tbat he published at
the eud of his life (1 83 ) "Meditations on Va
rious Methods of Proof of the Theory of Parallel
1 30
Li noS or the Tbeorem of the Sum of the Angle
of a Triangle".
A often happens io science, this cautious,
extensive, and ultimately pe intistic investi
gation appared when a sol ution had already
been found and published in the Vestnik Ka
zansk uni Wsiteta ( TM Heral 0/ ti Kazan
UnI Wsity)-tbe frst published work of Lo
bache" kyo
Actually, ther should h no caus for sur
pris. But the fact that exactly twenty years
later, the Russian Academician Bunyakovsky,
who at aoy rato should have beon acquainted
with tho works o[ Lobachevsky, published a
similar study . . . this is inded a sad com montary.
Note-I wish to stres this once again-note
the ridiculous oature of this event. But we will
come to that a bit later.
In his numerous attempts through Lbo year
to prove the GlLh potulate, Legendl displayed
both persistence and remarkable ingenui
ty.
Firstly, he proved jn eleant fashion a numbr
of theorems of "abslute geometry". Secondly,
in proviog the ffth po tulate via reductio ad
absurd U he actually found a sries of theorms
in Lobachevskian geometry. He did not attempt
to prove tbe fftb directly, but rather an equi
valent, or "lhe sum of tho angles of a triangle
is equal to
91
t
c, M
1. Take a line sgment A B.
2. Erct perpendiculars at tbe extreme points
A and B and lay off On them sgment AA'
nnd BB' of equal length.
3. Cnnect A ' and B' with a straight Une.
The resul t is a quadrilateral.
4. Take the midpoints of the bass C and C'
and join them with a straight line.
5. Take the "scond identical copy" of the
quadrilateral AA 'B8' the quadrilateral
A ,A' . B,B' , and superimpos it on the lrst s
that tho side 8,B' , l ies on the side AA ' .
I t i s then casy to prove that angle A ' i s equal
to angle B' , and the straight line CC' is pr
pendicular to both bass. Tbe reader can fnish
the rigorous proof of trus theorem, nnd he can
also obtain tbis resul t in a sligbtly diferent
way-by proedi ng on tbe basis of symmetry.
1 39
For angle a and angle B' tbere are three pos-
sibilities:
(i) tbey are equal to 9'
'
jj
(2) tbey & acute, that is les tban 90' ,],
(3) they 8 obtuse, that is great<r than 90'
'i
First of all, Saccheri demonstrates that iI
aoy of thes posibilitie a realized in any
quadrilateral, then it will he accomplished in
all possible quadrilatorals of this type.
He then submit proof that:
1 . If tbo "hypothesis of the obtus anglo"
holds, then the sum of the angles of any triangle
is greater than T,
2. If the "hypothesis of the right angle" holds,
then the sum of the angles of the triangle is
equal to T+
3. If the "hypothesis of tbe acute angle" holds,
then the sum of the angles of the triangle is
les than ".
He then proceeds to prove that the "hypothes
is of the right angle" is equivalent to Euclid's
potulate.
Consquently, in order to prove the frth pos
tulate it is necessary to refute the other two
hypotheses.
Sac cheri handled the "hypotbesis of the ob
tus angle" with speed and Cmplete rigour.
Thore remained tbe "hypotbosis of the acute
angle." It tben transpired that all this was only
an introduction, for the real story only nOw
hegins.
1 40
1
On over a buncrd pages Saccheri invostigated
the consquence of this truly titanic "hypothos
is of tbe acuto aoglo".
He ohtai ned one theorem alter the other, each
more terri ble than the preceding one, but he
clearly understod that so far tbere was no inner
contradiction. Then he thought he had it, the
proof, the divine spark that would reduce this
hypothesiS to ashes.
,ufhe hypotheis of the acute angle is absolut
ely fals, for it contradicts tho nature of the
straight line. "
Here it was that the enemy of humankind
caught Girolamo SaccherL He was in error. Crud
ely.
But no, do nOL hurry witb conclusions. Sac
cheri was sti M unsur. He fol t something out
of order and wrote:
"I could calmly stop at this poiot, hut I do
not want to give up the attempt to prove that
this adamant hypothesis of the acute angle tbat
I have already uproted is io cootradiction with
itslf. "
The game was thus resumed.
Saccheri again sought proof, hut tbis time in
another dirction.
He wished to prove that if ono accopted the
"hypothesis of the acute angle", it would turn
out that tbe "lous of points eqnidistant from
a given straight line is a curved line".
And this is rigorously proved. Note that tbo
conclusion would appear to h so absurd as to
compel One to halt. But Saccberi rali!e that
this was not yet suIncient.
At this point let u take leave of Saccherl aDd
1 41
recall our honourable Ghiyalhuddin Abulfath
'Omar ibn I brahTm al-KhayyamT. I t is time Lo
deliver the goods we promisd and relate what
ho did in attempts to prove the fth postulat.
Omar began his proof of the ffth postulate with
a critique (as was usual with all others) of all
predeesors. He disproved the eforts of Hero,
Eutoxis, al-KIasan, ash-Shanni an-. airizi. Als
he refuted Abu Ali ibn-al-Khaisam who had
taken an extremely curious and novel pathway.
Ali ibn-al-Khaisam proeeded from tho hy
pothesis that 8 l i ne doscrib d by tho upper end
of a prpendicular of given length is al K B stra
ight line H tho lower extremity is moved along
the given straight line. (The fgure shows a stick
On a roller and a dotted straight line. That is
how I attempted to portray the postulate of
Abu Ali ibn-al-Khaisam. )
Abu Ali ibn-al-Khaism himsU tried to sub
stantiate this asertion by reasoning about tho
properties of motion.
1 42
I
11W
1 45
Lamhert rather simply liquidated the "hypo
thesis of the obtus angle." We have no time
to say how this is done.
But that is not all. Lambert realized this
and statod t.hat the "hypothesis of the obtus
angle" was justi fied on a sphere, if one ascribe
to circumferences oj great circles the role of
straight lines. This is an excedingly interest
ing aod profouod ob ervation.
The point is that both Saccheri and Lambert
refuted the "hypothesis 01 the obtus angle"
by rigorously proving that if i t is accepted the
straight lines aa and BB' arc found to in
tersct in two points.
But this runs counter to a familiar axiom:
one and only one straight line can be drawn
through two diferent points.
I ncidentally, it suIfces to prove that aa and
BB' intrsct in one pOint lor one to reject the
"hypothesis of the obtus angle".
The reader can amus himself by verifying
the latter assrtion.
Now On 8 sphere wbero tbe arcs of a great circlo
intersct at two poi ut the "bypothesis of the
obtus angle" holds true.
After this slight departure, Lambort returned
to tho plano. Ho demonstrated tbat tbe "bypo
thesis of tbe rigbt angle" is oquivalent to Euc
lid 's postulate. Once agai n i t is necessary to
verify and refute the "hypothesis of the acute
anglo".
Lambert began the analysis in the hope of
arriving at absurdity and he extended his chain
of thoorems beyond the point rached by Sac
cberi.
1 46
He proved one of the most rmarkable and
strange (at frst glance) theorems of the geom
etry of Lobachevsky.
The area 01 any triangle is proportional to
the difrenc betwen 180 and the sum 01 Its
angles:
S =A (,-1)
Here, A is a numbr that remains constant for
all triangles, and 1 is the sum 01 the angle
of a triangle.
From this it i mmediately follows that tho
area of allY triangle cannot exceed
Smo A *
Tho optimal cas for us is when the sum 01
the angles of a triangle is zero. In turn, it tben
follows i mmediately that one has only to as
sume the exist nee of a triangle of arbitrarily
large ara and the postulate of Euclid is prov
ed.
It is again clear at once that given the "hy
pothesis of the acute angle", or, simply, given
Lobachevsky's goometry, there are no similar
triangles, bcaus thor cannot be two incon
gruent triangles with equal angle .
So tho theorom that Lambrt proved may be
usd to propos two new formulations of the
fifth postulate.
1. There eists a triangle whos area is greater
than any pressigne numbe.
Or:
2. There exist at least two similar triangles,
that is, triangls such that the areas are difer
ent and all t angles are correspondingly equal.
1 47
(True, as you will recall, this equivalent 01
the ffth postulate was employed much ear
Iier. ;
Both stalements are extremely natural and
obvious.
Thoro can be no doubt that the elemenlary
consquences of the theorom on areas were clear
to Lambert. However, he did not succumb to
the sly aod delusi ve charm of the obvious. Quite
the contra, he was enticed by the unmanago
able "hypothosis of lhe acute angle".
"I am even inclined to think tbat tho third
hypothe is ("the hypothesis of the
,
acuto
.
an
g|e" q
mo reason,
as a resul t of which on the plane I t I8 so obdur
ate to refutation, wheroas tho sond hypothesi s
i s so amenable."
That is absolutely correct. Indeed, consider
ing Eucl i d' s geomotry to hold on th
plane,
one can i ndicate sucb surfaces that Will fully
accommodate tho p|ane geometry of Lobachev
sky.
Thes go by the name of psudospheri
al sur
facos and wero discovered by BeltramI . (We
shnll have occa ion to oxamilo such surfaces,
but meanwhilo let us so what else Lambrt
has to say.;
- ,
His princi lal task is Lo prove that Euchd s
geometry holds true On th
.
e plane.
1
be remark
concerning psudospheres IS a subs,d,ary con
clusion.
And Lambrt fluly real iedone simply must
admire the logic of t.his man-that he had not
poved 8nythi ng.
1 48
"Tbe proofs of Eucl id's postulate can be car
ried sO far that what appafeotly remains is but
a tri ne. However, a thorough analysis domon
strates that the whole eseoce of the matter l ies
io this apparent trife. It ordinarily contains
either the proposition being proved or the pos
tulate equivalent to it . "
That is his conclusion, and it is a fawles,
preis one.
Without a doubt he disntangled tbe problem
better than any of his prdecesor, be carried
the analysis farther and enumerated a number
of absurd (from the viewpo|nt of Euclidean in
tuition) conclusions to which tho "hypothesis
of the aCllte angle" le, but he did not find a logic
ally fawless proof. And "argument called forth
by lovo or ill-wil l " as he clasi fed them ar not
tbe arguments of a geometer.
What is-more, deep wi thi n hi m Lambert ne
bulously snspected that perhaps the ffth pos
tulalo was, in g-neral , unprovable. He discus-
1 49
sd the posible truth of the "hypothesis of the
acute angle".
In his enthusiasm for the unwinding chnin of
bis theoroms, he unwittingly broke away from
his academic style. "Ther is smething enchant
ing here that even makes one wish that the third
hypothesiS b true.
"And still, despite such B advantage, I sho
uld like this not to be, for i t would involve a
whole sries of other i nconveniences.
"Trigonometric tables would then become in
fnitely extended, similarity and proportionality
of lguros would di appear al together, not a
single ugulo could thon be represented other than
in nbsoluto magnitude, and astronomy would
find matters very di llicult .
Tho words "despite such an advantage" refer
to a remarkable conclusion of oon-Euclidean
geometry-the existence of an absolute unit or
length.
As we se, Lambert was in posssion of this
concept too. (We shill come back to the absolute
unit of length later on.) Unfortunately, the work
of Lambert was l i kewis overlooked by mathe
maticians. To the very end of his days, Lobach
evsky knew nothing of it.
lt is not clear, however, whether one should
regret this or not. I f Lobachevsky had known
about Lambert 's work, i t might have saved him
a couplo of years or work, but it also might have
quenched tho interest in the problem, for he
might have convincod himslf that all the initial
results had boon already achieved.
Be that as it may, ho did Dot know of this
work.
1 50
There was very little distance to cover for
Lambert to become the author of non-Euclidean
geometry. Actually, only one thing had to be
done.
And that was to state frmly that the "hypo
thesis of the acute angle" stood equivalent to
the fth postulate.
Neither the ffth postulate nor Its countersta
temeot (tho "hypothesis of the acute aogle" in
Lho terminology of Lambrt) 101l0w from the
other axioms. Tbey 8 quite independent. Which
ooe is accomplisbed in our univers is simply
a question of experiment.
One had only to formulate clearly these, one
would think, simple thoughts and believe Lhat
that is exactly the way things stand, and the
rest would have ben a simple matter of teh
nique, so to speak.
A mathematician with the endowments of
Lambert could have rolatively simply proven
a few dozen mOre theorems and could have, with
just a little efort, systematized them and thu
constructd tbe entir system of non-Euclidean
geometry.
Lt W stop hero for a moment.
The laws of sientifc crativity aro hazy in
deed. Discoveries aro made in a variety of ways;
sme accidentaUy, others appear to crown the
efforts of year of exc.uclaUngly intens work.
Aoything is posible. But one law is unalter
able. Any ultra-brilliant provision hat is in
compreheosible to contemporaries, appears after
the pasage of f.ty years (8 hundred, at
the mot) natural, simple and al most !i
yia!.
v'v
\
:
#
\ I "
I n order to apprais a piece of wOrk properly,
one has to attempt to shed onesff of the range
of knowledgo tbat bas since accumulatd and
mentally picturo tho epoh under study.
Let us try to conjure up a pictur of a geometer
of the end of the 18th century or the beginning
of the 19tb century i nvestigating the ffth po -
tulate.
From an early age we are told that the geom
etry of Euclid is tho most perfect creation of
Ihe human mind. We are not only taught that
but we ourslves. as the years pass, succumb
more and moro to the enchanting logic of the
proofs, sinking deepr and deeper into the cold
beauty of the draWings, the lem mas and the
theorems, into tho illusive kingdom of the in
tellect.
We live in a closd world, and the only laws
governing our thinking proesss a the laws
of this world. Geometry has long since changed
1 52
from what it was in ancient times-"the science
of the measwing of the land". The problem
of it reality, of its practical accompli hments
in our world was solved so long ago tbat today
not a person give any tbought to it any more.
Geometry has so long since risn from the
sinful earth to the mountain peaks of tbe ideally
abstract . . .
The very idea that geometry still can and
must b veri led by experiment, that geometry
is actually only ono of the di vision of physics
cao never enter our mi nds, for at the very b
ginning of our days at school we leared tbat
geometry has ben in mans faithful srvice for
svoml thousand yeBIS.
True, in reent L i mos the entire system of
axioms has ben undergoing a Certai n critical
review.
1rue again, the notorious ffth postulate is a
shok to our aesthetic felings. But that is al l .
There can b 00 doubt wbatsover of the truth
of tbe Ith postulate. The only thing we 8
doubtfnl about is whether it is 8 postulate or
not. We simply suspect that a theorem has found
its way ioto the axioms.
To suspct the ffth postulate a. such, would
mean to put the whole of geometry in doubt.
A od if tbat were so, tben there would be just
as many grounds to suspect, say, the axiom that
"one and only one straight line can b drawo
tbrough two pOints". Or any olber axiom. Then
one would have to revise tbe notion of l i nes.
And the axioms of arithmetic. Then tho ideal
structure of ancient proportions will turn into
a shapeles conglomeration of fragmonts. That
1 53
is posible. But that is the work of a barbarian,
a vandal, not a mathematician.
Tbere is nothing more perfet in the world
tban geometry, and hero there is only one min
ute blemish that embarrasss us-the Ith po t
ulate.
As for the other axioms, tbey ar so obvious
tbat no srious problem could ever aris. Sligbt
modi fcations and more polished formulations?
Yes, those are possible. But of no interest, when
One comes down to it. That is how we think,
that is how mathematicians have thought for
the past 25 centuries. To give up this faith is
to give up everyUling we bave.
We strive towards beauty and harmony in
our Euclidean geometry, and to,ards ao ultim
at fnish to tbe edifco it is. Least of all do we
contemplate destruction.
And we aro convinced thut to think one could
chango a single axiom in Euclid's geometry
without arriving at a horrible absurdity is to
explode the whole system.
l ust OnO thought is neded, one phrase, but
that thought is such that will change our entire
world view.
4
hoQfcr
NON-EUCLIDEAN GEOMETRY.
THE SOLUTION
In 191 1 the bibliography on non-Euclidean
geometry totalled 4,20 works. Today, that num
ber has risn to betwen 20 and 25 thousand.
Not less than a thousand of thes are studies
of an historico-biographical nature.
This is only an esti mate, of cours, but it is
basd on such definite data that the actual numb
er of works should b substantially greater. We
shall take it to be one thousand. Probably at
least two hundred books and articles have ben
d(voted exclusively to Lobachevsky.
So why put out one more? That is exactly tho
question tbat bas plagued the author since he
began-even before he began his work-and it
still stood after the book was fnished. One conso
lalion of cour is that such problems aris in any
feld. Just about in the year 196 B.C., a forgot
ten aocient Egyptian pessimist and skeptic com
plained bitterly: "I f I could only sy something
that has not already ben said many times bfore' "
That i s slight comfort, al l the more so since
tho amount of writing done in tbe past foU
thou aod years has nearly drowned humanity,
though if we ar to believe the cIa iCB, a truly
gr at book is wriLten once in a hundred years.
But a rcasonnbl( person of middle ag( (the autbor,
by the way) cannot think in such terms. S we
are left with the question I Why?
l S5
Indeed, what can J add to the many many
volumes devoted to the Ilistory of geometry i n
general and non-Eucli dean i n particular and to
the general theory of relativity in still more
particular?
First of al l , we can say that the book is su
perfcial. I t is, and could not b otherwis.
Even aside (rom purely special questions, about
two years of hard every-day work would have
to be spent in spading up and lOOking through
the more i mportant hiograpWcal sources. But
that i n i t<e1f i s not yet suffcient. A conscien
tious biographer has to make a tborough study
of all tbe works of the person in qu ti on and
investigate Jlainstakingly the r pon% of t he
scienti fic col leagu 5 that were acquainted with
Wm and/or his works. He should. . . there is
even mOre that he should do.
Incidentally, Lobachevsky has such a biogr
apher. It is Academician V. F. Kagan. He wrote
a magni fcent and profound hiography of Lo
bachovsky. A Ii ttle too profound, perhal . It
i s not very easy to understand.
As a dilettante i n mathemati0s (and for a va
riety of otber r 8ns) I reaHzed that I could
not comp te in thos respets with Kagan. Nei
ther could I compete with many other biograph
ers and investigators of Lohachevsky and of
other scientists that have ben and wi l l bo ment
ioned in this book.
That brings us straight back to why I wrote
tbis book. I t is imQottant to know, otherwis
tb s pag S would not have ben wri tten (maybe
tbaL would have been tbe best version).
1 56
M
y idea was lhaL nobody had yet \riLten ahouL
Lhes heros as human bei ng, not as outstand
ing mathematicians, mon of genu, buL as norm
al (or almost normal) people.
That is what I set out O do-wi te a r al hook
ahout real men. About strong men, brilliant
men, celebrated men, great mel,-but more im
portanL ahout the human-interest down-to-earth
doings of thes peoplC, as people.
o to me and yon, they are-here-ordinary
people and not genius . The very novel idea
tbaL J bave up my slv0 is that a person
should, abOve all, be a persn, a man, a human
being. And even such a triO as a bad tempr,
a disagreable disposi tion and a di fcul t nature
can di porse any kindly feeli ngs stemming from
his work.
Starting in tWs key, I lnd i t hard to decipher
my own feeling with respect to JOnos Bolyni.
His gits were amazing. An inoxplicably hril
Iiant talent. His style alone proves thaL he was
a mathem tician by tho grace of God. I t was
only later, in the 20th cenLuy thaL works On
mathematical logic bgan to b written ill his
style. NOL a si ngle exira word, ultimately com
pact, fawless logic, exceptional clarity of reas
oning. I n tbe cenlral pl'ohIem-that of tho cons
istency of non-Euclidean geometry, he advanced
farther than Gauss and Lobacbevsky. Actually
be was very clos to the basic idea of proof.
l Ie did not find it, but he clearly realized the
direction i n which iL was to he sought.
nero he was ahead of al l the rest.
It is quite possible that, for hi mself, he form
ulated the ideas of non-Euclldean geometry s-
1 57
mewhal earlier than did Lobachevsky. A bout
183.
True, his work was published two years later
than the frst work of Lobachevsky (t81).
But, generally speaking, let lovers of prior
ity debate that issue.
For that matter, still earlier a German lawyer
(at One time profesr of law at Kharkov Uni
verity), Ferdinand Schweikart had mastred
the basic elementary conceptions o[ non-Euc
lidean geometry. True, he never published any
thing, but his nephew, Taurinus, whom he got
i nterested in this problem, put out a booklet.
Though an incomparably weaker mathemati
cian than any in this story, Taurinus came very
clos to a solution. He developed non-Euclidean
geometry in rather sme detail, solved a large
number of subtle problems, but he did not bave
a clear notion of the matter. In the end he arrived
at tho same point tbat investigators of tbe filth
Jlostulate had-an attempt to prove i t and, COn
squently, the truth of Euclidean geometry.
This is all the more surprising since at the
same time he would seem to havo an excellent
grasp of the consistency of hi non-Euclidean con-
structions, yet. . .
.
We have already mentioned the fact that ac
tually only one single idea was neded for the
construction of non-Euclidean geometry. Any
one who stri ved to prove the ffth po tulate by
reductio ad absurdum invariably camo to theo
rems of non-Euclidean geometlY. Lobacbovsky
himslf, writing of Legendre, said:
"I fnd tbat Legendre ti me and again took the
pathway that I had so luckily chosen. "
1 58
.
But it was the basic idea that Legendre la
cked. It was this sale idea that was absnt io
mathematics for over two thousand years.
I t was rU'st expresed, but was not ful l y reali
ze, by Lambrt; it was stated nebulously by
Schweikart and Tanrinus; Gaus had ben incli
ned in tbat direction for a long time without
actually mentioning it. I t las only Bolyai and
Lobachevsky wbo formulated it clearly.
A to rigour and profundity, the frt (and
only) work of Bolyai exceded ali otber .
Later O\, working intensly, Lobachevsky in
vestigated non-Euclidean geometry much more
hroadly and in far greater detail, hnt i f we com
pare the frst works, the more brilliant is tbat
of Bolyai.
The brilliance of his talent WIS evident iu all
things.
He was not only a mathematician of genius,
he was an extremely gifted musician. At the age
of ten he had already written a numbr of com
positions. Later he b
as nO easy
t
promising young scientist i n the Sibrian DiVI
sion of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR
( Ka.an Universily was then an i mportant cenLre
o! learing o[ the Hussian Empire).
I n August of the year 1 8' 1, at tbe age of
eighten Lobachevsky received his
asr' s de
greo. His frst succs and the beglDDlDg of a
numbr of very good yoars of inten:i ve work.
Socially, too, he was a succes, accepted in the
"best society" of Kazan. A young man of the
207
worl d, quite a man about town, always well
dressd.
The war with Napoleon hardl y touched him.
His youoger brother, Aloksi, tried to ruo away
to the army, but was returned. True, Nikolai
was worried sick uotil they found him. Loba
chevsky, i t must be said, always had very strong
family fel ings.
His moral code was already st-it waS that
of decency, decency in the moaning of the no
tions of that time.
Bartels, a very culturod teacher but a mediocr
mathematician made him study the clasics of
sience. Lobachevsky's only srious drawback,
i t would sem, was his excessive excitability
and conceit. He was characteriled once as "ex
cesi vely slfcentred ". On the other hand, Lo
bachevsky clearly and sberly saw tbat he was
far behind the bigest mathematicians of his day.
I n March, 1814, he was made junior scientifc
asistant (about equivalent to asciate profes
sr of today) i n the feld of physico-mathemati
cal sciences.
20B
l Je bgan delivering his own lectures.
I n July 1816 he was installed as extraordi llat'y
professor. This at the age of 24. His career had
begun. Meanwhile the university was a behive
of i ntrigue with chaDges ocurring constantly.
For a short time, tho reactionaries were on top.
Tben the "progresivists" got the upper hand.
Trustes changed. I n a word, thon, life at tbe
university was on "an even keel".
Lobachevsky had enemies in the reactionary
party and he had i nfuential patrons.
This was the period when Lobacbevsky bgan
to get interested i n the problem of parallel
l i nes. Tho bginning was standard. He attemp
ted to lnd a proof. I n 1815 at lectures ho even
describd to his students the proofs he had
found. But ohviously he son fouod his mistako.
A rather elementary One too.
A big change came in 1819. This was the
period of reaction throughout the country. I t
afectd Kazan as well. The new truste Magnit
sky was a clever but unprinCipled, cruel , cold
eli mbr-gegettr.
. Ho waS one of thos people wbo fight their
way U the top elbowing, climbing, pushing
others out of tbe way and trampling on thos
who have fallen. His one and only aim was to
roach the lOp. If reforms were needed, ho would
carry thor through; i f extreme obscurantism
was the word, he would be the extremist. But
he was a rather clever man with a fair for ad
ministration. He made his frst appearance as
an inspector summing up the situation in thes
words: clos the Kazan University becaus of
the fre-thinking and general moral degradation.
209
Alexander T , however, decided nol to destroy
but to tP tify lhe si lu"tion, fnd he pUL Magnit
sky in charge.
Thos wero d,wk days for the I Ini versily, h"t
Magnitsky was kindly disposed towards Loba
cbevsky at first. He was possibly thinking of
making him one of I,is prolege . During the
year 1819 to 1821 Lobacbevsky was On the
upswing, elected dean, bead of tho l i brary and
membr of the constructiou commi tteo. Posts
and ti tles came one after tho other.
In February of 1822 he was elected professor
in ordinary. Tbes were years when Lobachov
sky acted against his con cience. True, with a
person li ko Magnitsky there did not seem to
be any otb r way out.
Bear in mind, too, that Lobachevsky was 0
i ndependent thinking person, q uick-LO III pored and,
simply, a hard person to got along with. Also
his convictions were far removed from tho K of
Magnitb. Tbat is, under tbe situation of that
time, becaus if suddenly Lobachevsky's views
were approved U[1 above, by thos in power,
tben . . . Magnitky would turn out very progres
sive indeed. All this boils down to tbe fact
tbat in 1822-1823, Magnitsky was nO loogor
kindly disposd.
In 1823 came the frst major trouble in Iino
of duty. His newly "itten txtbook Gometry
was rejocted by Academician fu . I t may be
that 'uss was on tbe wbolo noL righL, although
serious invetigators agro that thero were es
sential dofects ill tbe book and some of FlSS '
remarks were qui te truo. Lobachevsky was stung
to tbe quick and haughtily refusd to reply to
21 0
any of Fus' rom arks, or Lo correct any 01 tbe
[aulls of the book, Ul even to take tho manus
cript back. His arrogance ceca ionaJy made mat
ters wors for hi m. Howe,er, he continuod to
work i ntensely, alld dl lrng t.hes years he be
came fully convi nced of the impossibility of
woving the ffth postulato, and fully con inced
of tho equal rights of a non-Euclidean sysLem
of geometry.
A fow pleasant even1 occurred in 1825 and
1826. Lobachovsky was put ill charge of lhe
contruction committee o[ the university, he
was also eleted Chie[ Librarian of tho U Ili ver
sity. His salary was raisd to [our thousand
roubles a year. Very good money in tho K days.
Then, Decembor 14, 1825, MagniLsky was r -
moved. He had nol ben able to lat.hom the /lew
situation a[ter the death of Alexander I , he
had risked everything OlI a big jump up, fgu
riog that this was tbo time, but failed. He had
placed everytbing on Konstantin, wbereas Ni
kolai won out. And then it was that tbe old
memorandum came to ligbt whore ho had, it
turned out, complaiued of the li bralism-no
Ie s-of ikolai Pavlovich, then Grand Prince.
Only in Rusia could a paradox like that take
place.
Quito naturaliy, an invesLigation was ordo
red. Crtain sums of mODel, i t appeared, had
disappeared. I t wasn't as i f tbe barracks st-up
at the university was alien to the spirit of Tsar
ikolai; simply Magnitsky had overplayed his
hand, and wbM is more important, he had sim
ply not ben able M guess the events of Decm
bor 1825. He bad lost. First discharged from
21 1
an posts and then exilod to nevel with ao ad
ditional investigation asigned into the money
that had vanished.
Of cour, the uni versi ty, and Lobacbevsky
as wel l , r joiced.
This is ti me to stop. February 23, 1 826.
Up to this point we have wi tnessd the carer
of an introsting, gifood, pleasant provincial
mathematician, though one not devoid of draw
backs. Wo havo looked kindly on hi clim b.
There bas ben no exciooment, and we bave not
been unduly enthusiastic. A very decent carer,
where the hero was promood from rung to rung
of tbe ladder. He was not indilerent to his
advancement and with the years Ilis worldly
wisdom grew, and tho desperadoes of his youtb,
ridiculous wild protesting 01 the malcontnt, all
remained i n the past. Gradually, bit by bit,
the common sns so usual in succe rul men
accumulated. At the age of thirty-four he was
a moderat man of fashion, a bit condescending
i n manner. Further advancements were i n Sight.
Within a year he would be appointed rector
(J une 3, 1 827) . . .
As of February 2, 182, aU thes had beco
me mere tri nes of IHe, rather essntial, but not
over much so, and of course not decisi vely s.
That was the day the great mathematician
gave his talk OD Don-Euclidean geometry to an
indiferent, bred audience who understood noth
ing at all. Of cours, if an angel had appeared
and i f there had b en sme sign from heaven
"This is the Man "-thi ngs might have ben
diferent. I t might havo ben forgotten even
that two days earlier an i nvestigation at the
21 2
university had begun. But at this junctnr of
events, the very last thing that could have
arousd his audience was undoubtdly a dis
cussion by tbo very revered ikolai [vanovicb
on the theory of parallel l ines.
Only Lobachevsky himslf realized at that
i nstant that this was the moment of triumph.
Tho lecture was forwarded to a commision
for a reviow to decide on whether it should be
published or not. The commision did not un
derstand anything and, apparently, did not ex
press any view at al l . Either they did not want
to endanger the well-being of a colleague, or
tbere was some other reason. Anyway, the work
was not published.
Then came 1827.
The new trusooe was the tyrant and ignora
mus Musin-Pushkin. But Lobachevsky had long
ben acquaJnted with him, and, judging by al l
thing, semed to be just tbo person to rehabi
litate the university tbat had fallen s low
under Magnitsky.
On Musin-Pushkin's suggestion, Lobachevsky
was elected rector, which post he ocupied until
186.
He was re-lecood six times, first by slight
majorities and then by overwhelming majorities.
That was something, if one recalls the atmos
phere of constant intrigue within the university.
There can b no question that he was a magni
ficent rector, who put a great deal of energy
and love into his work, and a forward-thinking
and very skillful admi ustrator. He actually
foundod tho university. With great IlrOrcsional
8ki I I , be beadod tbe construction work, !t u
l
'
21 3
a library, organized the regimo of the students
nnd adjusted relationships betwen the u::uia
"
.
nd German profesors teaching at the univer
sity.
It i
.
s hard to M whon he found ti me to devote
to Sience. Yet all his hasic scientilc results
were obtained during thes very years of admi
nistration 88 rctor.
The year 1 82. he Kazan VI,/nik (Kazan
noa/d publ ished his memoir "On the Princi
ples ?I eomotry". :iis Was the lrst systematic
doscnptlOn of non-Euclidoan geometry.
The year 183. In this year Lobachevsky b
came the hero of Katon. Choiera bit the city.
That was the terri hIe epi demic thaL swept across
Le whole
at
man could have writlen a couple of encouragIng
words to a Corrosponding Membr of the Got-
tingen Society. I t may be. . . .
&
I simply cannot fod a satisfa
iled.
He did not write. When 8 mattr of Ws hfe !S
at stake be is s chastely restrainedl Lobachev
sky the
'
mathematician was quite a diferent
man from Lobacbevsly t.he university loctor.
The mathematician was impractical, resrved,
pbilosopWcally plaCid.
. .
All thes years be worked intensi' Jly str
.
lvlng
to fnd a rigo.ous proof of noncontrarll
lorl11e
s.
Qute separatel
.
y lrm ts nowed lI5 utl
S
at work, Ws famIly hfe, hiS ups and do,ms I n
day-to-day Ii Ie. His wife proved to be 01 %~
13-1M7
225
riolls turn o[ mind, and Quibbling and opon
scandals occurred fairly often in Iheir home.
And through it all he was tho model stoic.
"Oh, my dear Varvara Aleksovna . . . " with all
respect-and thon he wonld disappear into his
fortress, b.s study. Or he would sink into si
lence puffng at his pipe.
Tbero wero a lot of children in the family.
He semed ratber indiferent to the girls but
he loved the boys with a kind of jealous, harsh,
carpiog love. Particularly Aleksi, the eldest.
So capable, s much like himslf in childhood.
Meanwhi Ie lhere was no end of ad ministra Ii vo
duties, which bo porformed in model fashion,
running the uni vorsity oiciently. And do oot
forget the diffculties of the ti mos. The gover
ment and the Tsar woro salisfed.
For zealous srvice His I mperial Majesty had
elevated Lobachevsky to his excellency the
Councillor of State. And in the oWng lingered
the still higher post of Privy Councillor.
Money maltrs were nol always in the bost
of order, but he was still full of energy and not
too old.
There wero endles intrigues and smearing and
muck-raking among his colleagues. But s al
ways is the cas. He took them in his stride,
became svere, reticent, pedantically composd.
But such trails arc commOn to aging men. He
was ordinary in all lhi ngs and habits. His ox
cellency was a good host and knew a thi ng or
two about cooking.
At the club thero was card-playing-be liked
preference. But his recreation morc oftn COn
sistd in translating from the Grek and Latin.
226
He loved his university, and the students loved
hi m. His work occupied him complotely.
Everything waS typically Rusian. His broh
er Aleksi was a heavy drinker. A relatn'e
of his wife was a gambler who lost a large sum
of Lobachevsky's money. His sns wcre grown
up now, students. His favourite one gladdened
his heart, the younger one didn' t; he was s
ohviously no mathematician.
What was On his mind all thes years? What
gave hi m the strength to pursue the study of
his geomol,ry so persistenll)? How was it pos
sible to carry on with his goometry through all
the vicissitudes of a lifetime and not t turn
i nlO the most ordinary of councillors of slate?
Whence the will power? What buoyed hi m up
all thes years? What were his thoughts whe
.
n
he was alone iu his tudy? What were Ius
dreams? And hopes?
I have no answer, and DO one els has either,
[ ' rn afraid. Nikolai [vanovich Lobachevsky ap-
227
pears to me as ono of the most mysterious men
i n tho whole history of siellce.
I n tho opinion of many of the most cultured
peoplo of that period, Lobachevsky was, on the
wholo, a very respected offcial. He was als
"an eccentric practically out of Ils mind ", "the
mad man from Kazan".
or cours, his real life began behind the doors
of his study. Quite naturally. But what main
tained him, what concentration or will-power,
what driving forco? What wa ho guided by
love, batred, bope, uperciliousne , babit tur
ned to instinct? f cannot say. I ' m afraid no
one can say. Becaus al l tbe riches of the archi
ves add nothing about this scond life 01 Ills
wbicb was the most i mportant 01 all, the life
that began inside bis tudy when be was alone
,tb Ils computations. Perhaps there is, alter
all, just oue thing tbat opens up a crack.
In tbe y ar 18, bis most dearly loved boy
Aleksei died. Within a fow montbs ikolai Lo
bacheYSky was a ick man, broken. He bgan
to los bis sight, and the illne progresd ra
pidly and implacably.
He bad tbree more years to Ii vo. His routine
went on and h sti ll performed his duties, bllt
Ii Ie was already gone.
Let us recall his efforts to mako his Sn study
mathematics; how, thougb sll.ontrolled and
calm 1lI0st of the timo, he would shout abus
when the boy was lazy, or would rejoico majesti
cally when he camo to his room to fnd the boy
celebrating a successfully pasd exam with his
friends: "Continue, g ntlomen, 1 shall not bo
ther you. " Recalling all thes tbings, one may
228
conclude that this harsh, unsociable man was
kept alive by a single romantic dream-that
of his son conti nuing his Geometry.
The death of Aleksei meant that he IlmsH
W8 dead. Misfortuue does not come unaccom
panied. During tho last the years of Lobacbev
ky's life, OnO calamity followed another.
Perhaps be was now to some extent Immune,
for the end had already come. Tbero remained
only one thing, his Geometry.
.
Already blind, with only a few days 01 lile
lolt. he dictated tho last of his works.
LhoQcr
NON-EUCLIDEAN GEOMETRY.
SOME ILLUSTRATIONS
L us look into the curiosi ty shop o( nOIl
Eucbd
an
metry
:
Our intuition, frmly root
ed as It is IR Euclidean notions, wl not avail
us (or long and wil l constantly be in connict
with the geometry o( Lobachevsky.
.
To co
,
pel our snsations to vote (or t heore
t lell l eq
w "" fa
w
d
d
~g
^
"
I,
243
bes the world. Qui te the contrary, ho incl ined
tow" .
.
ds the view t hat in this world, i t is Enc
l i d's geometry that is accomplished.
But that is not 1 important. The remarkable
thing is that from the very mst steps the new
geometry was clo Iy tied i n wi th physics and
that it was i nconceivable to di%ciate it from
ox peri menlo
This natlrally put forth the salient problem
of the relationship o[ goometry i ll general to
the real world, the possi bility o[ di ferent geo
metries in the real world.
As we have already said bfore. this WaS sug
gested earlier but [or two and a half Ulousand
years mathematicians took a di m view of i t,
regarding the whole matter as futile and absurd.
Willy-ni lly nOll-Euclidean geometry generated
tho p" obl m of experimentation. Are we indeed
so sure tbat God made the earth i n accord with
the laws of Euclidean geometry, as Ivan Kara
mazov would have us believe?
Th.cr is always beauty i n abstract formulas
engineeri ng total ly unexpected ideas, which even
the discoverer never su pee ted whon bo deri vcd
his formulas.
Al l thes couc1usions ar s charmingly elo
gant that one can understand Bolyai and Loba
chevsky who had faith in tho logical rigour of
their system.
Ole also that we have di cused here only
ono of the conclusions of Lobachovsky's very
first work, his paper of 182.
Ho immediately developed this sheme in depth
and the other results were no les beautiful . But
in mathemalics, faith is not a decisive factor.
244
There were no guaranteos that a logical contra
diction might not pop up in the future.
Lobachovsky spont the OS of his l ife in per
i tent attempts to fnd tbis pIUof. He strived
to demonstrate witb complet0 rigour that his
system was nawless. On tho way he worked out
a great diversity of tho most unoxl>ecled con
squences of his geometry, penetrating ever dee
per.
III this respect, he is without a doubt head
and sboulders above his contemporaries, for nei
ther Bolyai nor Gauss covered the ground that
he did.
He did not fnd the proof, though he was ra
ther clos to the basic idea.
Lobachevsky the man, his persistent, never
swerving truggle toward single goal is worthy
of our admi ration.
Chap w J0
NEW IDEAS. RIEMANN.
NONCONTRADICTORINESS
No, this will not be a chapter about things of
startling beauty. I , I l be bonest with tbe reader.
At least the frst half will be rather dry mathe
matics.
Frst about tbe theory of surfaces. Tbe pro
genitor was again the same old Gau .
Let us imagine that On sme kiod 01 whimsi
cal l y bent surface there re ide i ntelligent beings
of two di mensions (not thre). Wbat wiU their
gometry be like? Secondly, bow wiU they be
able to % that tbeir surface is curved?
At frst glance, tbe sond qucsUon may ap
pear quite naive. The reader may b realling
proof 01 the sphericity of tho eartb given i n
grade-shool geography books. Don't hurry, re
membr that we are three-dimen ional beings li
ving on a two-dimensional surface.
To rid ourslves or tbe i l l usion that this is
simple, think over the question: How can one
fnd out that our thoi mensional world i. cur
ved, and what in general doe. this s Irequently
employed phra mean after all?
The tB- and four-di mensional world wiil b
looked into later on, lor tbe presnt let us ro
turn to surfaces.
Causs bgan by i ntroducing n marvellous quan
li ly lhal dofns t hl' geometry 01 a surface. I t
is called Gausian curvnlurc. Tho fun8nlCl l l nl
246
property of Gaussian curvature is: it rmains
constant under any bnding of the surface 8
long as no stretcblng occurs. I t is intnitively
clear what this means, hut a rigrous formula
tion is btter: if in tbe bendiug of a surfac there
is nO stretching, then, first of all, the lengths
01 all curves drawn on tho surface remain unchan
god; scondly, the angles btween tbem remain
the same too.
This can be statd somewhat diferently. Take
a sheet of paper. Bend i t. Then measur tho
Gaussian curvature at sme point. ow you can
do wbatever you want to tbis sheet (except
stretching or tearing it), like twisting i t into
tbe most bizarre forms, and the value of the
Gaussian curvature at that point will not change.
The Gaussian curvaturo is so i mportant a eon
cept that wo will delno it in more rigorus fa
shion. To do this, we will bave frst to fnd out
what ar radii of curvature at a given point 01
8 surface.
We consider some point of a surface and draw
a line normal to i t. What is a normal? To ex-
247
plain we will need One more concept, that of a
t angent plane. We give an almo t rigorous def
tion. We consider all posible curved lines lo
cated On the surface and pa"sing througb a po
i nt P.
It turns out tbat the la"geuls Lo all thPs
curves lie C D ODe plane. This is lt0 evident 'It
frst gl 8uco, but i t CIH1 b proved rigorously. H
is lho ontire coUection of tangent lines that forms
a langent plano.
For the cas shown at tbe bot tom of page 25,
the loation of t he l'ngent plane is rather ob
vious. But smeti mes the tangent plaue is lo
cated more i ntricately relat i ve to tbe surface (se
the fgure on page 2/.7).
Now let us defne precisl y tllo notion of a
normal. The normal is a straight line perpndi
cular to the taugent plane. We can now defoe
tho coocept of principal radii of curvature. Pas a
plane throUgh the normal. There are cloarly an
i nfi nitude of such planes. We take any oDe to
hegi n wi th. A plane curve is formed by the i M"
tersclion of ho plBno and the surface. One can
al ways choos a circle that is contiguous to this
curve near the point P. I shal l not explain the
exact meani Jlg of thes words in the bope that
your intuitiou will suffce to crate tbe proper
i mage.
The radius of this contiguous (tangent i al) circ-
10 R is called the radius of curvatUre of tbe
plane curve. Since ao infnity of plunes can b
pasd through the normal, wo get an i nfnitely
l argo numbOl o( radii o[ CUI`V8UI'P, 8mOh which
t hero is a grPates and a smal lPst DDI ill i'h:oluto
v"luo. I t ClIlI be proved that pl8no CUI'VOS to
248
which the least aud grealest radii correspond
are mutually prpendicular at the toint P. Thes
two radii, R, and R., 8 called the pri
!
cipal
radii of curvature of our surface at the pOIDt P.
Likewis we can prove that the centres of tbe
circles are al ways located on Ule lormal .
I f th0 centres of Curv8ture l ie on one side
of the surlace, the poi nt P is called elliptical.
I I lhey lie OJl diferent sides, then it is csUed
hyperbolical. I n this cas, one of tbe principal
radii must b considered negativo.
Finally, there are parabolical points. They 8
points@ where one of the principal raii of cur
vature is equal to i nfnity. The GauSIan curva
ture at any point 01 a smlace is defued as:
I
f
749
Now W cao st our fodiogs out io a table:
In Ibe ellipical point
In tbe byprbliel pint
In Ibe plical point
K >O
K < O
K = O
Now let U se what properties the surfac
as a whole can have. I magine sm surface aod
try to cover i t with a piece of closly adhering
cloth. Tho rules of the game & that the cloth
caonot b cut or stretched, and has to cover
the surface without any folds.
I f a lady co[rootAd a tailor with such demands,
she would b di smissd without further ado, and
he would b right in doing s.
The reader would do well at this pOint to
stop reading and t to picture the proprties
25
that the fgure of our hypothetical lady of fash
ioo should pOSSS. After what we have fouod out
about tbe properties of Gaussian curvatur, the
answer is imple. The piece was plane at frst.
Which means the curvature was zero at every
point. Bending without strot.ching dos not chan
ge the curvature. This means that a plane piece
of cloth may b bent ooly into a surface whos
curvature at every poiot is strictly equal M
xcro.
A cyli nder is oDe instance. f t is easy to se
that the Gau ian curvature is strictly zere 00
the latAral surface of the cylinder. Or, in other
words, every point of the surface is parabolica!.
If you have mastered the concept of curvature,
then it will readily b sen that the scond examp
le 01 a suitable surface is the coDe.
ow W cannot bnd the plane onto a sphere
83 required. Tho curvature of a sphere is cons
Ian t and posi ti ve. I t is preisly this circumstan
ce that causs cartographers so much trouble.
251
We must obsrve, rather tardily, that al l along
W have had in view only "good" surface. To
put i t cnldely, "good" surfaces 8 thos that
have nO sharp points or edgs. The vertex of
cone, for example, is a "bad" point.
Als, when we speak of bnding one surface
onto auother, we have in view, strictly speaking,
the bending 01 a sulijcienUy large piece, but
not tbo whole surlace. To take an example. the
entiro lateral urfaco 01 conc can b developed
onto a plane only i f We make a cut along the
generatri x. The last term we ha,o to ex plain
is a geodetic line. A geodetic is a curved line
drawn On a surface btween two points s tbat
any other curve is longer. Tbis definition is one
of thos "almost rigorous" ones, but I have hopes
that only non-mathematicians will read this
chaptr and s there will b no one to criticize me.
Hypothetical beings of two dimensions who
live 01\ such a surface will sy that the geodetic
line is the shortst distance otween two points.
I ncidentally, three-dimensional beings (like we
are) would say the same thing i f we i mpos the
condition that thol should not leave tho surface.
To uS earth d wollers living On a pbore, the
shortest distance between two points on the earth
is an arc 01 great circle. It is prcisly along
the arc of a great circle that navigators sail
their ships in making the briefest voyags. Now
let us look into a very curious problem. We
said that a plane may b bot olllo 8 surlace
whos curvature is constant nlld equal to zero.
Or-what is tbe same thing-that such a slllface
may be developed OlltO a plane. Any figure drawn
On the plane wi l l turn into a similar fgure 011
252
"ur surlace. The anglos betweell lines do not
Ch81l" during tho hellding process. The ghollest
I ioes on the plano-straight lines-wi ll pas inlO
godetic lines on the surface. 'fhere/ore, for a
cylindrical triangle, lor instance (its sides are
naturally formed by curved l ilies). the sum of
the angles remains U,e same as in the plane
triangle. We an go on reasning in the same
vein. To overy gometric concept on the plane
we can conelate a correspondi ng i mage on the
surface.
I t is rather easy to M that all the theorems
that hold for the plane can be carried over without
change to the surface. The only tbiug that we must
oar in mind is that thos thoorems now hold
true for "images". I f Euclideau geometry is ac
complished on tho plano, then it will b accomp
lished on a cylinder Jor the "images" as wel l .
We have noW tOllched 011 one of the most
rmarkable and bautiful aspects of all mathe
matics. So long as we are not i nterested i n any
practical applications, i t is all the sme to liS
what ou" theorems speak about. We only want
them to satisfy the demands of logic. What is
more, we do not even know what we ar talking
about. It is only the physicist that has to know
what is "actuall y" taking place, what his world
is rally like.
For the physicist, a straight li ne is a ray of
light. For UIC mathematician, it is one of the
basic undefned concepts. There is nO way of
disti nguishing between the straight lines on a
Euclidean plane and the geoetic lines 01 the
surface of a cylinder i f they are compard slely
from the point of "iew of ax ioma tics.
253
Let us conjure up a fantast.ic picture. Two
twodimeIional world. One plalle, tho other
on the surface of a cylinder. Intelligent beings
I i ". in
.
both worlds. Suppos they have st up
sme kind of communication. The two-di mensio
nal "plane matbemalician and the two-dimen
sional "cylindrical " mathematician would asrt
with great satisfaction Olat their geometries 8
lho same.
I f the sy
le.
.
.
Thes transformations 01 the clfcle (proJecltve
transformations, i n EucHdean language) s
isfy, in non-Euclidean language, all the axioms
01 motion.
For inslance in non-Euclidean languag the
transformation
'
of chords signiles tbat straight
li nes Jlas, into straight l i nes, ctc. Now comes
tile last and deciSive stp. Wo rofer to thes
transformations 8S "motions of a Lobachevskian
plane".
Wo cnn summarizo the foregoing in tho form
of Lhe Klein model.
In lbe laoguage of EUClid'1 I n Ibe langu.do of
gemetry Lobcbovy. geomolry
Cirle EnUl plane
Chord
Stralgbt lioe
Polot Point
"To bloog" "To blong"
"To 0 blwen" "To lie WW0h
"Prjelho transformalion "MoLion"
of a cirle inlo itlf"
AU the properties 01 projectlvo trno formatlOos
8 of cours known, but we do not ned to
know them. All we have to do is accepL the (acl
that such transformations exist.
26
And s-thi is tho minute we ha.e bon waiting
for-i f it is 10 ible to declare the ci rele a Lo
hachevskian plane (this wo have provod). then
the problem is solved.
Indeed. suppos in proving sme kind of theor
em in the geometry of Lobachevsky. wo arri ve
at a contradiction. But every theorm of Lo
bachevs.y's geometry is now also sme theorem
of the geometry of Euclid.
Each theorem may b stated in two languages.
H we havo a contradiction in Lobachevsky's geo
metl'Y, W% als, at the same time, get one i n
Euclidean geometry.
Of cours, in Euclidean language the contra
diction will look di lerently and ,;1 1 open up
in some other theorm, but that is quite i mma
terial. Tho important thing is that if io One of
tho geometries there is B logical contradiction,
it will be i n the otber geometry as well.
The geometries are equivalent.
264
This then proves the independence of the ffth
postulate of aU the remaining axioms ot Euclid's
geometry.
That is al i i
But i n sience, l i ke ill tbo Arahian igb!s, the
ond of one story is but t he bginning of UIO noxt.
Proof of the noncontldictorincs of tho geom
etry of Lobachevsky signi fed for mathematicians
the slar of a colossal cycle of studies in axio
matics, III creation of a highly intricate, ideally
rigorous and . b ol utely abst"act apparatus of
mahematic81 logic, all apparatus lhat was in
fnitely removed from lhe slightest practical ap
plication-unt i l it was (oul l d tbat eleet"ollic
computing 1I13cbines . . . . By the wny, lhis is just
the time to concludo our discussion.
Let us return to tbe Klei II model to nole a
very amusing point. Take two points within
our circle. Draw 8 chord througb tbem. I n the
language of Eucli d, the dislnnce h twen thes
points is equal to the length o[ the sgment of
the chord. What is the situation i n Ule language
01 non-Euclidean geometry?
Intuitively, We can 8 that at any rate i t
cannot b equal to the lengU, of the sgment.
I ndeed, distances btween two points on the
i nfnite Lobachevskian plallO can b arbitrarily
gmat, while the "Euclidean dist 'IDces" btween
points of our circlo are restriclcd by i ts diam
eler. It is clear tbat wo have to defne a "nol)
Euclidean distanco" in some otber way. But
how? Very si mpl y i f we recall how the concept
of length is in trod uced i lito geometry.
Roughly, i t is done B follows. Take a sale
unit-some sgment-and by means of trans-
265
form.tion of motion make i t coincide with the
sgment being measured. Its length is dewrm
ioed by the number of ti mes the scale unit !ts
into it. We wil l not go any further. The impor
tant thing to now is that the defnition of equal
ity of line sgments (and consquently of length)
& also, incidentally, the congruence of any geo
metrical fgures, is detcrmjned by means of the
concept of motion.
That is the situation both in the geometry of
Euclid and i n the geometry of Lobachevsk. But
in Our model, motion in the Lobachevsldan plane
is, i n Euclidean language, a projective traosfor
mation of a circle. Therofore, it comes out that
in tbe language of Lobachevsldan geometry, two
line sgments ar equal if Ono passs into the
othor in a projective transformation. Recall i ng
that the length should not change during trans
formation of motion, we realiw that the "non
Euclidean length" must remain the same in a
projoctivo t ransformation. I must, as mathe
maticians sy, b invariant to a transformation.
This quantity-tbo invariant-is natural ly
known for projective tran. formati ons of a circle.
I f We also tako into account that the length
of the sum of two line sgments must be equal
to tho sum of the lengths of thes sgment, i t
turns out that tbo "non-Euclidean distance" is
determined uniquoly. And of cours sucb a dist
anco bhaves normal ly (that is, it becomes in
fini w) when one o[ the points lies On tho circum
forenco of tbe circle.
The circumference of a circle corresponds to
infini toly distant points of the Lobachovsldan
plane.
266
Of cours, the somewhat extravagant cbaracter
of "non-Euclidean motion" in tho Klen model
is also e"i dent in the fact that the size of a "non
Euclidean angle" betwon two straigbt lines is
qmw diferent from tho rustanco betwen two
chords in the Euclidean l anguage. But thes are
only details. They are important hut tri nes ne
vertheles. Al l the esntials have already ben
stad.
And now the last poiot.
To prove tho noncontradictory character of
the solid geometry of Lobachevsky, it suffice
to convert the Kloi n cU 'cle into a spbere.
A fow years of tor Klei n, the French matbemat
ician Poincon proposd another model of Lo
bachevskian geometry.
A
lso on a sphere. I t is
perhaps even moro remarkable. Poincaro Oven
conjectured a marvellous world of pbysical
267
beings, which, from the Euclidean viewpoint,
would hve IH the restricted circlo of Poincare,
but from their vantage point would clai m that
tbey were l iving in the i nfnit plane of Lo
bacbevsky.
In th is wodd, the strai@h I Ii nC" of Lo bachev
sky are, in Euclidean lauguage, arcs of circles
perpendicular to the surface of the sphere. The
accompanying drawing wi l l give the reader some
idea of Poincarc' model. There are a lot of
attractive featurs i n tho "Poincare sphc,e" but
wo will have to call a hal l at this IJoi nt, for olber
t hi ngs cl aim our n1 tenl i on,
Lh4Qlw
AN UNEXPECTED FINALE.
THE GENERAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY
We have now come to 8 ttlrning of tbO ways.
Up to this point, we had boeu talking tho lan
guage of elementary shool. Wo were able to
sme extent to convey the esnce of proof of
noocootradictorioess of the geometry of Loba
chcvsby and to i mpart to the reader sme ideas
of Riemann. Thi ngs have nOw become complic
aledo To get some foling of the content of the
gneral t heory of relativity, one has to iovesti
gate the special theory. But the anthol' can
hardly expect the reader 0 h8ve the deol) know
ledge that this requires and s cannot afford to
dwell in detail on tbe special theory.
The most natural thing would b to say noth
i ng. The temptation is great. But that would
moan taki'll the whole slmphony of the fifth
postulale and throwing away the triumphant,
purely Bethoven finale.
Obviously, we cannot do lhat. Al l 1 CBI1 do
is warn yon tbat what follows is onl y B bare
ouLline, extremely superfcial.
The general theory of relativity is basd di
rectly OH the idea of the "non-Euclidicity" of
space. That is what i ntol'ests us most. And s
let U try to dispons completely with the special
theory of relativity. We wil l confino ourslves
to ollly a word or two.
269
Gem.lry afte the year 195. The special theory
of relah I ty has already ubstantially alwred
our views concerning geometry. To bgin with,
lel US try to grasp tbe connection btwen geom
elry and physics i n general and also to se what
h
!
s changed i n geometry as a result of the spe
cl Ul theory of Mlat i Nity.
Befor Einstein, the univ rsal and frm con
viction
.
was that Euclidean gometry reigns su
me I n the real uni vers in which we live.
Ihere were no reasons to think otherwis. The
theoretical possi bility that our world is des
cribable b
!
sme kind of non-Euclidean geom
etry remamed a purely theoretical One, whi le
Lobachevsky' s and Riemann's suspicions DI this
score were nO moro than speculations. Tbe situa
tion was as if someone said: "The supposi t ion
that so-nnd- K, Mr. X, is a Martian dweller dos
not i n tbe least contradict the laws D1 formal
lOgic. "
"That ma be," would be the respons, "but
aU obsrvahons and experiments point to so
and-s being an inhabitant of the earth. "
ow after the advent of the special theory,
there ap
I
had thei
hands
.
lull of speifc nrgnL problems,
and dllflOg penods of delino and qlliescncc
Lhere was neither the enlhnsiasm flor Lbe moral
energy to risk i nvcstigating sucb a cardinal and
most certai nl y hopeles problom.
1 1 for tho bgi
?
rting
.
a NewLon was neces ary,
then for tho COllllnuatlOn an i ntel lect of perhaps
a till greator scale was neded.
Most likoly, one mu L agre wi L h Einstein
that without hi m the theory of gravitation might
noL have bon craled La this day.
r n scienco (in the arts too, by tho way) the
role of a gonius is perhaps greater than in ot her
fields. One man is capable of accomplishing more
thMH huodreds of hugo resarch t 'ams. Tho da
cisive iactor is not quanti ty but quality.
So between tho years of 195 and 1916 Ein
stei n stud! d the problem of gravitation. In 1916
the work was completed. Dnring thi s same pe
rIOd he
.
was eJ
al theory, ll
telU P.G
ceded as he himslf said. from a childish, naIve
questin that had engaged him ever since his
school days.
"What happens in a falling lift?"
Another cleven years of intensive work, sv
eral dozen faulty versions that had promisd suc
cess and a numbr of probing invesligations were
neeaed bfore the problem was reslved in 1916.
However, nO exhaustive result that reslved
the problem, like Newton's law, was yeL ob
tained. The work was far from completion, but
the foundation had ben defnitely laid.
Crudely speaking. that as how
.
things sod.
An oxcerpt from Chaplin s autobIography glves
U a pic Lure of how all this appeard in the minds
of two people who cannot be suspected of the
slightest desire to twist the truth.
285
"As Mr Einstein had requested i t should b
a small .r"i , I i n"i led onl " two other friends
At dimler she told me the sioly of tho morin,
he conceIved Ihe t hery o[ rel ativity.
''''I'he Doctor caml down i ll his dreSing gown
as lI
( 1 ) F-
"heeey"he
- T
r
289
Af is the gravitational IMS of the earth,
and T is tho distance from our ball to the centre
of the earth. Newton established that a massi.o
sphere attracts with a force such as i f its entire
mas wero concentratd in the centro. That was
a purely mathematical problem.
(2) F = min."
g
where
g
is the acceleration 01 fre fall.
Cmbi ning the two equations wO get
inrr( "'hrm
g
*
=
T
-
"henrg
r'
ow if Pmqg for all conceivable bo
dies; if they are equal in the cas of steel , wood,
gass, Uquids and radioactive elements and po
M
Iymers and s on and on, then
g
=T
"
.
In other words, the acceleration of tbe earth's
graviLy is the same for all bodies.
This was frst established by Galileo. The
equality of the inert and gravitational masss,
290
as we have already notd, had ben frmly establ
ished in dozens of eX]lcrirents.
Wi Ih the ad vent of the special theory, when
it beame clear that every kind of energy pos
M53 an inert mass, experiments wore perform
ed with radioactive substances.
It turned out tbat in their cas too the ioert
and gravitational masss were equivalent. Tbat
is to say, energy possss heavy mass as well,
which is tbe same B the inert mass. In short,
precis experi monts demonstrated the identical
equivalence of the inert mass and the heavy
mas. However it was One thing to know and
quile another to understand. Einstein st out
to prove why they are equal.
It may not yet b clear wbat al l this has to
do with geometry, but nevertheless this sle ex
peri mental fact plus the special theory of rlat
ivity, plus one more requirement of a purely
theoretical character was enough for Einstin
to bring about a complete change in our concept
ions of tbe geometry of the univers-the gen
eral theory.
OI abut the theoretical requirement. We
can even formulate it in strictly technical lan
guage: "the laws of nature must b generally
covariant", or, more simply, "all systems of
rference must b equivalent".
J fully realize that this is not much of an ex
planation, I gave the statements mOre for my
Oln conslation. 'Ve simply do not have the
neCe sry time to go i nto the origin of tbe gen
eral thery of relativity. I do not Wish to give
only 0 smblance of an explanation, though that
wou.ld b fairly easy to do. The only thing I
V
291
ask you to take On trlllt is that tho "equivalence
of reference systems" is a demand which largly
stems from aesthetics. The i nner logic and the
beauty of a physical theory were to Einstin One
of tho most decisi ve factors.
I t may b that he ocasionally overestimated
the relative signi fcance of such arguments, but
he blieved that the laws of the univers should
in principle be very natural and logical, and
that theoreticians often distort tbem perceiv
ing things in a crooked mirror. One can, of
cours, fnd fault with sucb reasning-no thing
exist that do not have weak spots-but tbe fact
tbat this mode of reasni ng was good is proved
by the re ults he achieved.
"Tho theory of gravitational felds construct
ed on the bnsis of the theory of relativity bars
the namo of the general theory of relativity. I t
was crated by Ei nstein (and formulated in final
form by bi m in 1916) and is perbaps tbe most
bautiful of existing theories. The remarkable
tbing is that it was constrncted by Einst i n
i n a purely deductive fashion and only subs
quently corroborated via astronomical obsr
vations. " Tblll wrote Landau and Li! hils in
their fundamental cours of theoretical physics
wWch is considered to be the world's b t i n
tbat feld. I t i s the only place i n all their ix
volumes where tbe autbors display any omotion.
That fact alone speaks volumes.
But let U get back to apocrypha.
In Wply to the query of bis nine-year-old sn,
"Papa, wbat is i t tbat makes you s famous? "
Einstein is reported to bave said quite sriously
that wben a blind bug crawls over the surfaco
292
of a ball, it dos not notice that th path trav
ersd is curved. Said Einstei n, "I , On the con
trary, had the good fortune to notice that."
TWs pasag is often quoted, but don't think
that it exhausts the content of the gneral theory.
I t is obvious that Einstein himslf believed
that the basic result of bi work was a fundament
al cbange i n our conceptions of tbe geometry
of the univers.
We have already said that the sllecial tbery
lUlled the idea of the geometric properties of
pace being indopendent of timo.
Time bad bcome a part of geometry.
But the properties of lime only aleeted the
geometry of moving bodies. For bodies at rest,
the gometry of Euclid h Id true.
A new pbysical factor app arcd in the general
theory of relativity that detormined the geom
etry.
The old resul t-the mutual dependence of tbo
properties of space and time-was naturally ro
tained. But lWs was not nU. I t tured out tbat
tbe gemetrical properLes of the world 8
23
given point at a given instant of time are deter
mined by tho gravitational feld at that point.
Thls last phras probably dos not mean very
much to tbe reader, and s we shall give a few
precis statement and then a crude analogy that
sbould domonstrate certain tbings.
In the general theory of relativity, the world
is describd by the geometry of Riemann. Here,
when speaking of tbo world and its geometry.
we all the time have i n view the four-di mension
al world. Time is i nextricably woven into tbe
geometrical properties of space.
A you recall, both Gaus and Riemann reg
arded the curvature of space at a given pOint
85 tbo detrmining cbaracteristic. Als docis
ive was the Uilltrinsic characteristic of spaceJ_
the properties of tbe sbortst l ines (geodesics).
Thes lines are physically determined by tbo
trajectories traversd by material particles f
of tbo action of forco.
According to Einstein, both the curvature at
a given point and the properties of geodesics
ar determined by tho gravitatIonal feld. In
the general theory of relativity, gravitation oc
cupies an exceptional place of honour. Roughly
speaking, it is tho most important of all inter
actions.
I t determines tho gometry of the univers.
We cal put It diferently: gavitation is detrm
ined by the gometry. But no matter bow W
word it, tbe result is that t gemtrical pro
perties of the world are detemine by the distri
bution of gra vttating msss.
We repat again: whenever we speak of geom
etrical properties, wo have i n view a four-im-
294
ensional world, so tbat in ordinary parlance one
ought U sy:
TM gemetrical propeties and tM propeties
01 time are compltely determine by the distri
bution of masss in tM uni vs.
And just like the geometry of the plane is
approximately fulfilled for small areas of a two
di m nsional curved surface, s small regions of
the four-dI mensional world may be approxim
ately rgarded as regions i n whlch the curvature
is tero.
Physically, this means that in small spatio
temporal regions One can exclude the gravita
tional feld and pass over to the special theory
of rlativity.
According to Einstein, gometrical properties
appear in space and Limo only when there are
rnaterial bodies in the univers.
295
That, very roughly spaking, is tbe gist of the
ideas of tbe general theory of relativity.
Two remarkable circumstances stand out in
the story of the development of this theory.
1 . At frst Einstein was not even acquainted
with Riemann's ideas. He had wanted to ex
plain the equality of the inert and heavy mas$
and found i ll bis sarch that Riemann's geom
etry was the necesary mathematical form for
a desription of his purely phYSical reasoning.
2. The general theory is probably tbo only
instance of a pbysical tbeory created in a purely
deductive manner. There was only one exprim
ental Iact underlying the whole theory.
Today, the general Uleory has been corrobor
ated experimentally B numbr of ti mes and was
lust recently verifed under laboratory conditions.
Now the analogy which I promisd.
I magine a piece of cloth stretched taut. This
is a plane. The geodesics On it are straight lines.
The curvature is zero. A fre material particle
on
.
su
.
ch a surface will move in a straight line.
ThlS lS an analogue of the space-time of tbe spec
wi tbeory of relativity. Now throw B stone into
!bo middle. The cloth sinks in the vicinity of
l
pact
:
The sbape will he distorted. The geod
?S1CS wl
.
1I no longer b straight Unes. A particle
ID motIOn on such a surface, Oven in the absnce
of forces, will b defected from a straight-line
path.
The farther away from the stone, the les the
curvature, and at infnity, the cloth is again
lat. Tbe portion of curved cloth is a rough model
of space-time in the presnce of gravitating mas
ss.
296
And now tbo last question. What is the actual
geometry of the world we live in?
.
Experiment has shown that at least in our
part of the univers tbe curvature of space-time
is positive; crudely speaking, that is, becaus
the question of tho true geometry of the uni
vers is a very touchy one. Physicists have
to U their imagination. This is a realm where
hypothess abound.
Pormally speaki ng, the whole problem' cons
i sIs solely in determining tbe coffcients in tbe
formula that defnes the square of the distance
i n a four-dimensional world: space plus time.
That is all!
As of today we have a number of models 01
the world. Several hypothetical Ulli vcrss. But
we still do not know for sure which one flS tho
world in whicb we Jj ve. The portion of tho uni
vers accesiblo to tbo most powerful telesopes
(only a paltry len thousand million light years)
is far too small.
Of cours tbe local geometry of space-timo va
ries from 'oint to point and cbanges very fanc
ifully near gravitational mass.
Let 's try another analogy. Cmpare our situa
tiOD with a dweller of a mountainous region
of the earth attempting, with the aid of geodetic
obsrvations, to establish that the earth is a
sphere. His region of obsrvations is of cours
very restricted. Only a Iew kilometres. Quit
obviously such a physicist is in no easy posi
tion.
Even if be is able-uing his measurement
to fnd tbaL Lhe meaD radius of curvature of
his portion of the surface Is 6,40 IQIQ!etres
97
(the approximate radius of the earth), he will
not bo one hWldred per cent confdent that the
surface of the planet has the same curvature in
regions outside his view. And then be ,u inev
itably have to do what Isaac Newton s disliked.
He will have to frame hypothess.
That is the actual situation of down-to..arth
physicists when they ar asked ahout the geom
etry of the world in tho large.
Let's stop for a moment at this exciting point.
[t is time W did some summing up.
There ar two main pOints to b summarIzed;
both ar a dirct consquence of non-Euclidean
gomelry.
The lrst is the creation of axiomatics and,
subsquently, of mathematical logiC. This w.s
accomplished by Hi! brt. We have already had
ocasion to mention him, but ollr story was very
crude and approximate. Particularly as regards
the problem of the completenes of the axioms.
I could have done a btter job, but only at tho
298
expense of drawing out our story. Anyway, when
I sat down to write this bok I had no idea of
how to tell th story of ax ioma tics precisly,
concisly and comprehensibly. Too little has
been sid oE axiomatics, and most of tbat was
not very accurate. The only conslation is thaI
I can now add a bit of advertisment.
The whole range 01 problems involving axlo
matics is amazi ngly elegant. Even the state
ments of many of the problems 8 totally unex
pected. This is particularly truo of tbo problem
of completeness. One rcsul will sulfce as an
illustration. Already in the Hl?,o's the follow
ing theorem had ben proved.
Suppos you have a cerl.ain logical system.
I ts loundation consist. of tho Basic Concept
and the axioms. Say, Euclidean geometry. I f
this logical system i s "suffciently powerful"
(the meaning of this is of cours over our heads),
then it will always b possible to formulate
theorems which, within the framework of tho
system, cannot b proved or disproved.
At /rst glance it would sem that the trouble
lies in a lack of axioms. Tbat is not s. 0 mat
ter how many axioms aro taken, no matter how
we supplement our system, there will always
remain certain assrtions about which nothing
defnite can be said.
Alter this marvellous theorom was proved,
tho whole problem of noncontradictori ness took
on a diferent aspect.
Wo were silent on this poinl, just as we did
not so much as touch OD the totally wlexpected
application 01 mathematical logic in comput
ing machines.
299
We spoke in smewhat more detail about the
scond line of development that - passs through
iiemanroian geomotry to the general theory
of relativity.
One more thing. The whole history of the dev
elopment of non-Euclidean geometry appears a.
one of the most brilliant instance. of unexpeted
turns in tho history of science.
WI.at appeared to b the ult- imate i n abstract
speculative and theoretical meditations of mathe
matiCians was in sme marvellous way trans
mutd into thi ng. of extreme i mportance to
practical phy ici.ts and even engi ners.
Lhdlrr Z
EtNSTEIN
The esnce and nature of any extraordinary
talent are mysterious. That is a trit statement.
But the bitter truth is that the mechanlsm, even
the rough operating scheme, of that remarkable
computing device that is our hrain remains a
mystery to science. We cannot make out how,
ill the brilliant scheme of evolution, nature fash
ioned sme 14 to 17 thousnd million element
ary units called neurons into what is known as
the human brain.
We do not even have a suitable answer t the
question: "In what way dos the human brain
difer from that of some other animal?" Wo eithor
conine ourslves to the general phenomenolog
ical reasning of the biologist or to the scint
illatingly clever but, alas, trivial paradoxes of
the writr.
There is even les to b sid about how the
brain of a genius difers from that of a common
place earth dwoller. More, we do not even have
any gronnds to claim thM there are sme kind
of organic diferences of that nature.
I t may very likely b that in every persn
some exceptional talent wasts away unbeknown
M the world. It is a very entiCing and consling
idea, and was developed at One time w th tbo
greatest pleasur by Mark Twain.
31
Thero is of cours smething very suspicious
about it aU. But thore are no objective facls in
dicating any absurdity. I t would perhaps be
hard to fnd a btter illustration 01 tho level of
our knowledge about the mechanism and bio
logy of thinking. We hardly know anything nnd
can only take note of the purely external charac
teristics 01 talen t.
Tho oft-repated phras that "talent is work"
d le s one such characteristic. Thes words are
commonly misunderstood to actually mean smo
tlllng; this is done all the more eagerly since
the gilted, out of 0 tentatiou modesty and with
due r peet lor tradition, though at times quite
sincerely underestimating themslves, point to
work as the main sluce 01 tbeir excoptional at
lai nments.
Slatements of this kind arc many, but only a
portion (and 8 small one at thall) is the truth.
Paganini claimed Ils wizard playing came
from a supremely xhausting labour Ihat en
abled him to master the potentialities of his in
slrument.
He was wrong 01 cous.
The writer Lev Tolstoi liked to say that his
gill as M writer wa not at all so great or signi
ficant, tho truly important and valuable tngs
being the moral ideas he preached that were s
natural and simple.
I do not think that Tolstoi sid what he
thought.
Einstein, speaking 01 hi gnius, said a remar
kable thing. and we shall come back to it again.
But I think ho had in mind smething quit
diflerent and simply was compelled by circum-
302
slancos (energetic newsmen) to throw bono to
the public.
So my id a is that wo hould not blieve ge
nius on this point. The eternal, mournful in
dignation of Pushkin's Salieri (a talonted prson,
by the way) prsnts a better and mor accurate
picture of what a geniUJ really is.
I L is smething incomprehensible.
When dealing with a normally endowed per
sn, we can analys and decipher a fow things.
We can then pick out, mor or les clearly, tech
niques, experience, tast-all that comes as the
reward of arduous, exhausting labour.
For example, one can al most alway und r tand
what is god and what is bad in Balzac's bok.
But wh n you are imperceptibly charmod by
the endle , rather clumsy and at limes (hor
rible dictul) imply grammatically incorrect phra-
85 of Tolstoi ; when you ceas to watch the style,
the techniques, the images and only follow the
story of Ih piebald hors HoI tomer, learniug
how ho lived and died, and how many herss
there were i n the herd of his la t owner . . . . Whon
you call ld dOleos of moro or less suitable ex
planations 01 why uch and such a paragraph
was wri ttell and what relative Iitorary merits i t
has etc., but canuot grasp how i t could hav
come to Tolsto; ' s mind to write that way and
why you ar lolt with that inexplicable convic
tion that that was precisly the way it should
have ben written . . . .
Then w say that this is an anomaly which
can b r corded as such but cannot b accounted
lor.
The curious thing is that quite olten B prsn
303
who is a gnius i n one feld is by no means 8
harmoniously endowed personality.
There & paradoxical instances galore. Per
haps tho bst one is Tol toi. Tolstoi the philoso.
pher was a narrow-minded, biasd and capricious
persnality.
We enn bring this disusioll of genius to a
cos
.
by adding that the very conception of ge
HIU IS oxtremely hazy and subjective, particu
larly when one deals with art, whero objecti ve
criteria are still mor nebulous.
In sience too, ulti matly, the deciding fac
tors (or, to b more oxact, their absnce) are tbe
sme as In art, and tbat is why very often a
frst magnitude star of today bcomes noticeab
ly faint tomorrow.
Some cass, incidentally, are unque tionable.
One is that of Al brt Einstein.
As far B we can judg [rom reminiscences, the
childhood years of Einstein did not in the lea t
sugg st that he would be 3D Ei nsteiD.
He was a quiet, reticent child. Usually chil
drn are full of I ile and energy, noisy, ill a hur
ry, in a hurry to toll the world what th y aro.
But in overy dOZOD there ar one or two of
the quiet kind. Thoy do not take part in games
and kep to thomslves. They %m to b occu
pied more by their inner world tban by tho
world around them. I t may b that smething
bas stirred up mistrust in tbeir minds and tbey
simply cautiously avoid people, in tinctively be
lieving that it is safer tbat way. Children of
this kind ar not li ked in the rather merciless
kingdom of childhood. Tboy aro continuaUy b
Ing teasd.
304
"Si sy", "mamma '5 boy", uwcakling" are
SOme of the international terms lhat often caus
more anguish than, in later l ifo, a raking down
by ono's superior. At any rato, the mark tbey
leave in tho person's l i re is deper.
Ein tein was of the timid kind.
His rolati ves recall that he was called "mam
ma's boy" for his morbid love of tbe truth and
lair play.
Another thing. 1 did not l i ke sldiers. Nei
tber tho real Ones marchi ng along in bright new
uniforms aDd helmet stamping in unison down
the quiet stroets of the towns of I,is Fathorland,
nor tho pretty tin sldiers that come in nice
boxe. He did noL like sldiers.
True, honesty and fair play are not so rare in
children. The question, rathor, lie in the age
at whicb it ordinarily disappoars.
Now as to thi in Linctivc dislike o[ sldicrs
that i indeed strange.
There ar not many children like tbat, and
one might su pet smething out of the ordinary
in such a child. But no, there do not sem to b
the slightost indication that this "smething"
will, in fften years, Dower iota the theory of
relativity.
There were other things that worried Einstein
at this age.
I do not know whethor the people around
him noticed that at the ago of ten or eleven this
boy of well-to-do parents was going through a
crucial internal drama, which i n many ways de
termined the wbole of bis future life.
At least Einstin himself rememb red; at too
age of 67 he wrote:
305
"Even when I was a fairly precocious young
man lhe nothingness of the hops and strivings
which chass most men restlessly through Ii fo
came to my consciousness with considerable vita
lity. Moreover, [ son discoverd the cruelty of
that chas, whicb in thos years was mnch
more carefully covered up by hyporisy aud glit
tering words than is the eas today. By the mere
existence of his stomach everyone was condem
lled to participate in that chas. Moreover, i t
was posible to stisfy the stomach by such par
ticipation, but 10t man in so far ashe is a thinking
alld feling being. As the frst way out there was
religion, which is impl anted into every child hy
way of the traditional education-machine. Thus
I came-despite the fact that I was the sn of
entirely irreligious (J e,sh) paronts-to a deep
religiosity, which, howevor, found an abrupt end
ing at the age of 12. Througil tbe reading of
popular scientifc books I soon rachod the con
viction that much in the stories of the Biblo
could /lot b true. The consquence was a poitive-
306
I y faoatic fl'othillkiog coupled with the imprs
sion that youth is intentionally boiog deceived
by the state through lies; it was a crushing i m-
11ossion. Suspicioo against every kind 01 autho
rity glew out of this expel'ience, a skeptical aLti
tude towards the conviction which were alive
in any spei foc scial euvironment-an altitude
whieh has never again left me, even though laler
0lI bcaus of a b tlcr insight into the causal
connectiollS, it lost sme of its Oiginal poig
nancy. "
This smewhat heavy pasage demands more
than a hasty reading. It is worth a most de
tailed analysis.
Note, frstly, that Einstein wrote his autobio
graphy as a scientist striving to extract from his
inner life with complete honesty ouly what de
srves attention. He 01 cours realized that this
was no easy task at al most 70 years of age. He
was eveo academically cautious in the title:
"Autobiographical Notes". Mostly he wroto about
what he considered to b the ouly intresting
thing in his lifo-the formation of his scienti fic
outlook. His work.
There is no place for allY tiing els in this slf
obituary. There is no attempt to appear better,
no ostentatious display of any kind. Actually i t
i s a Sientifc paper. I n overy lIne one fols the
desire to b as truthful and objective as posible
in decribing how he, Eintein, reasned.
Such was the lile of tn-year-old Einstin.
He did not like school. He recalled school,
picturing his teachers as army srgeants; and tho
gymnasium where the instructors wero, to him,
lieu tnant.
W
37
Here we have tbe 6rst riddle. One fairly orten
mets people who, irrespective or tbeir culture
and education, never reach the idea that a per
sn needs smething more than simple well-b
ing. Some arrive al that conclusion at a mature
age, or even at the end o( their l ives.
To one degree or a"other, this striving to
wards the mysterious "smething els" is found
in aU children, but mostly in a very intuitive
way of which they 8 not aware.
Einstein, On the contrary, reasoned with rigo
rou
.
s logic. As a result he arrived at religion,
wblch was quite understandable, taking into ac
counl the conditions nnder whicb he lived.
So rar there is nothing mucb Ollt of the ordi
nary.
The amazing thing is thaI alter reading a num
hor of popular-science books the boy quito in
dependently canied out a purely logical analy
sis and took a sharp turn away from religion,
as a doctrine that is unsatisfactory. He even
gos farther, arriving at a clear-cut conclusion of
great social i mport: " . . . youth is intentionally
being deceived by the state through lies . . . "
That was at the ag of twelve.
And that was the conception that he carried
with him throughout his l i Ie. If that is so, then
whetin lies his, AI bert Einstoi n's, "some
thing"?
Very very cautiously, fearful of distorting tbo
trufh, he writes that partly conSCiously and part
ly subconsciously he came to the conclUSiOn tbat
for him life would b happy if he devoted him
slf to science. "The road to this paradis was
not as comfortable and alluring as tho road to
308
the religious paradis; but i t has proved itslf
as trustworthy, and I have never regrettod ha
ving chosn i t. '
You cao blieve him, ho was indeed One of
the happiest people of our ag. Perbaps ho would
have boon just as happy even if we imagine tbat
his work 'as not understood, not rocognized and
if he bad to die an unknown eccentric engineer
of the Swis Patent Bureau at Berne, where, as
a twenty-fve-year-{Id youth he created the theo
ry of relativity. InCidentally, at tbe end oi his
l i fe he exprienced smething of this kind once
again, i n a sns.
Not in the sns of bei ng famous, of cours.
He was the most reognized and most popular
scientist in tbe world. He was al most as well
known as Marilyn Monro or the footballer Oi
Stefano. His name had bcome a symbol of the
human inteliect.
But phYSicists did not take much interest i n
the works written towards the end of his l i fe.
Yet i t was only their opinion that carried any
woight with Einstein.
309
Actually, not to much weigbt, bcaus tbe
decisive factor was always tbe opinion of Albrt
Eiostein.
Why did be choos sieoce?
Perhaps if a cartain modical student. had not
suggested tbat be read poplllar-sience IitoratllO
be would have ben a god musician instead of
a brilliant physicist. Einstein played tbe violin
from the ago of six and was sriously and sin
cerely in love witb music throughout bis life.
Then again he might bave gone into inventing
another one of his pasions. But sucb musings
are idle.
Ei nstein himslf, in later life, always sid that
if a person was born to be a physicist, if it was
in his blood, tben he would b 8 physicist 110
matter how his l i le turned out.
It's hard to say, be most likely was judging
by himslf. Tnle, on one occasion, recalling his
youth, be ox presd the opposit viow.
Be all this as it may, the existence of all the
popular-science literatlltC of the time would b
justi fed by the single fact that it had some in
Duence on tbe deeply tinking youngster of
twelve who roamed the pictlltCsque outskirts of
tho provincial Swabian town of 1m i n 1891,
Soldiers' fet rc.'unded on the streets of Ul m.
They were the heirs of the victorious warriors
of Mol tke who twonty years bfore had routed
France.
The military traditions of Ul m, it sems,
went deeper still. I n 1 85-Ul m was then a lrs\
clas lortress-a wondorfully equipped Austrian
arlTlY surrenderetl to Napoleon ill a most suda
lous lashion, virtually without lghtil1g.
31 0
But, frst of all, the army was Austlinn, which
means, formally speaking, not German, and this
consquently implies "not at all German".
Secondly, tbe sldiers did not remembr the
defeats, for their beads wore fled with victo
rios.
Defeats wer simply rgrettable accidents,
th. t 's all.
So they marched.
That was probably when to the child Ein tein
caDlO hate. A restrained, calm, smewhat cold
and rational hatred. A hatred that invariably
stayed with him his wholo Ii Ie. He could not
stand militarism, war and slaughter. He viowed
i t all as the supreme concentration of human stu
pidity.
Thl bcame clear to him in his early years,
alld his viow never changod.
The year was 1 891 . Fascism was a long way
or. The crematoriums of Oswiecir and Maida
nak were not yet built. They came later.
Germany was still to face the Schliefen plan.
The First World War. Marching armies. Exalted
wepi ng WOmen throwing 10wers to their menfolk.
Trainloads of soldier. Eratz lood products. And
the sme women weping, diferntly, over tbo
endles stream of casualty telegrams from tbo
Eastern and Western fronts. Tho final rout, the
o,orlhrow of the Kaisr, tho Treaty of Versilles,
io nalion, rnin, hunger, and the epidemic of fu
would al l come iate, to tho Gormans. All thes
thin!s wUltld come bofolo tho Fiihrer came.
Truo, L hero were a low tbing . For example,
tho hright uniforms lIII,1 the P"usian gneral
31 1
slaff, antismitism, and patriotic military mar
ches, and fraternities, and-probably most i m
portant of al l -an unquestioning reverence of
titles.
Ci vil.an or mi l i tary, it makes no diference.
"Herr Privy Couucillor! Ohl Indeed!. . .
Tho great Olympian hi mslf, Gothe (aod a
volume of Gothe could of cours b found in
every rospectable family), even Golhe, ladies and
gentlemen, was just as preud of his ministerial
post in the misrable Weimar prinCipality as,
perhaps, he was of his potry.
And Hegel? The great "Privy Councillor" He
gel, remember? And his doctrine of the Prusian
monarcby?
In short, tbe German stato was consistent in
,is strivings to wip out lhe very capability
of independent (hence, critical) thought that is
part and parcel of every normal human being,
Hnd to put in its place ready-made slogans,
rules and traditions.
And they did a good job, one mnst admit.
The system was polished to per[octiou by true
cra ftsmen i n the art.
The "Wacht am Rhein", the sntimental "Lie
der" of blueyed girls, and Wagner's operas,
and gymnastics at school, the tales of ancient
ordic heros at the history lesson, and tradi
tional of-colour humour in cbeap editions, and
pedantic neatnes instilled from early childhood,
and abslnte obdience to the bead of the smal
lest unit of the state-the family.
And, finaUy, the end Ie mlll liplicity and di
versity of ollicial , sm i-official aud Jlon-offcial
hierarchy of t i tles and r.nks.
31 2
The hierarchy i n the family, i n tho beauro
cracy, i n tho mil itary srvice; the beirarchy of
numbrles Veroins, fraternities, llnions in sports,
at the factory, in music, the arts, the siences,
ill li teratur and religion; unions of lovers of
hunting, lovers of song birds, unions of be
kepers, yachtsmen, and s on and on.
Al! this craled and cherished a convontionali
ty that was both slf-satisfed and humblo; i t
created people that forgot that they were capab
le of thinking, people for whom a dictatorship
appeared to be the most natllral form of power
i maginable for tho reaSn that each in himslf
was a dictator on a microscale.
The remarkablo thing about the i nfi nitely poi
snous character of tllis whole demoniacal ma
chino was that it fed On v ry decent felings and
aspirations-patriotism, rspct for one
8 ei
ders, sports . . . .
But what of the people themslves?
The same. Whether at the begi nning of the
IHtcnlh century or the beginning of the twen
tieth, or evon during the year. of fascism, they
did not dilfor in any way from any other people.
There can b no quetion tht a hllndred thou
sand scoundrels can b found in any large coun
try. The historical situation i n Germany at the
end of the 192's was such tbat precisly this group
came to power. Possibly, accidental circumstan
ces played an appMiable role here.
Trne, the prerequisites for this accident
wer already prepard. Incidontally, J would not
b saying a"yt hing original OI H0W j[ I added
l hat roughly tho SalUo prerequisi tes were avai
I ble in auy of tho largo i 0IporiaHst states.
31 3
This had boo made cloar many timos in the
boks of such wri ters as Sinclair Lewis and H. G.
WeUs, where the po sibility of fascism develop
i ng iu tho Uuited States or in England was des
cribd in science fction. Perhaps tho greatest
dangr of tho domagogy of fascism lies in tho
fact that i t is not new or exceptional in any way.
I I fascism is a disas of the human race, it
is an ancient affiction. States of the fascist typ
exi ted in all ag . Egypt, Sparta, Rome-all
the ancient regimes preachod just about the
smo ideology as the 'azis. So Hitlor did not
have to concoct anything particularly new. True,
ho added a goodly portion of scial demagogy,
which Egypt got along without but which an
cient Rome found it n ce a to includo.
And of cou.rs ono of the ba ic axioms of tbe
system was nationalism.
otbing very origi nal about tbat eitber. From
time immemorial, fattery, Oven of tho crude t
kind, ha alway ben excellont bait to lure tho
bearts of members of th human race. I t is al
ways nice to hear that you are bett r than tho
next man. Al l tho more 8, whon you yoursll
are not s sure of th fact.
ow if the Dattery is kept up in iatontly
enough, ooe bgins to helievo.
Every empir huilding state since tho pbaraohs
of Egypt bas brought nationalism into play as a
means of attracting and uniting tho peoplo.
Tho idea is simple and naive, a truism.
The emperors of Rome, Genghis Kban, apo
Icon, Hi tler have all employed tbe saro tech
lIique, just as tried ald te ted as compli menting
the woman 0ll0 wants to sduce. Towards the
31 4
end o[ bis life, Einstein gloomily remarked that
people lear but little from the Ie ons of his
tory bcaus ach new act of stupidity appears
to them in a Ire h light.
That this sy ter produces results eVOD in our
"enligbtened" age was, unfortunately, demonstra
td in tbe cond World War. But we must re
p at: tbe fact tbat most o[ the G rman people
accepted fascism in one form or anoth r do
not, of cours, imply that tbo Germans as such
ar les responsi ve to tbo generally accepted mo
ral norms than the Rusians or tbe F nch.
ow if the question of the re ponsibility o[
tbo German people as a whole for tbe ris of
fascism comes up, then wiLb just a mncb justi
fcation the qu tion could be addresd to aU
tho capitalist states of our planet, whicb with
comparative calm watch d Hitler advance from
the Ber Hall putsb in Bavaria to tbo furnaces
o[ the concentration cam ps and the mass sboot
ings in Ru ia, Poland, yugoslavia . . . .
Tbo logic of noni nterference wa just tbe
same . . . -
Today, twenty odd years after the end of the
war, today wben i t is posible t judg with r
lative objectivity, onO shonld hardly throw all
tbe horrible blame onto the German people.
All tho more s since that nation too paid a
suffciently dear price. Among tbo victims of tbe
ads wore al 0 thos B rlin youngsters who du
ring tbe last April days of 194, crying from
sheer frigbt, wenl at Ru ian tanks with Faust
Patronon sincer(ly believing that they w re fgh
l i ng alld dying for their Fatherland.
Thes urgullIonlg ar Iroiahly just 88 true as
31 5
the fact Utat the acti vo SS men aod the "crea_
tive" and initiative Hitlerites of the punitive
expeditions and d ath camp should b judged
and exterminated today, too, twenty and mor
years aftor tbe war's ond; they should be shot
calmly and with a elear consience, "without all
ger and bias", on the basis of tbo very same rea
sooing that profesional murderers and recidi
vists are wiped out.
Wo may rcal l that onco upon a time one of
them got the idea of writing "10dem das sino"
on the gatos to the Buchenwald concentration
camp-to each his duo.
Why do . writo this here? Becaus tha t was
approximat Iy the way Einstein thought. He ba
ted fascism his whole life.
Humanism and the al l-permeatng kindness
that was Einstin's do 1I0t appoar to link up
with sntimental al l-forgivi ngnes. which. as a
rule, stems from indifferonce and gets along ve
ry well with stone-ol d egotism.
This is nicely and precisly described by Le
pold I nfeld i n his recollections.
.
Unf
8 stand
and style ill bis dealings wi th people.
Tbere semed to be a vacancy opon at a certain
institution, and four dilerent a
l
lplicants came
to hlm one aftor the otber for letters of recommen
dation. Einstein gave letters to all lour.
To the surprisd questions of his friends bo
replied calmly that he saw nothing strange or
extravagaot in what he bad done, for in each
cas he gave di fferoot reasns for his cboiCe of
caJldidate and it was, be said, up to the employer
to do tho cboosing.
Let us return to 1 891 , to the town of Ul m and
to tbe twelve-year-old boy who was exporiencing
a wonder. I I wa contained in a book on Eucll
dean plane goometry. Euclid was a revelation
to Einstein, and it remained 8 to the end of his
life. Shortly bfore hls death he said words to
tbe efect that if Euclid's work could not fo
one's enthHia m i l youtb, then that person was
not born to b a tbeolelician.
Einstein's recollection of this wonder on tbe
fourth or ffth
I
lage of ltis "Autobiographical
Notes" is just about the ltlst purely autobiogra
phical recolletion.
A few words follow about bis education at
tho Polytechnic [n titut of Zuricb, then just
in passing 8 remark or two about the syslem 01
"
323
instrllction and . . . rougbl y fifty pages of Ein
stein's idea concerni ng modrs of thillki ng, epis
lemology 81 1 d, of COllr, phyic, W nl ways.
Hut one bfluld lIot get the idea tbat this way
of cOllstructing an autobiography is another 00
of thos cuto absurd absnt-minded ways of tho
a.hetic monk. Don' t ever try to represnt Al
bert Einsleill as a kind of J acl
l
ue Paganel of
phyics.
A few pages later h. give a clear-cut and
ealm explanat ion of his somewhat extr.vl'gant
manner of presnting thi nW!.
"And this is aD obituary?" asks t he puzzled
rcader. I feel l i k answering: "Why yes, of cour
s. " Becaus the most i mportant thing i n the
I i! of a man of my make-up is what be thinks
and how he thinks and not what he dos or exp
rienccs. "
That i why Ei n lein "ecalls tb wonder of
geometry and docs not even mention his Nobl
Prize.
This idea of a "wonder" a of something that
tho human mind encounters Ulot contradicts "I I
established notion , i "ery persistentl y repeated
by Einstein throughollt his I i le.
l u reply to a reporter's question as to how i t
happened that Ei nstein and not smebody els
discovered the special theory of rel ativi ty, Ein
stein remarked that ho \a rather late in deve
loping mentally and that for this r'Rn h sti l l
relroined tho perception 01 a child at the lOge 01
20-25. And so wbell, unencumbered, be medita
ted on the situation o[ t hi ng in physics, be ua
turally was surprisd l i ke any normal chil d
would be, but ince bo was at that lime twenty
324
years of age, his i ntel l et was mor develop d
(this he admi t ted) thron throt o[ normal ten
ycar-old boy and so he wa. able to obtai II re
Si l l ts tha t COIllIII'isd t he special t heory of re I 8-
ti vi Ly.
Penotrnting to the kerel of mallers here, we
Ond t hat t here is an i mportant and very esntial
idea behind i t al l , tltat lhe % ientist should con
tantl y experience 8 fel i ng of wOllderm nL and
rgard al l the phenomena of nntILre i n au unpre
judiced manner; he should rej ct al l dogmas and
authorities . . . . I n shorL, h should thi nk UJld not
quote. 1'ru , Lhis wa IIOt an original thought.
Plato had al ready put th idea neatly when Ito
aid: ,\ onder is tho mother of scionce. "
Today this i s such a trui m lbat no sel f-res
petllg wriler risks repeal i ng i t, yet t hero is no
scond Ei nstei n. Obviously, there must be some
thing more. But, s.,d as it is to admi t , w0 ar
rather i n the po i t ion of a eunuch being tol d the
mealling of lov .
o young Ein.stein ex pri nced One wonder .r
ler another. Betwen lhe ages of twelve and si x
toon he discovered mathematic , 8nd the purely
emoLional i mpresion that this new world, UIO
world of 11I'ecis logic and unbridled imagination
made on him, was exceptional.
At about this l i me Einstein experienced yeL
another wonder, purely psychological.
"Til fact thal [ neglected matbematics to 8
certain extont had its cause noL merely in my
stronger i nlere t in Ule natural cienc.s than i u
mathematics buL also i n Lhe followiog strango
experience. I saw that JIatematics wn split up
into nUllerous speci al itie , each of wWch coul d
325
easily absrb the short l i fetime granted to us . . .
my intuition was not strong enough i n the field
of mathomatics in order to di Uerentiatc clearly
tho fundamental l y i rpo.tant, that which is real
l y basic, [(om the [st of the more or less dispen
sable erudition. Beyolld this, however, my in
torst i n tbe knowledgB of nalure was also unqua
Ii ficdly . trongr; and it was not clear to me as
a student that the approacb 10 a more profound
knowledge of the basic principles of physics is
tied up with Ihe most i ntricato mathematical
methods. This dawned upon me only gradually
aftr years of i lldopcudent scientific work. 'rue
enough, physics als was divided into sparate
fiolds, each 01 which as capable of devouring
a hort lifetime of work without baving satis
fied tbe hunger for deper knowledge. The mas.
of insuffciently connected exprimental data waS
overwhelming bere als. I n this fiel d, bowever, J
soo learned to sceot out that wbich was able
to lead to fundamentals and to turn aside from
everythi ng els, from the mul titude 0/ t hi ng
which cl utter up the mind and divert it from
Ute e ential . "
This i s amazing. I t is not so important whether
Ei nstein, at tbe age oJ si xten to twenty had for
mulated to himslf thes tbi ngs or whethCr tbe
decision was to sme extent not consciously relt
in his own mind.
The amazing thing is the maturity of such a
cboice+ ucb lucid critical thinking in gneral is
very rar0, and i s smelhing practicaUy unheard
01 at tho ag of sixteen to eighteell years.
Indeed, takB a look at what we have. Here is
a young boy 01 si ton caried away by mathe-
326
lIIalic . The intQgral , tho fundalllontais of ana
lytic glometry fre a great surce of pleasure, 01
such jOy that nOlbillg els call COlli pare. He of
cours real izes that he is gifted and that his ta
leot slands Ollt on the general backglound.
He bad every posi bi l i ty of a [ro choice (aud
this is most essntial). nO circumstance. of l i fe
cOlIJ pelled hi m. Even moro, i f Olle takes into Re
count tho purely exteral i nDuences, lhen there
were mor points i n favour of mathematics. The
Polytechnic I II t i t uto of Ziirich had a oumber of
bri l liant mathematicians such a Minkowski.
Thore wcre no outstanding physicists though.
Einstei n hi mslf said l ater that up to Ihe age of
thirty he had nevel" sell a real tneorelical phy
sici t .
Given statting conditious l i ke thes, i t i s bard
I y posi ble to concei ve 01 a young man giviug up
matbematic [or the cognate ubjoct of theoreti
cn I pbysics.
A cballg over 10 potry or, say. music would
have ben, psychologic!tl l y speaki ng, more UD~
derstandable.
J fel that tbe problem was reslved hy an
amazing featur of Einstein 's character, which,
obviously, was already fully matnre in thos
years, and that is a total absnco of intel lectual
cOllcei t that is so natural among gifted young
pKoplo
He al ways appraisd both bis potent i ali ties
and his results obrly and cal mly. He never
played at ostentatious 1I0desty and he knew-he
said i t openly-that his works rpmsnt the glea
t0t D ul t of twenlietb-ccnt\ll"y science
At Ihe sme time he knew (01" he thought he
327
knew) tJ .. t be would not become an outstanding
matilcmalician.
And so bo gave I] matbematics.
Througb!)ut his lifetime, Einstei n's rlation
ships with mathematics W0IT ratiler complica
ted. On the one hand, i n later Iile, ho timo and
agai l l regreUed his loutblllJ sl f-conudent COn
clusion tbat physics required onl y the lundamen
tal s of mathe",atics and that tbe more sphisti
cated matters coul d be left to p"o[e ional ma
thematicians. Ho became 'onvincod of tbi error
when he hgan working OlI the general theory
or rol ativity. During tbo f"5t stages, he bad to
ask the help of his frielld Marccl G"ossmanu in
the mathematical port ion.
In later years, Ei nstei n 's views changed. His
main works-at least outwardly-aro works or
a mathematician.
Neverthcl :M, he Illway' remai ned a physicist
in modo of t lJougbt Hud in bis approach to pro
blems.
1 shall not dsk getting into a di cussion "bout
the similarities and dilerencos of the tbeornti
cal physicist aud the pm. JJ1 athematician. Suf
lice it to sy that there is a dilfe,ence. And a
raU.er essntial ono, as wi tness tho fol/oling
amUlling exchange 01 wit botween Einstiu and
Hilbert.
I II 1\)15, Hilbrt took a l i ki ng to tbe theory of
,elati "i tl and deidod to try his hand at physics
blieving iliat substantial progl'es wouJd not b
made wit hout malh omaLicirulS.
As he ralho. clevOJly IIUt i t without excessive
modesty, "physics is aCLual ly too dimcul t lor
tbe physicist". His work was nlturally at tbe
328
ultimaln mathematical level but smewhat
lacking in pbysical content.
In a letter to Ehrenf st, Ein tein rather spi
telully replied for the pbysicists when he descri
bd Hilbrt ` work as the tricks of a suprman.
Towards the end ol his life, Einstein remarked
to the efect that mathematics is tbe only per
fect way of leading yourslf around by the nOs.
We will not attempt to draw any moral bere,
but will simply rpeat that no matter how ma
thematical Ei nstein's works were, he always re
mained a physicist.
It is now time for u to note one import.ant
lactor. Tbough Einstein repeatedly said that the
respons of the community-recognition On the
part of his colleagues-was extrmely i mportant
to hi m, and this was of cours true, his own ap
praisal of his work was the decisive factor.
To tbe very end of his days he could not re
concile himslf t o the basic ideas of quantum
mechanics (which h relegated to the class of
ephemeral physics) and t bough he remained
alone he never .hangea his opinion.
I n the sme way, he was the only physicist i n
the world who, without any external prerequisi
tes and alter having earned fame and recogni
tion, worked for ten years (between 195 and
1916) On the problem of the gravitational feld.
Standing quite out ide the rang of interests
of tbe phYSics ol that priod, be created the g
neral theory of relatb'ity.
Perhaps duo to a nriety of accidental circum
stances he bcame the trlost famous sientist in
the world. Calmly aod omewbat sardOnically
he withstood a virtual avalanche of bonorary
329
awards, medals and distinctions (including the
title aod attire of honorary cluef of an Indian
lrib). And then fol' another 3 years he worked
intensly on the general theory of relativity. W
maining practically alone, actually without any
recognition or moral support and appearing i n
the eyes of the new generation of quite slf
confident theoreticians of the 193'5 to 195's
something in the nature of an aging monument.
Incidentally, he once mentioned to his wife
that tbe resnIts he obtained in the 40 's were I he
biggest contributiou that he had ever made.
Who knows whetber he was right, a he almost
al ways waS when Iho subject matter was physics?
The only thing to b said is Ihat t here has ben
an ever increasing i nlerest in Ihe general theory
of jolativity and, in particular, iJl the i nvesti
gations of Einstein carried ont dl ll'ing tbe last
year of his life.
,
But perhaps tbat too i just a fad which phy
sicists are pro lie to follow like women do fashi
ons. Or it may simply b 8n expression of a cer
l ai n disppointmen, a crisis in modern tbeore
tical physics,
Yet perhap the foundatiolls of the physics of
the future are indeed to be sought i n Einstein's
wOk OI tho unifed field t heo,"y, At any "ate,
the scienti le ca,er of Einstill, bginning from
his general theol'Y of relativity, is an unparal
leled anomaly in tbe bisto 1 of science.
Alld if one speaks of the purely pr onal as
pect of the mater. tbe wbolo story is a miracle
that causs more respect than the purely mat he
matical gi ftednes of Einsteiu, wbich ultimalely
scoms beyond tbe scope of human kind.
330
I II passing let us add tbat on the side (even if
we count from 1920 onwards), Ein tein carried
out a range of rsarches totally unconnectd
,ith relativity theory, but of t hemslves quite
suffcient to split up among a nnmbr of workers
alld fl five or six vacancie at all election to the
Academy of Sciences,
We may agai n add that his resnIts ill the tbeo
ry of Brownian motioll and the photlectric efect
(this was in 195) were i n themslves suflcient
to have ensured the author all exceptional
p
lace
in Ihe history of pbysics.
We migbt also recall tbat the most fashionable
and promising trend today in quantum statistic
has as its source the theory of the thermal ca
pacity of crystals, which just by the way was
proposd by Einstein in 1908,
Finally, Einstein '5 rejection of quantum me
chanics, his paradoxes, yielded so much mate
rial for an el ucidation of the fundamentals of
that feld that in themsh'es tbey can b consi
dered Ir t-magnitudo works of cionce. Then, too,
he obtained a numbr of very i mportant resnIts
after 1916 in various parts of the quantum the
ory.
But for him al l of tbes were onIy a mental
game and a pleasnt recreation from the main
thing-the unifed feld theory,
.
So we have Einstein at the ZUrich Polytechnic
I nstitute majoring in phySics and neglecting ma
t hematics. He even skipp d lectures-not to spend
his time idly but the belle" to utilize it. Before
arriving at Zurich together with his fa
i l y, he
had already visited Mil an and had expertenced a
nnmber of small unpleasntne , such as bing
2
331
told to leave the gymnasium at Munich for un
healthy skepticism. Als he failed once in an
examination i n zology and botany at tbe Po
lytechnic Institut.
.
But thes events, which for another person
mIght have played a decisive role, wore for Ein
stein merely unpleasnt trivia.
Tho die was cast, and his natural bubbling
over cherfulnes and clear-thinking head dismis
sd al l
.
thes and other bumps and scrapes that
came his way. He wrote that he was nevor in a
gloomy mood unless he bad a stomachache . . . .
J udging by his letters and the recollections of
relative , Ei nstein at 2025 years of age was a
strong lifo-lOVing young man with a pasion for
music,
c wa
Dever any hint of tbis constant urgo
for IUDcr lIldepndence ever bnilding up into ego
tism and a disregard for thos about him. This
was precluded by an inbor culture and a con
sciously developd mildness .
I n a word, he was a nice well-mannered young
man, broad-minded, without a trace of conceit
Or morbid reOections. Ooe could radily fors
his future as 8 school prinCipal or a top-clas
expert in the patent bureau, where a that time
he WaS only rated third-clas. One could se
hi m a great lover of music and literature, Icading
S
.
ophocles, Racinc, Srvants, disusiog tho trea
tLss of SplUoza and Hume, whicb he was then
reading with a group of friends. One could pic
ture Einstein on a mountain hike animately dis
cusing Mozart, Alexander of Macedonia, Aeschy
lus, Beethoven, Kant, Archimedes, Cleopatra,
ewton, Cuvier. Confucius, Anatole France .. . .
.
Later, we might M hi m the author of progres
Stve articles on the history of science, or music
or pedagogy . +
I n shorl , his letters and the recollections of
people who knew him draw a picture of a very
nice young man disturbiogly ordinary.
One lnds it hard to blieve, then, tbat this
was Einstein and oot jut some pleasnt, educa
ted well-mannerd, clever young man.
Perhaps there i s one thing, Eistein 's ability
to dispens with all externals when the discus
sion turns to philosphy or physics. But no, this
was not vcry oxceptional feature among the
young people of thos days.
Actually, bowever, an explosion was in tho
making.
333
And it came in 1 95.
J must repeat that any one of three works of
Einstein that appeared i n that year-the theory
of Brownian motion, the theory of the photo
electric elfect, and the theory of Olati Yi ty
would elevat the author to the rank of exlra-cla8
th ortician.
It remains a psychological mystery wbether
Einstein himslf fly resliwd what he had ac
co Rp Iished.
If ho did-and everything about Ein tein and
his latr pronouncements on this score suggest
that that was the cas-then we must admi t tbat
i ntellectually he must have ben very much
alone, and the pleasnt people about llim did not
even notice anything out of the ordinary, while
Einstein himslf, tactnUy reticent, tried not to
suppress his fiends whom he liked in a \'ery humsn
way. Otherwis how 8ro we to expl ain his letter
to Habicht, one of hi friends of the Ber priod?
This uniqne epistlo begins "Dear Habicht, th
ilence btween us is sacred and tho fact that r
am i nterrupting i t with lere twaddle lIIay sem
a profanstion. " And s on in Einstein '5 old
fashioned ponderous play!ul style, call i ng l Ia
bicht a "frozen whale" and fanCifully upbraidi ng
hi m for not snding his di rtation, which Ein
stein W8 eagr to get and read "with plea uro
and intere t".
Bul tbe b t joke of all, one quite worthy of
Heinrich Heine, i bidden at the very bgin
ning of the letter, bcans what is bei ng ofered
as mere twaddle is tho fOllOWing:
"I n r turn (for Habicht's dissrtation.-Smii
gal I promi% you four papers, the fir t of whicb
334
J will snd oon b caus I am expecting tbe all
thor S copies.
"It is deyoted to radiation and light en rgy
and is very re^olutionaryg 8S you yourslf wi l l
K, i f you frst snd me your work.
"Th scond papr contains a determination
of the true io of atoms by m 3nS of studying
difusion and internal friction in liquid solutions.
ovl'he third demonstrate that in accordanco
with the molecnlar th ory of heat, particl 01
th order of 10-' mm suspended in a liquid x
perience apparent chaotic motion due to the ther
mal motion of the molecules. Biologists have al
rady ob. rved such moLions of suspnded par
ticles; th ir term is Brownian molecular moLion.
"The fourth paper is basd On th olectrodyna
mics of mO\'i ng bdies and mod i fes tho concop
tion of space and tim : yon will be i ntersted
in tb purely kinematic part 01 the work . . . .
IIabicM certaillly did not los out i o thi ex
change I wonder how much is i nbred mode ty
Ei o tei n's appeal to a scientists of equal stan
ding-and how mucb is merly traditional cour
t y. I t i hard to take sriously the rather ti
mid hope that i n a paper where, in pa i ng as
i t were, our conceptions of li me and pace 8IY
overtbrown@ there ight b ometiling of i nte
rest to Habicht. I f re W get a picture of Binst in
verging on that of tho vil lage simpleton.
Yet on the otber hand-and tbis is evident
from all future lellers, from Einstein' s whole
life-there is the incel'e lwaren , confdence,
cOllviction (wbat have you) thU Habicht is a
O1an, a p r%nality and ha tho same valu as
he, Albrt Ein tei n, and is not different before
335
any law. Above all, before the inner law that
Einstein obyed in his youth, in maturity and
in old ag.
Most likely the imprc ion of a certain ordina
rines in the prsn of Einstoin (I speak purposly
of his youth wben hi associates and companions
could not yet know that he was tbe greatst pby
icist in tho world) was largely due to Einstein' s
overriding feling of democracy, ani an egali 13-
rianism just 35 natural to him as his desire to
study theoretical physics.
I have already spoken of this, but I want to
repeat bcaus to people of the twentieth cen
tury this trait of an outstanding persn is pro
bably the most cherisbed; one is espcially at
tracted to a man who, when placed in an excep
tional situation either due to his own merits Or
to a more or les accidental st of circumstances,
remains democratic and humanistic not only in
form but in e snce to.
And not tbat for a scientist of Einstein' s
stature, there were not less but prhaps more
grounds and conditions to become, at least in the
communHy of his asciates and pupils, a more
unhridled and cruel dictator in the sphere of the
inwllect than any actnal dictator has in the
spher of JolHcaI life.
Self-COnfdence, which expands into capricio
usne , intolerance, and conceit, unfortunately
often attends ontstanding (3nd mediocre) scien
tists, who in this respect only fall short of pots
and prima donnas.
Such thing are not usually written in books
yet that is the cas.
True, I can judge Einstein only on the basis
336
of biographical material, but tbis cas appears
to b absolutely clear. Einstein did not have a
single one of thes traits to even the slightest
degre.
That is yet another psychological enigma 8
sciated w th the name of Albrt Einstein, and
by far not the last in signi fcance.
EinsteIn stood the test of fame i n just as easy
going a (ashion-hardly noticing it-as he did
his failure at the exams at the Polyl chnic I n
stitute of Zurich.
That, approximately, is the picture I have of
Einstein.
One thing remains. It is vcry important.
It is the attitude of Einstein to violence and
war.
Wi Uy-nlly, from about the 1920's onwards,
when he had bcome world-famous, and the na
tionalistic, antismitic fasist scum of Germany
had bgun victimizing him and his works, to
the end of his life he was closly assciated witb
political afairs at large.
One cannot sy tha t he tried to evade hur
ning political i ues of tbe day. He clearly rea
lized that, frstly, such a thing was simply im
posible (whetber be liked i t or not is a diferent
question), and scondly, he felt that he simply
had to interfere wherver he blieved that
SOme good could result.
But here he found himslf in a sphere where,
from his point of view, very many things were
unpredictable, uncontrollablo, and unexplain
ahle.
Becaus Einstein was extremely perceptive, he
could probably picture to hi msl [ and account
337
lor the I ychology of olfcers of the Prussian
general staf, but to conceive of a human bing
reasoning and acting l i ke the commandants of
extermination camp , like tho men in punith'e
expeditions and the hundreds and hundred of
thousands of mcn, or to understand how i t
came about that tbe leaders of quite a few coun
tries could b morally and i nt lIectuall y about
on a level wi th thos very same S men was
something beyond the capacity of Einstein. This
wa bcaus he unwittingly OYN timated the
human intellect.
In the '93' he who wa a convinced and
con i tent
I
lacifist had to say "now is not tbe
time for paci fist ideas", for (this was a natural,
immediate conclusion) the only way to halt the
spread of fascism is by us 01 mili tary lorce.
I n what followed ho was witno to an i l1\'ol
ved, stupid and dirty political game. H saW
poli tician of I he twentieth ccntury adhering to
the old-Ia hioned, nah'o criteria 01 humanitaria
nism to al most the same degre as onghis
K118n. He "itnessd the cond World War, and
he ShW evonts altel' the war build up into W
rre h threat of yet another war. He wa to some
extent reSIOnsi ble for the making of the atomic
bomb, for he had written bis famous letter to
Roosvel t.
I n reminisconces of Einstein, wri lers often
speak of the so-called "Bi n teiniltn tragedy of
the atomic bomb".
To my mind, i t was not the bomb.
From the standpoint of reason and logic (and
thes lactors were al ways decisive for Ein tein)
he was irr I)roacha hIe.
338
He wrote the lotler i n August, 1939, whon
there was a direct and i mmediate danger of Hit ler
making the bomb and when the only reasonable
solntion was to get i t bforo fasi m did.
He fulJy roalized that he had bad nothing to
do with tbe cold-blooded sosle s murder of
tens of thousands of Japanes in Hiro hima and
'agasaki, all the mOr so siJlce in 1945 he wrOle
Roosvelt a king bim not to al \ow the military
us of the bomb.
To Einsteing the atomic bombardment of thes
cities was in tho way of the last act of hUlllan
barbarism, fnal proof of the hopele posi tion
of the sciontist, the absurdity of tbe scial struc
ture, the unconditional abnormality 01 buman
being in sats of government.
Of cours, this gloomy conclusion was aggrava
t d by tbe purly emotional realization that he,
Al bert Einstein, was connected with the explo
Sion, bowever indirectly. But tbis was only an
i ncidental factor. More depresing still was the
fact that during tho years he at ti mo lost
faith i n the possi bility of any social and moral
progre , yet tbis ran count r to everything Ein
stein stood for. However, bere loo be remained
true to hi msll, to his manner of outwardly dis
pasionate, calm analysis.
lIe learned of the explosion by radio. Einstein' s
first reaction was one of griof and de pondency.
Y"l h aU"d tlml the tragedy bad nothing
to do with tho di covery of tbe chain reaction.
Hi s viow that the discovery of the 6 ion of
urani um dos not represnt a threat to civiliza
tion any more than tbe discovery of matches
dos, that tbe futur development of humanity
339
d pends on it moral code and not 00 the level
of technol ogy, was repeated many times.
He Vte that the worl d was 00 the varg of a
crisis, the whole signilcance of which was not
prce. vod by thos who have the power to de
cide betwen good and evil, that the nowl y W~
leasd atomic energy had chaed everything,
I aving unchaed only our mode of thinkingq
"The slulion of this problem lies in the
hearts of the people. "
But the fact that he sw all this s clearly
did not make things easier. Towards tho end of
his li!e his supply of natural cheer was running
out, and his depressd state of mind only aggra
vated the mercilesly critical view he took in
appraising himsl f and bis work.
"Tbere is not a Single idea wbich I am cOllV in
ced will 8 tand the test of time. At times I am
in doubt about the correctnes of the path I have
taken. My contemporaries se i n me at ooce
a rebl and a .eactionary who, to put it fgura
l ively, has outlived himslf. That is of cours
a pasing fad causd by nearsightednes. The fee
ling of di satisfaction comes, however, from
within. "
Einstein' sventieth anniversary was bing
celebrated when ho wrote this letter to an old
friend. Honours never moved him, and now
sliLi les. He sadly concluded: "The best that life
bas given me is a few real friends, bright and cordi
al, who understand Olle another like you and me. "
One year bfore his deatb, when he declined
the invitation to be presnt at th fiftieth anni
versary of the cration of the special thoory of
"elati vi ly, he wrote in the same spirit:
340
"Old ag and illness do not prmit me to take
part in such ceremonies. And [ must admit that
in pat I am grateful to fate, for everything that
is in the least asociated with the cult of tbe per
snality bas always ben a tortur to me . ( . . In
my long life I have come to undersland that we
a a great doal farther away from a real under
standing of the proce S of natur than most
pople today realize.
Thero may have ben more optimistic notes
at other moments, but in gneral the last 01 his
years were sd. Nsvertheless he continud to
work. His cher at times Ie It him, but never his
clear analytical mind, which functioned fawless
ly to the end. He never changed his views or
convictions in the least. They merely took On
more sombre tones .
As bfor he was always ready to respond to
a lettr or to deline hi ideals, though more of
len One would hear hi m say, "pople have gone
mad", "the world is on the brink of a catastro
phe". During thes years 01 the "cold war the
situation in the Unitd Stats was grave. At
such times extremists always come to the surface.
The notorious Anti-A merican Activities Com
mitte was active. Tho slightst deviation from
offcial political views was dangerous. Natural
ly, tho intl lectuals-the most Wide-awake por
lion of the nation-were frst to come under sus
picion.
Cn Einstein's letters and spe che of this p
riod, one ses more and more a bitter yet coura
geous stoicism. Not a drop of sntimentality.
As bfore he was \ery far a way from a ny kind
of complacent all-forgivingness.
341
I n reply to an American teacher, he wrote:
"Frankly, I can only se the "evolutionary
W(IY of noncoopration in the sns of Gandhi 's.
Every intellectual . . . must b prepared for jail
(Iud economic ruin, in short, lor tho scrifce of
his personal weUar in the i nterest of tho cul
tural welfare of his country.
"If enougb peopJe are ready to take this grave
step they will b succesfll l. I f not, then lhe in
tellectuals of tbis country desrve nothiRg bt
ter than the slavery which is int nded for them. "
I s not this the same as sying "Yes, tbe people
of u country desrve the government that they
ha vo"?
He continued to receive letters and no matter
what he tbought , what his mood was, be consi
dered it his duty to belp by writing to lhos
wbo lelt they neded his aid. His work sufored
of cour. , but what was there to do.
As he put it with a bit of irony just a year b
fore his death, "the time 1 need for meditation
and work I have to steal like a profesional
thief". And yet for all that, he continued t
work to the end, whether he was disappointed
in humanity or in the level of human knowledg.
Now I call se how poorly I have succeded i n
wri ling about Ei nstein. '0 say nothing of other
things, 1 realize that Einstein appears here un
real, 1mblievable, too good.
But tbat ws what he was.
Perhaps his greatest weaknes was a somewhat
c" uel irony. He acutly saw the weak sides of
people and at time ho overindulged in his hu
ll,our. Of cours he was nO saint and would get
ini tsted over purely persnal mi ltters. And pro-
342
babl)' at times unnecessarily S. Particularly i n
his yonth.
He was not ashamed of wri ting very bad po
try, even l i ked to, and he would snd his vc,ss
to his friend . He gave concerts eagerly though
his violin playing was far from brilliant.
Finally,-true, this is only a su picion I have,
basd on circumstantial evidence-l think he
Was inclined to courting ladies i ll a rather old
fa hioned srt of way. That would sem to com
plete tbe list of his si n .
Hi s most slient trai t \Va that in hi pri vate
l i fe he strictly adhered to thos beautiful prin
ciples that he espousd publicly. People of this
kind are rare and the more 0 tbe higher their
standing. Naturally, a mall is best tested in the
face of death.
From 194 onward Ei nstein knew lhat at .ny
moment his l i fe mighL end uddeuly bcaus of
a stroke. He had said a numbr of t i mos that he
was not .[raid of death, that the expectation of
death would not change anything i n his l i fe,
and now be proved i t.
It did not, except perhal)S his diet which he
tried to obsrve. J ust as thirty years earlier,
he was calmly srcastic when speaking about
hi posible departure to a beller world and wben
in Apt'il 1955 his time came, he remained tbe
way he had al ways ben.
ELnstein su(ared greatly, and he knew that
be would die. But whenever there was any im
provement he reverted to his bloved irony and
stOically awaited events. He died in his sleep.
Einstein was probably One of the most l i keable
persons i n the hi story of humankind.
343
H
M)t 00l0 W000 D @t&lP0 0Y 00t omment 00 b0
c00M0I, b0 lla0 &M0u &B0 lh0 0W@0 0l lbU U0k. W. W0uld
a b lm l0 t%66 &u 0l8t 90@gMl009 00 ma W5b
l0 me.
0t &ddM 9! Mt 0058, 2, 0fV 1b9X 8t6u0k,
l0W, ..b..
Prnted In th Unlqn 01 SOlet Soclalut RepbUc.
8. CMMTfA
Peaakwp H. WwA N
X)Aown K- C
0W? lWk M 3ro
Tu NNm Awe
Komxopu f Awvm. P. Amua
CAao uaa m WiXll lW t
HoAnmam R DE&7 WV I9 I.
7me N I WIg@ ]M
2.M c. R R. R. Y-m 3. l3 . Hx , W I7W
eKa W W. 3es lW.
Tap 0.W
Teme IM I, RW MHP= 00$. z3.
H3DATETbCTSO 4 MP
Ym. |k Px8 RY., 2
.\ukwkW TNBfD$KR I A&kt$a000Ha
h0KT0a RO WRRTH NN C mKl1nYW CCCP
04. K&K0 l3