Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
PHILOSOPHY OF MATHEMATICS
TO
BY
A.M.,LLJX,
PHILADE LPHIA:
J. B.
LIPPINCOTT COMPANY.
1886.
In
B.
LIPPINCOTT &
CO.,
United
District of Pennsylvania.
IIPPINCOTT'S PR188,
PHILADELPHIA.
Eastern
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER
I.
PAGE
METHOD THE
METHOD or EXHAUSTION
CHAPTER
II.
MAL METHOD
38
CHAPTER
THE METHOD OF
III.
56
INDIVISIBLES
CHAPTER
IV.
CHAPTER
THE METHOD OF
THE METHOD OF
V.
CHAPTER
LEIBNITZ
73
93
VI.
137
CONTENTS.
OHAPTEE
YII.
PAGE
THE METHOD
OP
NEWTON
170
CHAPTEB VIIL
OF THE SYMBOLS
AND
j
OX
00
209
247
NOTEB
247
NOTE
CHAPTER
I.
FIRST PRINCIPLES OF
broken, and
unity destroyed, by the influx of principles which are as unintelligible as they are novel.
He finds himself surrounded by enigmas and obscuriits
10
it
compara-
tively
lectual powers; because the dark and unintelligible
processes he is required to perform scarcely demand fl
hundred students, among whom there were mathematical minds of no ordinary power, and
required them
to tell me what are the first principles of the infinitesimal method or calculus.
Yet, after having read
and mastered the first chapter, which, of course, con-
!l
jf
|fc
[{
*
;
ciples are.
first
r"!
much
less define
them.
ii
>
In this
knowledge.
11
so
clear
order,
real
mathematical
and unmistakable
light.
to contribute all in
my
My
other words, to render as clear as possible the fundamental principles of the higher calculus,
from which the whole science should be seen to flow
result
or, in
my
obligation to them.
see, the
more clearly, the exact nature of its methods, by showing us the difficulties it has had to encounter, and
the precise manner in which it has surmounted them.
It will also disclose, in a clear light, the merits of
12
THIS
PHILOSOPHY OF MATHEMATICS.
the various
stages of its
to
to
show us that,
wander-
brought to light the secrets of almost every department of nature, and with which, above all, it has unveiled the entire system of the material universe to
the wonder and admiration of the world?
THE METHOD OF
EXHAUSTION.
perties of these
searching method.
Hence
the
method of exhaustion
in their more difficult
13
to the ancient
meaning of what
we must
is
so often
of exhaustion.
" admitted
the ancients, says Carnot,
only demonstrations which are perfectly rigorous, they believed they could not permit themselves to consider
As
as they
the same
number of
of different
two
circles
established that the polygons are to each other as the squares of their homologous lines, they concluded, by the method of exhaussizes.
Having
14
this process to
proached as near as
we
As
the circles.
method.
cumscribed
Hence they
circles themselves, so
radii."
But
it
was the
method. Nothing obscure, nothing vague, was admitted either into their premises, or into the structure
of their reasoning. Hence their demonstrations absolutely excluded the possibility of doubt or controversy ;
a character and a charm which, it is to be lamented,
Having divined
that
any two
circles
(C and c) are
(E and r), the
to
2
;
any
false.
then
let
if
as suppose that
C:c:
line larger
than
By
r.
is
:
15
not to c as II 2
:r /2 ;
r'
being
a process of reasoning,
by which every
Hence
this
geometers in their most difficult researches, has sometimes been called the reductio ad absurdum, as well as
a form of speech, in both
which a part is put for the whole.
The
ad absurdum is, indeed, generally included
in
reductio
same
altitude.
They used it
They imagined
also
in regard
to
other surfaces to
curved surfaces.
be inscribed and
16
which
figures
base
circle
of the
great circles
sphere
is
multiplied
its
surface multiplied
by
Hav-
sphere,
surface
same
ratio
two
as beautiful
man.*
* When
Cicero was in Syracuse he sought out the tomb of Archimedes, and, having removed the rubbish beneath which it had long
been buried, he found a sphere and circumscribed cylinder
engraved
on its surface, by which he knew it to be the tomb of the
great
geometer.
17
of exhaustion.
and because
strations,
finitesimal
effort
analysis.
of the mind
but
it
contains the
It
is
is
true
germ of the
that
it
in-
exacts an
sacrifice to it too
much time?" *
Such were
its
it still
hand,
it
had
tedious, slow
Descartes
supplied the
rcoi)
2*
18
2!H2?
PHILOSOPHY OF MATHEMATICS.
"
The method
the germ
Leibnitz.
contains
of the ancients, says Carnot,
of the infinitesimal analysis" of Newton and
But he nowhere
tells
us what that
germ
is,
or wherein
it consists.
It
is
of this indirect and tedious process that Newton proposed his improved method. But there are other ele-
1.
In every
more nearly the proposed quantities, and, finally, to differ from them as little as one pleases.
2. The variable
are
become
to
never
quantities
equal to the
supposed
which
toward
to
were
made
quantities
approach.
they
Now here we behold the elements of the modern
infinitesimal analysis in its most improved and satisThe constant quantity, toward which
factory form.
the variable is made or conceived to approach as
nearly as one pleases, is, in the modern analysis, called
"the limit" of that variable. The continually decreasing difference between the variable and
its limit,
that
is
is
is
analysis.
and
fertility
by which
it
is
characterized, without
which
19
ancient method.
ment of the
demanded an
enduring patience in the pursuit of truth, and a capacity for protracted research and profound meditation
for
Although
all
"When the true philosophy of the infinitesimal calculus shall appear, it will be seen, not as a metaphysiIt
cal speculation, but as a demonstrated science.
It will not only
will put an end to controversy.
to
be
all
the
calculus
radiant
cause
over
with the clear-
n,
20
evidently needed,
if
is
ele-
method
of geometry.
But, unfortunately, from a misconception of these principles, they have usually succeeded
in bringing down darkness rather than light from the
made
light, is
to introduce a
new darkness
into the
We
each other as
of their
tJieir
radii,
the squares
radii"
circ.
C.
area
A
A
circ t
area
OB
OB
* Davies'
Legendre, Book
C
C
A O B,
A OB
and that
Theorem.
21
the
number of
CA
be to each other
OB
Now if the
(Prop. X.).
arcs subtending the sides of the polygons be continually bisected until the number of sides of the polyas the radii
and
we have
here
Giro.
CA
ciro.
OB
C A O B.
CA
area
OB
CA
2
:
OB
"
2
.
many
of the most
Hence
it
becomes necessary
occupy the position
of a
attention
is,
ma-
and
22
this,
effect
on the mind of
the beginner.
But what shall we say of its substance?
The whole demonstration rests on the assumption that
indefinite
number of
Or, in
equal to the circumscribed circle.
other words, as the author expresses it in a more re"
cent edition of his Geometry, the circle is but a regu*
The
lar polygon of an infinite number of sides."
sides, is
same principle
sition that
of half
its
is
employed
to demonstrate the
all.
bodies,"
relating
on
propo-
and
if this
foundation be not
and
silence controversy, it
would certainly be
" infinitesimal
method," as it is called, is even more
used
in
this last work than in the one already
lavishly
" The
noticed.
infinitesimal system," says the author,
" has been
adopted without hesitation, and to an extent
somewhat unprecedented.
* Davies'
Legendre, revised edition
Proposition XII.
f Hackley's Geometry.
The
of 1856.
usual expedients
Book
V.,
Scholium
to
23
methods, involving
Now
the question
" the in-
which
it
used.
The author tells us that " the perimeter of the polygon of an indefinite number of sides becomes the same
thing as the circumference of the circle." f Or, again,
"
by an infinite approach the polygon and the circle
Now when
coincide."
him
to
was, as
"As
they admitted
method of demonstration by
ad absurdum. This method was, in fact,
the reductio
modern teachers of
the science.
the fewness of
its steps is
great
polygon
however great the number. Did
number of
sides,"
they, then, fail to escape the principle in question?
Does the reductio ad absurdum, their great expedient
for
is
Yet
are
it
sought to escape.
we now
reductio
for this
purpose, is,
involving
the very principle from which its authors intended to
effect an escape
But if that principle is false, then
the weak and tottering foundation of those
portions of
!
geometry which
it is made
more
than
a mere
something
and render it secure.
assertion to bolster it
up
25
sides." *
it is
humble teachers
It gets rid,
it
is
true,
of the
honors?
" the
I object to the above so-called principle of
It
infinitesimal system," first, because it is obscure.
neither shines in the light of its
in the light of any other principle.
is
neither
intuitively clear
and
own
evidence, nor
That
is
to say, it
satisfactory
to the
tiquity ?
than the very greatest minds of anif much progress has been made
I doubt
* Elements of
Geometry.
Professor of Mathematics
University.
3
Book
V.,
26
between a
present day are not agreed among themselves respecting the truth or the possibility of the conception in
sacri-
ficed
geometry the
principle that a circle is a polygon of an infinite number of sides, and returns to the reductio ad absurdum
of Euclid.
were
Even
if their
principle
cipal
etc., etc.
27
small.
and
of a
circle,
or
identical with
Even
matics.
if it
were
true, it
would not be
entitled
to
rank as a
judges.
first
Whereas,
it is
first
inevitable conviction
kind.
In the second
Every
line
has length.
is
How,
changes
28
OF MATHEMATICS.
ornetry as dirtinot
and
different
'
>
h broken
be
up and confounded, as if there
difference
is not th
t ls done in
the darkness of the
imagination
ather than in the
pure light of reason ? If the c
our
ent
into
mto
the
nS
v
very
"7 *"
P"-iple down
l
^
foundations of the science
D<
thUS Ca
first
Why dis
false
ha^lrf
to
hich
'
as
fd:;te ;itiiT
e' ind
ever
*~*
29
way
to refute
contradictions
been long
satisfied
with his
work* the principle in question is not seen, and the word limit is substituted in
its place.
I say the word limit, because this term is
not adequately defined by him.
"The limit of the
in a revised edition of his
" is the
perimeter" (of the inscribed polygon), says he,
circumference of the circle ; the limit of the apothem
is
is
Now
expression for the area becomes," and so forth.
what does the author mean by the expression " passing
to the limit?"
Does he mean that the variable polywill
ultimately become the circle or pass into its
gon
If so, then he has made no change whatever
limit ?
in the structure of his former demonstration, except
the substitution of an undefined term for an unintelli-
gible principle.
is
circle
that the
the limit of
its
(variable)
" no
sensible error can arise
perimeter," he adds, that
in supposing that
what
is
not,
But he
at all arise?
strictly
If
speaking,
so,
coincide with
from
all hesitation
<
|
1
30
of sides."
Why,
is
true
circle.
of a limit?
finite,
an
who
to
We
to each other.
We
But
an
if
the circle
infinite
is
number of
* See edition of
1SG6.
let this
with
be shown
XIV.
all,
lished principle.
Why
as
31
an estab-
made
an
infinite
lish that
If a
number of sides?
which
circle is
infinite
Why
continue to estab-
number of
sides," then
it is
cylinder
only a right prism, and the cone only a
right pyramid with such polygons for their bases, and
is
the sphere itself is only a solid generated by the revolution of such a polygon around one of its diameters.
Hence all the theorems relating to the circle and the
Book VIII. of
the
work
in
cases of the propositions already demonstrated in regard to the regular polygon, the right cone, and the
volume generated by the revolution of a regular polygon around a line joining any two of its opposite vertices. Why, then, after having demonstrated the general truths or propositions, proceed, with like formality,
to demonstrate the special cases?
Is this conformed
to the usage of geometers in other cases of the same
If not,
assert that
"a
circle is
32
they are not clearly convinced of the truth of this assumption themselves.
If this assumption may be relied on as intuitively
infinite
number of
sides,"
then
how
greatly
them would, indeed, be at the very most only simfrom propositions already deple corollaries flowing
to
as a
Thus, the volume of the cylinder
base
its
to
be
would
equal
species of the right prism
theto
surface'
its
convex
into its altitude, and
equal
monstrated.
periphery of
manner
its
same
line.
In
like
pyramid,
its altitude,
and
its
In
phery of its base into one-half of its slant height.
the same way we might deduce, or rather simply reof a
state, all the theorems in regard to the frustum
But what,
would become of Book VIII. of the Elements ?
Would it not be far too short and simple? As it is,
what it lacks in the substance it makes up in the form
then,
demonstrations.
It is now spread, like goldover twenty goodly octavo pages; and yet, if the
principle on which it is based be really true and satis-
of
its
leaf,
factory, the
a few
It
would
scarcely
make
But
if
we
33
polygon ever becomes equal to the circle, or coinwith it, what shall we do ? If we deny that they
cides
ever coincide,
how
shall
we bridge over
the
chasm
between them, so as to pass from a knowledge of rightlined figures and volumes to that of curves and curved
surfaces?
chasm,
fall
first
problem which
to the cultivators
ages,
It
is
many
no
made known
in order to be universally
a xr7j/j.a ec
received, and become a possession for ever
del more precious even than the gift of Thucydides.
But there are mighty obstacles to the diffusion of
supposed to have
known
all
creation.
But the
fact is
B*
34
for
Newton,
as
he
creation ?
The second of
these obstacles
is,
that few
men can
be induced
to
7'
those
who
own.
Satisfied
with
this,
al-
Their
own
Hence, in
their prayerless devotion to truth, all they do is, for
the most part, only to add one falsehood more to the
empire of darkness.
is
book referred
to that
polygon, says
author,
approach as nearly as we please to equality with
the circle, but can never entirely reach it" *
Accord-
to
33
made
it
as
it
Now
is
not
this
We
true of the circle, and we are merely told that whatever is always true of the polygon is also true of the
In this the author not only appears to beg
circle
!
or in all
its
stages,
bounded by a broken
circle is
line,
and
Thus, he
"
says,
what-
ever
is
Now
* Art.
1.98.
f Art. 477.
Art. 201.
1}
36
" whatever
is
point of a curve
Now
it
is
so far
from
true.
The author
does not claim the credit of having discovered or invented this new axiom. " In explaining
the doctrine of limits/' says he, " the axiom stated by
Dr. Whewell
scholar." f
is
Now
"
Thus, says he, a line or figure ultimately coincides
with the line or figure which is its limit." J Now,
most assuredly, if the inscribed polygon ultimately
coincides with the circle, then no new axiom is necessary to convince us that whatever is always true of
the polygon is also true of the circle. For this is only
to say that whatever
all its
forms
is
is
true of
it
in its last
form
a truism
and consequently
there
it
nothing.
* Art.
201.
f Preface.
J Doctrine of Limits,
Book
II.,
Art.
4,
3?
it
over.
CHAPTER
II.
thematicians of the highest rank regard it, as eviThus Carnot, for example, says, " It
itly untrue.
absolutely impossible that a circle can ever be conered as a true polygon, whatever may be the numof its sides." * The same position is, with equal
phasis,
by an
reference to
articulate
This
is
their
writings.
necessary either to estabprinciple or postulate in geome-
is
is
it,
then
is
there an
end of
its exist-
As no effort is
made to prove it, so none need be made to refute it.
For no one has a right to be heard in geometry who
makes the science start from unknown or contradicted
ence as a
first
*
38
principle or postulate.
Beflexions,
etc.,
chapter
I.,
p. II.
39
principles, especially
all ages,
Let us
The problem
to pass
to
we may
see, then, if
same
be solved
result.
is,
as
we have
seen,
how
to those
how
to pass
of curvilinear ones.
Or, in particular,
from the known properties of the polygon to a knowSince no polyledge of the properties of the circle.
tended by
sides,
its sides,
and continue
we may double
the
number of its
ad libitum;
how to
tion
or from the
known
to the
unknown?
The method
Nor
For, in the clear and satisfactory soluproblem, the very first relating to the infinitesimal analysis, it opens, as we shall be enabled
is
this all.
tion of this
fh
us, then,
proceed to Jay
down
trie first
principles ot
this
problem.
The limit of a variable.
When
difference
from
this last
may become
less
than any
second
is its limit.
"
limit" says
Mr.
Now
traced obscurely,
cealed from the
they
deduced from
may
* Elements de Calcul
Infinitesimal, par M. Duhamel, Vol. I,
Book I., chap. I., p. 9.
f Dif. and Int. Calculus, p. 4.
mathematicians.
student
who
41
On the contrary,
prospects presented to his mind.
the student who pursues the analysis of the other resembles, for the most part, the condition of a man who
feels his way in the dark, or consents to be led blindfold
The very
his guide.
definition of the
definition of
In the
all-important term limit.
the variable is said not to
M. Duhamel,
its limit,
value
little
tion, not a
word
as to
is
supposed
But
'
omit them."
Now
strict line
examine
Hence,
it is
* Chapter
I.,
p. 6.
follow.
Is the definition of a
limit,
always subjected
to certain conditions or
laws of change,
or
changing according to those conditions
If
either reach their limits or they do not.
and
in
they
do reach them, then
be stated
laws
they
in the defi-
or
rigidly adhered to without wavering
in
the
as
be
done
this
vacillation.
if,
Especially let
work before us, the same fact is everywhere assumed
nition
and
as unquestionably true.
the last
supposed to be its "limiting value/'* or
value of that variable itself. Again, he still more
is
"
any actual value of a function
explicitly says,
5
be considered as a limiting value/ f Having assumed
that the variable actually reaches its limit, it would,
may
have been
the other.
to
make one
But
if it
The
reason
is
plain.
been
very
tion
difficult to verify
to the in-
He
might
easily find
Chapter
I.,
p. 6.
f Ibid.
43
But such
limits.
analysis.
tiian
Hence,
variables of
some use
and known
in the calculus
He
Can he produce
In order to
illustrate his
"notion of a limit," he
Now,
etc.
of this
+ +
J
J -f J +?
"the limit of the sum
series,
increased,
limit 2 ?
is
2."
nothing?
If
so,
may
be equal to
of Cavalieri
indivisibles as absurd,
is
equal to the sum of an indefinite number of points,
a surface to an indefinite number of lines, and a volume
to
But
is
not the
44
as such if
we may
assert
+ + +
sum
of the progression l
i
i
i+j etc.,
2
its
limit
reaches
by
actually
being sufficiently far
shall
produced.
certainly escape such dark and
that the
We
darkening assumptions
if
we can only
variable to
itself to
its
pass to
find a
method
Precisely such a
method we
have in the work of Duhamel, and nothing approximating to it in the differential calculus of the English
mathematician.*
Our author
a limit.
"Although
approaches as nearly as
we
" never
actually attains its
I apprehend, will be found to be the
to depart from the definition of Duhamel when variables are produced from the calculus which are seen to
f Chapter
I.,
p. 6.
45
That
he will cease
But
it
is
to
be hoped that
and the polygon, because this will make the idea perDuhamel knows, as Euclid demonstrated,
fectly plain.
He knows
this,
He
upon the
made
may
be
it
up with doubtful propositions
be
may
supposed to take place at the end
of an infinite process. He has no use for any such
assumptions or assertions even if true, because he has
its
existence or filling
about what
much
clearer
and
better
method
to obtain the
same
1:1
46
result..
clear
simply an
quantity.,
or
"For example,
the
difference
is indefinitely
"
We cite
some examples,
where
ambiguous
infinitely
which he has
so clearly defined.
There
however, nothing obscure in his meaning. An infinitely small quantity is, as he defines it, not a fixed
is,
or
constant
quantity at
all,
much
less
one abso-
infinitesimal
47
made
still
smaller.
It
is,
But
it
them
to
necessary to
establish
is
knowledge of
ticians,
its
want of
LIMITS.
and a
mathemamany
this principle,
applications, that so
pensable to render the lamp of the infinitesimal analysis a sufficient light for our eyes, as well as guide for
our
"
feet.
This principle
is
as follows
limits, that
is,
It
||
'i
is,
Ji
[8
and surpassing
bj a deter-
for
The first variable having
nlnate quantity ^.
limit will end by remaining constantly comprised
>etween two values, one greater the other less than A,
L
jad
little .difference
from
A as you please;
et
;
having as
//.
Now it
aaining at a distance from B less than J A.
3 evident that then the two values could no
longer
which they ought to be, according to the
of the question. These data are, then, incompatible with the existence of any difference whatever
>e
equal,
lata
Then
these limits
re equal.
The
iseful
b
Let the
lines
to
A B and A C
ny
arne ratio to
B' b'
C' c
C C"
Ab Ac
:
A B A C.
:
If not, then Ab Ac
B some line greater or
2ss than
C. Suppose, in the first place, that Ab
Lc
C' being less .than
C.
C';
By
:
AB A
:
ypothesis, the
L
C, and
variable
may be made
Ac
continually approaches
to differ
from
it
by
less
than
Ab
Let
49
another
till
Ac
differs
from A
C by
less
;
or, in other words, till the point c passes
tity
the point C', and reaches some point, as c', between C'
and C, and b reaches the corresponding point b'.
C'
Ab
By
hypothesis,
two variables
ratio of the
Ab
Ac
Ac
Ac'::
Ab'
A B A C';
:
AB
Ab
or
AC'XAb'=Ac'XAB;
which
is
member
: :
AC',
is
second member.
Ac
always the
Ac'.
hence
is
A B A C',.or to
:
absurd.
A B A C",
there
AC
is
as
ratio to
be
Ac
Now
some
AB
line, as
is
to
have
Ab:Ac::AB':AC;
which, by a process of reasoning similar to the above,
to be absurd.
Hence, if the fourth
term of the proportion can be neither greater nor less
may be shown
than
AC,
it
mustJbe equal to
Ab Ac
:
AC;
or
A B A C.
:
we must have
Q. E. B,
ft
',*
f
50
are equal.
The above
we
be necessary
follows
to establish
positions.
:
The
1.
algebraic
x, y, z .
.
%,
those
In
limits.
fact,
u can be represented by a
the differences
its limit.
sum of
+...
the variables
+ a, b + &
a, /?,... A
We have then x + y + z +
+ c+...l) +
*).
for
+ u = (a +
But a + +
.
/9
Then
it, is
+ + +
b
which is always
which was to be
first,
1,
demonstrated.
2.
The
limit
ber of
= a+
(1
A)
+) (c r)
designating the sum of a finite numto,
terms, each .having zero for its limit, since they
51
(b
/3
co
ft,
see,
u,
then, that the second member, or the first x 7 z
has for its limit a b c
which was to be demon1,
.
strated.
3.
The
limit
In
_ a+# _
~~ a,
is
the
fact,
bet
a/? '
last fraction
to b
2
,
which
can be
is
made
a constant
The
limit of -
is
then
the proposition to be
demon-
strated.
4.
The
of a power of a variable
limit
the
is
same
duct of
Let
m = 2,
ever
x<i'
is
preceding
i
case,
the limit of x^
limit x* or of i/x ;
it
is
the
p power of the
last.
But
x,
52
its
limit a,
it
follows that a
is
the
q power of the
__
limit
p
Then x q has
as we have enunciated.
These principles will be found exceedingly easy
at the
practice, as well as clear and rapid in arriving
for a limit
a<i,
which are
difficult.
limits of
That
is,
S S
:
which
2.
is
;
:
2
:
E' 2,
TJie circumferences
to
each
The
in the
Hence
same ratio
circles.
C'
we
C' be circumferences,
If C,
53
shall
have
R',
to
half
its
circum-
Let
apothem, and p
have
But
its
periphery.
Then we
shall
its
always
P = | a, p.
if
Hence
be equal.
S
since the limit of
is
= |E
S,
C,
C.
the product of the limits J
Q. E. D.
4. The volume of a cone is equal to the product of its
base by one-third of its altitude.
a,
is
The
cone
is
the limit of a
cone,
its base,
and
Let
its
whose height is also H; since every pyramid is measured by one-third of its base into its height, we have
V = i B' H.
But
If
equal.
Hence
5*
inciated.
nave an invariable
T ._c5ir
v/v~~,
ratio to
if
each
the cone
is
its
base into
half
its
its
is
equal to
its
he
Nay,
any pyramid.
and
down from
that ana-
he will find
it
55
CHAPTER
THE METHOD OF
III.
INDIVISIBLES.
KEPLER
ancients,
which seemed
to feel
mind
he employed them
divisibles," which,
is
it
known
is
well
as
III., p. 141.
57
" are
certainly absurd, and they
*
Now
to
be
with
circumspection."
employed
ought
here the question very naturally arises, in every re-
to true results.
is to say,
ideas
of discoveries, so
is
how
We are told,
made up
of
lutely
does
no length whatever.
it
take to
hypothesis
is
0*
III.,
its
harsh-
p. 141,
58
is
any true
principle, then
it is
not absurd at
all,
since
it
we do
not see
how our
condition
is
bettered
by the
nothing but a corollary from the method of exhaustion ; but he acknowledged that he knew not how to give a rigorous demonstration of
know how to
This
it."
is true.
demonstrate his
it.
He
That
is
own method,
understood
is
to say,
it
because he
practically,
he knew how
But how or
to apply it so as to make discoveries.
his
method
turn
to
out
true
results he
why
happened
did not know, and consequently he could not explain
to others.
His disciples had to walk by faith and not
road was dark, the goal was
of his disciples even eclipsed the
master in the beauty and the value of their discoveries.
by
science
beautiful.
But, after
but
if the
Some
all,
their
59
u The
great geometers who followed this method/'
as Carnot well says, "soon seized its spirit; it was in
great vogue with them until the discovery of the new
calculus, and they paid no more attention to the objections which were then raised against it than the
Bernouillis paid to those which were afterwards raised
It was to this
against the infinitesimal analysis.
method of indivisibles that Pascal and Roberval owed
their profound researches concerning the cycloid."*
Thus, while appealing to the practical judgment of
man may,
But when,
day.
how
this
it
admirable result
is
brought to pass,
know
is it
not
make
give him the idea of a watch, by showing him the internal mechanism and arrangement of the parts which
serve to indicate on its surface as it passes each flying
parts to
plishes.
May we
its
several
it
accom-
Chapter
III., p. 144.
THE PHILOSOPHY
60
no one
lias
OX'
MATHEMATICS.
indivisibles,
tell by
what means and how it achieves its beautiful results ?
Without such knowledge the mathematician may, it
is true, be able to name his tools and to work with
them but does he understand them ? Does he comprehend the method he employs?
;
Blaise Pascal
himself,
down by
Cavalieri.
indefinitely
we understand
of the
Thus, he concludes, if
"
in this sense the expressions the sum
lines, the
nothing in
solid.
sum of
the planes,
pure geometry."
This
is
etc.,
they have
perfectly conformed to
is true.
The sum
of
little
certainly a plane,
61
to effect
an escape by the
me explain. If we divide
into
figure
rectangles, no matter
how small, the sum of these rect-
any curvilinear
Let
sum
of
all
the
little
mixtilinear
It is evident,
that
the
smaller
the
however,
rectangles are made, or
the greater their number becomes, the less will be the
in question.
But how could Cavalieri
that
this
difference
would ever become absoimagine
so
as
the
inscribed rectangles conlutely nothing
long
difference
tinue to be surfaces ?
and
posed would be equal to the area of the figure in question and he was confirmed in this hypo-thesis, because
;
it
was found
Thus,
it
his hypothesis
had appeared
at
first,
led to so
many
But when
this
method
"
pronounced
it
62
ground.
bles
rectangles/'
himself.
fact,
It
that such
is
certain
Now,
figure
it
is
composed of right
lines.
Yet
as well as the
What,
small quantity/' then " the one may be taken for the
other without making the slightest difference in the
result."
Or, in other words, that an infinitely small
may be added
quantity
Carnot adds, as
cedure, that
it
is
Nor
quantities as nothing.
is this
all.
No
one can
quantity without
making even an
than absurd.
mended
infinitely small
it
as otherwise
when such
is
gencies of a system
judgment, and
which
that Leibnitz
-
make magnitudes.
it
* Carnot,
chapter
III., p. 140.
64
On the othes
of nothings
curvilinear
a
that
Pascal
space
we agree with
composed of rectangles alone,
is
magnitude
hand,
is,
if
only the
sum
strictly speaking,
we
then
shall
that which is
paled? Any one is at liberty to select
But
the most agreeable to his reason or imagination.
amid
indeed, absolutely necessary to be swamped
the zeros of Cavalieri or else to wear the yoke of Pas-
is it,
cal's
by
between this Scylla and Charybdis of the infinitesiThe reader will soon be enabled to
sail
mal method?
answer
minus,
all
a+
are really
quantities?
But, then, they are
small that they
without
may be added to
a,
its
There
is, it is
true,
so very
affecting
Dictionary of
Infinitesimal.
Mathematics,
etc.,
Art
65
But does
give it currency in the mathematical world.
a real axiom ever need the support of authority ? On
the other hand, there
is
human
controversy.
But waiv-
ing this, I shall in the next chapter explode this pretended axiom, this principle of darkness assuming the
form of
light,
some of the
which has
so long cast
fairest portions of
its
shadow on
demonstrative truth.
I shall conclude the present chapter with the examples which Carnot has given from Cavalieri and Pascal
to illustrate and recommend the method of indivisibles.
" Let
C D, C F also be drawn
any point m
of the line
A D,
be drawn perpendicular
to
and
through
mnpg
let
finally
66
771
circle
ACG
C G,
AD
as
will generis
the rectangle
C
;
scribed right cylinder; the isosceles right-angled triwill generate a right cone, having the
angle C
GD
of a right line
g, ng, p g will each generate a circle,
of which the point g will be the centre.
"But
the
first
of these circles
is
an element of the
"
sum
say,,
of the cone ;
and
as
it is
is
to
sum
and
ments,
it
"But we know
that the
67
is
one-
is
how
to find the
sum
and curvilinear
number of
figures,
bodies.
Let there be a
triangle, for
example;
let fall
from
vertex upon
its
its
sum
the
of
all
But
the
first
the terms
68
of
this pyramid.
According to the principles of the geometry of indivisibles, the intersections of each of these planes by
of
all these
elements.
But by the
the vertex.
its
B:b::H
:h2
and
V the
therefore,
Then V, which
the
is
sum of
all
these elements,
is
T>
2
Ji
multiplied by the
sum of the
from
o to
the quantities
squares from o to
Now common
K2
2
.
sum of
69
to
H,
in-
is
2H +3H + H
3
is
reduced to
-J
3
.
T>
found above, we
will
have
for the
volume sought
that
is,
Now
here
we
see,
is
up
we have seen, pronounced c; certainly absurd" by Carnot, and yet it leads by some
This hypothesis
is,
as
unknown process
and only
in
method.
No one was more sensible than
Cavalieri liinise.i
70
own method.
Accord-
ingly he strove, as he
tells us,
Instead of pretending
that he could explain, or even see through, these ob" Here are difficulties which
jections, he exclaimed
:
He
speaks,
would
be, at
stand
Again,
we
thrown out
Now
such
and
7.
not in vain.
71
f*
This
is
the
is
often called
upon
to
encounter
of their pupils.
Thus,
treatises
and best
which
is
suspicion that the methods employed are only approximative, and therefore a doubt as to whether the results
are absolutely true.
This objection is certainly very
time by no means easy to
but
at
the
same
natural,
&
Co.
1855.
etc.
Cambridge
Macmillau
72
its
after
intellect,
greatest
!
What
Newton, had
and nothing
certainly
says,
objection is,"
not
is
his
natural."
only
"suspicion"
Nay,
very
if
and
inevitable.
But
it
is
any
natural;
necessary
student should be unable to tell where his
his "suspicion," his "uncertainty"
"
difficulty,"
commences,
why
The
truth
others,
is,
found
"by no means
derful creation of
mind
many
CHAPTER
IV.
to replace
system.
first
work of Carnot.
two
sides.
with
its
base,
Now, although
hypothesis
there at the bottom of
is
its
"cer-
Nor from
been any
7
that
day
better seen or
73
74
which
will in
But we
cing light.
Let
which
A 1>
A D
(J.
Let
its
into
altitude
be divided
be drawn parallel to
its
rig-lit
base
by
ABC?
is
equal to the area of the
he believed that it would
always he
munber
75
ry bdis.
The method
its
basis,
It
of Pascal
is
founded in
fundamental conception,
evident that the
is
error.
Its
demonstrably
sum
of the rectangles
can never be exactly equal to the area of the triangle
unless the broken line
can be
false.
is
AlmnopqrstuvC
A C. But this
made
can
never be, since, however great the number of rectangles may be conceived to be, still the sum of all the
A m
such as
I,
n, o p, and so forth, parallel
to the base of the triangle will always continue equal
to
C, and the sum of all the little lines, such as n o,
little lines,
p g,
s,
and
A D of
D +A
A C, then one
would be equal
to the
sum of
ADC
to the
much
AC
A m n,
I
etc.,
is
less
76
number of
its
triangle A D C
CD Almnopr
ally tends
first area,
it.
with-
The same
it is obvious,
equally true in regard to the
right line
B, and the broken line on the other sid<*
of the triangle
things are,
ABC.
We should,
tion of Pascal
do at the present day without falling into the hypothesis of Cavalieri or any of its manifold obscurities.
If, instead of seeking the sum of the rectangles, whose
number
is
seek the limit of that sum, we shall find the exact area
of the triangle by a logical process as clear in itself as
it is
true in
For
its
conclusion.
triangle
A B C, b
lines parallel to
B C,
H and h
AD
been divided.
Then, by
b
,
or
in
is
similar triangles,
we have
B::7i: H,
_
>
77
ABC, we have
T>
of k
.h for
from
varies
all
the values of h.
A to A D
we
H, and
since
little
Jc
in
or from zero to
Ji
2k, 3 Jc
k,
or
Jti
But
since the
according to
n (n
_A
+ 1)
sum
of the series 1
+2+3
+n
L^
we have
=A
2
3. ..
H
H + +
k(nlc
_B H (H + ^)^B
-
(1
H*
7*
is,
ft
~H
78
Now,
if
we
rectangles,
shall
have
= B-X EP + Hfe
or
however
great, in
other words, the number of rectangles may be conceived to be, the two variables S and its value will be
But
the limit of
of the triangle
is
ABC
2
,
is
is
the area
TT 7.
TT2
13
or
That
is,
its
base by
its alti-
tude.
Now,
cal,
it
may be
clearly
as well as Roberval
false
hypothesis or
wonder of the
infinitesimal
and Pascal.
made
79
are
to
produce light.
Thus, in the logic of Pascal, there was an unsusThis
pected compensation of unsuspected errors.
might, indeed, have been conjectured from the nature
of his procedure.
we look
For, if
sum
we
made
at the figure,
of the rectangles
is
like
manner,
if
we examine
variable term.
B
seen,
H +H
X
2
or
BH,B
we have
,.,
an expression winch,
no meaning.
as
.
is,
For
BH
is
T>
surface,
and
is
line,
and
it is
impossible to
add a
T>
o TT
term
is
TT
T>
\~
The
constant
A B C.
2
Is not the variable term, then,
the
sum
of
all
the
little
That
variable triangles ?
triangles been
ABC,
were nothing
away
is
elded
as if they
littleness ?
Such a
80
suspicion,
it
closely
and narrowly
method.
is
AB
sum
the
rejected
is
term
sum of
the
is
2
the
all
v
* //x/v
T 8
Hence
their
is
For the
triangles.
sum
,
'
andT u
manner
/->,
uv)k
_DCX
that the
sum of the
equal
T)
all
A B C is
to
equal
H
(P
ABG
is
the triangles
+ B P) k =
2
7,
.
on both sides of
'
may be shown
it
equal to
st-j-
like
triangle
In
But the
s t
'
A B C by
But
which has
81
false hypothesis,
;
reasoning
finite
and
Let
this
the rectangles by S.
rni
Inen
Now,
if
Q
fo=
BH
22
.
Jo
.
we may be permitted to
sum is equal to the
TR
Z*
as
away
unworthy of
2i
notice,
then
we
"B "FT
shall obtain
Zi
by throwing away
exactly equal to the
or rather
sum of
D*
however,
which
is
2i
82
the reason-
is
ing of the more approved form of the method of indiIt is, indeed, only under the darkness of
visibles.
the infinite that such assertions
illicit
and
How
method of limits
proceeds on no false
different the
.this
understood,
If properly
assertion
and
sum
which
is
=~
TT2
JnL
2*
becomes
a
b
that
&, so
it
22'
BH h
= -.
T>
(the
sum
the second
TT
is
the limit of
equation.
Hence,
T>
TT
if
83
2H +3H 4 H
2
T like
rl
In
manner, from ,,
the expression
*
,
square, as nothing
i)i
being
infinite, all
+2H
in the
term
sum
first
H
;
HV
,,
precisely the
i
when
same
*n
A
fully expressed,
making
From
Jc
o,
we
the above
_,
For
-- --i
is
find
2H +3H
3
result.
its
limit
example
it
|-
+H
andiu
by
3
.
of his
own
rectangles,
which
Jo.
is
Now
if
II be
p|
I
i
'
/f
84
infinite,
with
as
nothing compared
TT 2
2
,
it
should be
2t
remembered
the
first factor
becomes
o.
CO
for the
lies
is
same supposition,
reduced to o
or
of
Precisely the symbol
Cavalieri's
at the bottom of
see ; still
hypothesis, and which, as we shall hereafter
remains to be correctly interpreted by the mathematiIn like manner the sum of the auxiliary
cal world.
or
prisms used in finding the volume of the pyramid,
= 5- X 2H3 + 3H2 + H
H
suppositions to
is
=oX
a symbol which
never could have been understood or correctly interpreted without a knowledge of the method of limits.
can, however, be
of Leibnitz and
well to
may be
volume
On
the base
85
or
H"
/
and
B/C
.,
'
72
for the
S, the
sum
of
the prisms,
all
is
base
Now
6.
is
evidently equal to
'
Jc
2
Ji
But, if
Hence, S
2 k, 3
=?
Jc,
4 7c
+2 P+3
2
(#
+nL
2
nJc
F+
= H.
4?1P...
#),
or
2i
86
Hence, S
=B
__
S-
or
___
~~
1.2.3
Now,
if
we
and smaller,
is
becoming exactly equal to that volume. Hence
In like manner, as k becomes smaller
and smaller, the expression
the limit of S.
l_
_
Hx
/\
1.2.3
or
with
X JH
3
,
Hence
X H
is
the
is
homogeneous, as
it
is not dropped or
suppressed,' the
should always be understood to Ib
limit of
~ X (J H
-f
87
H + |H
2
),
But
and luminous,
have
to conceive the
He
bols.
effects
are
among
cation.
SEGMENT.
88
First Solution.
ter
A B and
AY
to the tangent
of the segment
ADC,
= 2p
x.
ADC may be
interior parallelograms,,
which
A B C, A B D,
lent
We
to the
gram
A Y;
area,
sum of
two
areas
the
know the
area
A B C if
ABC.
we know
its
ratio
A B C E,
and to find
this
we
will
MH
compare two
MK
corresponding parallelograms P
Q/
P', Q,
of the sums which have these two areas for their limits*
I
TEE PHILOSOPHY OF MATHEMATICS.
89
Designating by
and by
Ji
PMHP = yA
7
QMKQ'~~o?i'
and we have, from the equation of the curve,
2yk +
hence
k2
= 2 ph.
Hence,
= 2y + &.
'
or y
2_p
= yx
xk
This ratio then tends toward the limit
tends toward zero
2,
when k
A C B AEG
;
are
quantities that
then, according
area
AC
ACB
of
AE
is
A E G B,
of this
circumscribed parallelogram.
Second Solution. It is easy to calculate directly
the area
which is the limit of the sum of the
AEG,
parallelograms
Q M K Q'
is
or
Q II M
x k sin A,
Q', of which
designating the
90
angle
It Is
will give
necessary to express x in terms of y, which
for the expression of any one of the parallelograms
2
sm
A
.
if
Now,
we suppose
2p
altitudes of the parallelograms are all equal, which
was useless in the preceding solution, the successive
values of y will be
k,
and we
shall
3k...nk,
k,
have
= A E, or (n + 1) k = A E,
according as we take the parallelograms Q, M
nk
which
It
or Q,
K,
is indifferent.
is
when n
same
sum
=A
for the
summation of
1.2.3
It
is
ing expression
k* sin
(n
+ 1) (2 n + 1)
1.2.3
or
k) sin
Je
AJE
3
.
sin
That limit
is
91
evidently
A B A E sin A
.
or
2.3jp
'
= A B.
observing that
2p
The area A E C is, then, the third of the parallelogram A B C E, and the area A B C is two-thirds of it,
as
we found by the
first solution.
Third Solution.
We
curve.
Let
ACC
diameter,
CD
AD=AB
I)
AC.
the tangent at
let
from,
AB
which
the
results
ACB
92
A C B as the limit of a
A B tend all
upon
PMM P
sum
of in-
in
M
M
D
M T, M' T from which will result
through
AT-=AP, AT = AP TT P P
As
to the area
A B,
parallel to
chords
MM
we
If,
the middle of
MM
7
,
area
exactly the
is
T T
7
base of
But each of
MM
TM
terminating
in.
M.
T TE
7
triangle
sum of
arcs
parison with
it,
when P P 7
ME M
7
than the rectilinear triangle
7
T is that of the rectwhose ratio to the triangle T
difference
is less
DA
the
sum
of the triangles
T E T.
7
C B, A C
being limits of sums of infinitely small quantities
which are in the ratio of 2:1, will be themselves in
This being established, the two areas
DBG,
and
before..
A B
Then
C is two-thirds of the triangle
or of the parallelogram constructed upon
B
C, which leads us back to the result obtained
this ratio.
CHAPTER
V.
DESCARTES
the ancient
is
original
is
not
how
to
be
great
men
should have been content to read them and to comment upon them without allowing themselves any
other use of their lights than such as was necessary
to follow them, without daring to commit the crime
of sometimes thinking for themselves, and of carrying
their mind beyond what the ancients had discovered.
In this manner many worked, wrote, and books multiplied,
of
many
all
fill
the productions
the world with
94
activity
but
repeated, for
gyrations, but
made
no progress.
" Such was the state of
mathematics," continues the
all philosophy, up to the time
above
"and
Marquis,
of J
treated
crowned with an
new and
infinity of
a revolt, was
as
with
respect to mathematics
it
it
is still
by
they had
merely
all
the
been arrested.
first
Nor
is
Pappus
this all.
He
said
It
is
not only
modern
analysis,
diffi*
'
TITJS
PHILOSOPHY OF MATHEMATICS.
95
easy
that
problem was
and
the
most general
geometry."
But although
ordinates to the extremities of that side, and the difference between the two corresponding abcissas, is evi-
96
of these two similar triangles, a method which dispenses with the calculations demanded by the method
of Fermat, as well as by that of Descartes.
Barrow did not stop, however, at his " differential
his
triangle;" he invented a species of calculus for
M.
made
it
extends to as
many
indeterminates as one
reflexion
and by
refraction," etc.*
to
Petites.
97
Nor
is
all.
application
of indeterminate
analysis to the
Hence,
its first
if
we would
principles or
its
We
proceed, then,
and
see the
Then
this
98
tudes
first,
j^
-g
be represented
the
a;
secondly, inby
symbol
absolutely,
may
stead of representing the magnitudes directly, the algebraic symbols may represent the number of times that
number of times
In
this case, as
that a
known
it is said,
The
third opinion
is,
its
turn,
is
sup-
line,
but the
itself.
"the
Thus, we
numerical measure of the line may, when known, be
are told,
denotes
is
itself.
AB
Thus, if
(denoted by a) is
two inches long, and an inch is the
Now,
it
99
If
of precision and clearness in the nse of language.
the student should confine his attention exclusively to
down
still
more obvious
position
to re-
may be taken
It
is
Nor would he be
symbols never denote numbers, but always the undivided magnitudes themselves.
Suppose, then, that
each of these opinions contains the truth, it is evident
JJ
jj\
that
it
On
tjj
irn-
other, they
produce darkness, perplexity, and confusion in the
necessary, if possible, so to
readjust the truths exhibited in these
opinions as to avoid
It
is
all
all
100
first
principles of the
science.
When
It is
measured by a
is
num
this
line" or its
~
not a =
2,
=o
but
a,
2 inches
2,
1 inch
by
or
rt
2.
,.,
In
like
inch
inches, so that, in
4,
but
|-
and
both
In the
4.
we
shall
=4
half
first
inch
in the second, a
cases,
we
remembered that
it is
4 half
only a
yard in length be
however,
is
101
And
this
a be taken
or the
inches,
it,
as 3 feet or 36
same magnitude.
the whole, and in the
In one case
it
line,
and as being a
distinc-
it
nitude
ber
;"
proceeds
011
is
mag-
"
may be
line to another.
measure, either expressed or understood. If, for example, any one were asked how long a particular line
it should be represented, and he were to
is, or how
answer
it is
by 3
102
sent them.
There
is,
way
of representing a
lir
is this
cal
culties
seem
way
to
6 feet
denoted by
=3
6, it is
feet,
and -
=2
the product
abf
+b=
feei
o:
feet ?
The product
of feet
by
by cents; an absurc
is
103
But, however
com-
when they
There
is
usually supposed.
Certainly, the abstract number
obtained by comparing a line with an assumed unit
is
But
measure.
The
precise truth
is,
when a
sufficient
number of
* Note A.
1 04
known, or may be measured, the others may be deduced from them by means of the relations they bear
to each other.
The same is true of all other parts of
geometry. Hence, what we need is not a representation of the magnitudes themselves, but of the relations
start from certain given
existing between them.
We
we
relations,
pass on to other relations by means of
and
reasoning;
having found those which are most
convenient for our purpose, the theorems of geometry
are established and ready for use.
The precise manner in which this is accomplished we shall now pro-
ceed to explain.
In all our reasoning
we
numbers
Tjiese, it
do not,
true,
strictly speaking, represent lines or
other magnitudes, but the relations between these may,
and always should, represent the relations between
is
g;i
the magnitudes under consideration. This representation of relations, and not magnitudes, is all that is
necessary in symbolical reasoning, and if this be borne
mind the rationale of the whole process may be
in
81 H
|/,
It
is altogether arbitrary.
inch, a foot, a yard, a mile, or a thouBut this unit once chosen, the square de-
may be an
sand miles.
scribed on
faces,
it
for solids.
it
a line, surface,
this course
and perplexity.
105
Then
number answering
two
Suppose, for
B contains 6 units, and the
example, that the line
line
Let a denote the abstract number
units.
abstract
to a surface.
CDS
[B
-iD
C>
6,
this
of a surface.
It
is
number
is
But
this
Hence the
surface of the
denominate units.
This
is
what
many
is
concrete or
intended, or at
proposition which in
its
literal sense is
wholly unin-
telligible.
like
106
letters a, b,
and
c}
and
consequently an abstract
is
number.
num-
easily
bers denoted by a,
b,
and
number
as so
many
It
is
in this
and
sense,
in mind, as
letters as repre-
senting a solid.
In most
definitions this
exhibited as
branch of mathematics
is
use of algebra in geometrical researches." This definition, like most others of the same science, can impart
to the beginner no adequate idea of the thing defined.
It fails in this respect, partly because the geometrical
method used in this branch of mathematics is different
107
new
cleared
before he can
Geometry,
it is
we
" in the
are told that
application of algebra to geometry, usually called Analytic Geometry, the magnitudes of lines, angles, sur-
Now these
defi-
cal researches.
allusion to that
metry is constituted.
This beautiful science,
it
is
universally conceded,
made
precisely
108
describe the
In-
method of Vieta
we
please, represent
algebraic symbols.
operate on these symbols
we may,
them by
all
the results
definition of the " Application of Algebra to Geometry," as left by him, it would have been free from
objection.
But
it
Descartes.
like
before
109
ployed
letters to represent
quantities
pure or mixed.
is
"
nemetry, as well as the solution of determinate problems," in their works on Analytical Geometry. This
seems to be demanded by logical consistency, or a
10
110
strict
adherence
analytical
to
problems of geometry,
definitions.
We
is
clearly included in
iheir
we intend
to adopt.
the
much as
works referred
few pages,
sion
too,
being
of ordinary
little
algebra, should,
face
"
Hence he was
totally separated in their object."
" to fix
right in determining, as he did,
precisely and
cause to be comprehended this division of the
Application of Algebra to Geometry into two distinct
branches," or methods of investigation.
Since these
"
are
so
then,
totally separated in their
as
as
well
in
their
objects,"
methods, we shall separate
them in our definitions.
certainly shall not, in
two branches,
We
Ill
exclusion of the
of Vieta
is,
no such opinion. On
the contrary, they unanimously regard the method of
Descartes as constituting Analytical Geometry, though
definitions themselves entertain
this
view
tions.
If so, then
of Analytical Geometry"
the
nature
such
should
of
not
surely
investigations
have been excluded, as it has been, from his definition
tute the science
In
like
manner, an-
In
spite
something
different
and
higher and
better
than
geometry.
112
In order
to unfold in as clear
and
precise a
manner
is
attained.
" Geometrical
magnitudes, viz., lines, surfaces, and
solids," are, it is frequently said, the objects of Analytical
Geometry.
But
hardly be
accepted as true. For lines, surfaces, and solids, considered as magnitudes, are not, properly speaking, the
We
nary problems
is
much more
ancient."
If we would
113
and form.
Of
these the
most
easily
dealt with are ideas of magnitudes, because magnitudes, whether lines, surfaces, or solids, may be readily
have related
to questions
of form.
These
it is
true, his
The
speaking, the relations of linear magnitudes.
it considers are not magnitudes; they are forms
objects
its
higher
work on
They are the scaffolding merely, not the ediIn what manner this edifice, this beautiful
14
definition.
We begin with
an explanation of
its
geo-
metric method.
"By
mean
that
But
as
sent, the
method of
illustrate its
It
meaning.
is
constituted
by the
If,
Hence the
first step
115
From
by its
dis-
among
Yet
this
by which
its
method, although so
simple, and
hended.
the
first
philosopher by
new
In order
we
of Descartes,
two right
lines
XX
and
Y Y', which
lib
make
tion
two
for
MP
these points
parallel
7
to
P parallel to
and these parallels
Y, and
,
will intersect in the point P. But the point
is
N,
OX
determined when we
the point
the point
its
is
M or
equal M P.
distance
or
lies in
the angle
That
Y O X';
is,
otherwise
position could
its
this
ON
and
given,
the point to which
might be found, he
+
O
effected his
and
ON
by the same
made
letters,
O N by 6;
when a
is
is
P //;
ac-
represented by a and
it
is
minus
it is
X X', and
when
a and
is>
mea-
toward X.
counted from O
In
it
117
O
O
it
is
toward
and
applicable to
all similar distances.
Thus, by the use of two letters
and two signs, the position of any point in any one of
N, or
their representatives
b, is
The
distance
abscissa,
called
O M,
or
its
equal
ON
or
answer.
N P,
its
is
called the
equal
M P,
is
which they
to
6,
The
say, the point (a, 6).
are
laid
is
called
the abscissas
off,
we simply
X X', on which
Both together
dinate axes.
axes intersect,
YY
the axis of
the co-ordinate
of co-ordinates
We may
118
of co-ordinates.
tem of
The
always be understood^
co-ordinates, should
be otherwise expressed.
In the foregoing remarks we have spoken of the
unless
it
fixed,
point P which is supposed
co-ordinates a and b are therefore constant.
remain
to
any
other, to
it is
and whose
move on
will
of value.
all
XX
Y Y'
is
all
-X
-X
possible values,
may
TX
-Y
whether
X'
119
angle to
Y O X',
Y O X,
Y'O X,
Y'O X
7
.
In Analytical Geometry, then, the letters x and y represent not unknown, determinate values or magnitudes as in algebra, but variable quantities.
It is
of variable co-ordinates and symbols of inde-
this use
somewhat
value
is
fuller expo-
so completely over-
Even
ject.
as
we have
cartes,
lytic
method.
Indeed,
his
which he
problems" Yet this method of co-ordinates, if separated from the method of indeterminate analysis, can
120
ori[A
the
*
other
,
Wlloll
y
. D ,l
ihe
Ilne or curve
thus
XE
^ ST? ^
described by a poin .
Joes not come
mn
Ae doma^
'.
metry.
>
according to S0 me
such cas es
pi
unchanging miftu a]
one point of
"
om re]ation
unif
is
wder
Analytical Geo-
"?
"
the absci -a
a c
toTn T'
In a I
1&W
rinVariab]eOTd cr.
^^
7
chan^ bu t
of
such line
ordinate must
f.^ ^
there7itl
ordinate of each
or
<lependent
^
f^
and
relation
PaSSm ^ from
*he
absdssa
bet
^ ^*7rf
^m
<he
instances
121
the line.
equation; but
of
the point
it is still
by which
The equation of
more frequently
it is
described.
by suitable operations upon it, to detect all the circumstances and to discover all the properties of the line
or locus to which it belongs.
few simple illustra-
such as
two equal
B',
parts,
then
it is
YO
X'
into
which
is
11
is
per-
B'.
In
by the equation
'
122
like
the
manner,
same
which
the equation of
line institutes
any
precisely
x and y as that
symbolized or re-
them.
presented by
If In
Y O X.
7
let
A B
and denote
its
is
123
expressed
f -f #2 = r\
and
Now
equation
the properties of the circumference of the
be evolved by suitable transformations.
so this
equation
all
circle
may
As our
shall, in this
Then
+ x= AM; r
bu.tr
+ x) (r
x);
= MB; and?/ =
hence
that
Or,
if
we
choose,
we may
set out
from
this property,
Thus,
let it
ordinate
is
X,
is
at
its
A O = O B = r.
Then,
*
124
TEE PHILOSOPHY OF
MATHEMATICS.
\Y
= , + , and MB==r _,
by substitution, f = r +
__
_
x]
x] = ^
^y.
hence,
bnt
therefore
(r
125
into
by
We
shall
Suppose the
illustration.
is
some constant
into
line
is
and
is
its
definition^
or
Now
if,
which the
y in the
or x
equation, gives
=o
Hence
for the corresponding value of the abscissa.
at the origin of co-ordithe line cuts the axis of
nates, since that is the only point whose co-ordinates
are both o.
l?l
lli
>.
n*
or, in other
J%l
126
ZHE PSILOSOfSY
127
method when
we
lay off
O F = -,
and
OL=%
DD
f
an indefinite perpendicular
to the
axis
X', then each and every point of the curve in
namely,
question will enjoy this remarkable property
point
erect
it
an equal
will be at
line
That
the point
from
F and the
dicular to
PF
PF
or
PF
= P M + FM =y
2
=f +
2
but
hence,
if
is,
right line
or
distance
D D'.
PF
x*
px
+4
-+
(a?
= 2jp&';
= a? + p x + & = (x +- P
-)*
- ^)
2
128
but
tlierefore ;
as enunciated.
to describe
the
motion.
illustrations, or instances
of
The geomet-
and
it was by the
happy union of both that Analytical
It was, moreover, by the
Geometry was created.
wonderful fecundity ancl power of this combination
that the way was opened for the
discovery of the Infinitesimal Calculus, and for the solution of the
grand
The
method
consists in
generality which
is
the
capa-
works
on Analytical Geometry.
point:
Ld
To
illustrate this
a curve suck
tlie
rectangle
of the distances between its foot and two fixed points on
the axis of x in a
given ratio.
Let
ancl
be the two fixed points on the axis of
129
any
line whatever.
line
O D,
At
A B = 6,
and
let
is
required.
is the ordinate of that
the abscissa, and P
point, and the two distances between its foot, M, and
the two fixed points O and
are
and
M.
is
MD
Hence, by
PM :OMxMD::6
2
or
since
P M,
for
(2
x)
O M the
a2
is
the variable
variable abscissa x }
OM = 2a
x.
Hence
is
:a2 ,
ordinate y, and
OD
F*
we have
and
since
130
form and
all
of the hyperbola, and of the parabola;* unfolding from one short analytic expression
the whole system of beautiful truths which caused
circle,
of the
ellipse,
The method
In addition
to these variables,
Newton and
t See Note B.
131
of indeterminates."
" The fundamental
principle of the
method of inde-
A + B + Cz + J)x + etc. = 0,
2
a;
in
as
we
co-efficients
that
to say, that
is
we
shall always
have
A = 0, B = 0, C = 0,
whatever
each of these
may be
etc.,
the
equation.
"
please,
sum
of
all
to say, the
Then
that
sum
first
its
factor; that is
term
differs as little as
first.
we
please
from ; but
cannot
differ
as
little
a
constant
being
as we please from 0, since then it would be a variable,
then
can be only
maining thus
it
0,
then
we have
A=
there re-
132
Bo?
+ Cz + r) +
3
etc.
0.
B+
Ca?
+ Da? + etc. = 0,
8
we have given
to
B=
prove
A=
= D=
0,
0, etc.
ing would likewise prove
" That
be
an
there
let
granted,
equation with only
two terms
in
which the
first
term
is
A and Bx
Then we may
an immediate corollary from the method of indeterminates, that if the sum or the difference of two pre-
as
zero"
"This
by
The respective
long to the infinitesimal analysis.
procedures of the one and of the other methods, simplified as
all
the difference
to say, to destroy
133
calculus.
"
these
use.
some examples.
" For a second
" let us
*
example/' says the author,
propose to prove that the area of a circle is equal to the
product of its circumference by the half of its radius ;
that is to say, denoting the radius by E, the ratio of
the circumference to the radius by TT, and consequently
that circumference by JT R, S the surface of the circle,
we ought to have
" In order
to prove this I inscribe in the circle a regular polygon, then I successively double the number of
until the area of the polygon differs as little as
At the same
please from the area of the circle.
its sides
we
thcm
|
TT
as little as
the area
2
;
then if we make
the quantity p, if it is not zero, can at least be supposed as small as we please. That supposed, I put the
first
example
is
my purpose,
and
besides,
i 34
is
equal to
in
we have
then
==
0, or
=}
TT
B?;
it
be proposed
now
which
it
ax
x2 may be a maximum.
"
x ; } the
(x
+x
(x
+ xj
(ax
x*),
by reducing
(a
it is
f
then the ratio of this
quantity to x , or
2x
x',
as
2x
xf
/?.
135
(a
we
supposed as small as
please
equal to
Then we have
0.
2x
0, or
=^
a,
"
number of frustums,
of these frustums
may
posed of two
parts,,
having for
its
of the aglets,
But
But the
shall
clear that
it is
we
=V
first
arbitrary,
have
P = P', then
g',or(V
term of
(?20 = 0.
nothing
136
Then we have
which was
be demonstrated." *
to
of a pyramid
We
we
wish,
by the ordinary
analysis.
It
is
CHAPTER
THE METHOD OF
VI.
LEIBNITZ.
"
proximation." t
*
Reflexions,
etc.,
f This objection
Chapter
I.,
p. 36,
to the calculus is
it
has
always
12*
137
138
as
or otherwise ?
Is
it
true or false ?
"Will
it
make no
we throw
possible difference in the result whether
retain
or
these
as
as
infinitely
nothing
away
something
small quantities? If we subtract one quantity, however small, from another, shall we not at least diminish that other by an amount equal to the quantity sub-
It seems so to me.
tracted?
"
who adopted
his idea
(i. e.,
the above
axiom) contented
new
which
it
gives
to the
specious
calculus.
We
branding
axiom
as
an error ; for
it
139
This
truth,, if it
far as ever
The
calculus of Leibnitz,
we
are told,
did not
M.
beyond
cavil
Carnot, or
the world ?
gave
calculus,"
it
victoriously
etc.,
Oluipter
III., p.
H.
mind
1 40
tlie
minds of those
who
direct
said that he
For
it is
and
also that it
well
known
in question, it cannot be
to furnish such a reply.
was a
failure.*
"
Leibnitz," says
M.
"
Comte, urged to answer, had presented an explanation entirely erroneous, saying that he treated infinitely
small quantities as incomparables, and that he neglected
them
in
comparison with
finite
quantities,
'like
by reducing
calculus," etc.f
to a
it
mere approximative
A greater than M.
" embarrassed
by the obwould be made to infinitely
which he
"
felt
small quantities, such as the differential calculus considered them, has preferred to reduce his infinitely
this
uncertainty, Leibnitz
more
satisfactory.
Even
141
"The Marquis de L'HSpital," one of the most celebrated of those followers, " was the first to write a
'
systematic treatise on the Analysis of Infinitely Small
Hitherto its principles constituted, for
Quantities,"
the most part, a sort of esoteric doctrine for the initiated
" demands or
suppositions."
stated
by the Marquis
I.
"
FIRST
The
first
of these
is
calls
thus
DEMAND OB
We demand that we
SUPPOSITION.
or diminished only
than
True,
we
itself,
it
please
If we
actually remain the same ?
ish" a quantity, ever so little, will
or diminished ?
And
however small, as
it
not be increased
Thus,
it
seems to be written
over the very door of the mathematical school of Leib" let no man enter here who
nitz and de L'Hopital,
first
principles
upon
trust."
When
for light:
"Never mind,"
Petits, Art.
2, p. 3.
said his
1 42
"
teacher
else
to
could he do
and ceased
to
be a thinker in order
become a worker.
II.
Now
principles or
demands lead
opposite and
well as those
who worked
it
suppositions
says,
made
at the
commencement of
this treatise,
and upon
which alone
it
is
attentive readers.
them
after the
manner of the
ancients, if I
had not
to
difficulties;
what
for this
"sort of axioms."
It
1 43
know
pretty certain,
ii
system.
this
not,
most
additional firmness
plicated and
The
by
illustrations
this first
144
able indeed
reason
regard
commentator,
fact," says
geometers and astronomers; they make, however, every day, omissions much
more considerable than those of the algebraists. "When
a geometer, for example, takes the height of a mounfinitely exact the operations of
tain, does
wind has
is
about three
takes an infinite
number ofdx's
demand
to
is
Thus, from
this curious
commentary
it
appears that
work of de L'H6pital
in 1798, as
well as Wolff, the great disciple of Leibnitz, regarded
the differential calculus as merely a method of approxi-
mation.
was
at times
145
Indeed,
and fixed
from the
error.
He
he simply stood amazed, as thousands have since done, before the mystery of his
"
sometimes
his
small
in his conclusions,
method,
infinitely
calling
quansometimes "real quantities/' and sometimes " fictions."
"When he considered these quantities
tities
zeros,"
in their origin,
and looked
which
be veritable zeros.
" fictions."
nitely small quantities as merely analytical
The great celebrities of the mathematical world since
the time of Leibnitz, the most illustrious names, indeed, in the history of the science, may be divided into
attempts,
13
imperfect," says
146
M. Comte, "a
distinguished geometer, Carnot, presented at last the true, direct, logical explanation of
the method of Leibnitz, by showing it to be founded
obscure intimation
it is true,
mands
them down
The
explanation of Carnot
is
certainly, as far as it
"In terminating,"
nation.
man whose
III., p. 100.
[
f
1 47
Lagrange
He
it is
clear that
we make
itself
is
easily
" For
"
example," says he,
let
it
be proposed to
it
among
first,
"strike
all
j*
J
j|
'
f|
mind
and
vacillation in the
contradictions, especially in
of Leibnitz.
to the
method
f
<
l/f
148
draw a tangent
to the circumference
MD
at the
M,
given point
" Let C be the centre of the
circle,
D C B the axis;
P x, the ordinate
suppose the abscissa
and let T P be the subtangent required.
" In order to find
let us consider the
it,
M P = y,
a
circle as
N"
polygon with a very great number of sides ; let
be one of these sides, prolonged even to the axis; that
will evidently be the tangent in question, since that
line does not penetrate to the interior of the polygon
let fall
the perpendicular
MO
upon
N Q,
which
MO:NO::TP:MP,
MO = TP =
~ TP
NO MP
y
or
On
is
point
=
= 2 a (x + M O)
1
N O)
N,(y
from this equation the
and i educing, we have
MO_
~~
first,
27/
+ M O)
taking
found for the point
r
(x
+ NO
NO
TP==
2/(2y
to that
149
y, it
becomes
+ NO)
2a2x
MO'
" If then
the
M N, which, by hypothesis,
is itself
very small.
Then
we can
a
which
it
was necessary
to find.
is
him
TP=
?/
-
proaches the truth very nearly, but is really most perfectly exact ; it is, however, a thing of which it is easy
to assure one's self by seeking T P, according to the
principle that the tangent is perpendicular to the extremity of the radius ; for it is obvious that the similar
triangles
M P T, give
CP MP MP
C P M,
13 *
P,
150
({
Let us
a
see, then,
found above,
and
T P=
Lence,
it
how
as above.
in the equation
MO
or rather
how
why
it
by the
was not so
before.
2a
and that the
result
2#
TP=
MO'
if
-
being nevertheless
by the comparison of
have been able
to neglect
O and N O in the first equation and
indeed we ought to have done so in order to rectify
the calculus, and to destroy the error which had arisen
from the false hypotheses from which we had set out.
To
M P T, we
is
then not
151
problem."
TP=-
that
is
to say,
and not
"For
by considering the
a true curve,
circle as
as a polygon.
this purpose,
from a point E, taken arbiany distance from the point M, let the line
S be drawn parallel to
P, and through the points
and
let the secant E T' be drawn ; we shall evi-
trarily at
E
E
dently have
T'P:MP::MZ:EZ,
and dividing
T P
;
we have
TP+TT' = MP
This laid down,
if
we imagine that
ES
moves
parallel
to the point T,
TP=MP
EZ
to
which the
* This -last
expression seems a
little
first
obscure, since
is
will then be
it is difficult to
152
we
please
by making
S approach
M P as
much
a.n
as
EZ
MZ =
" In
T like manner we i,
have
2v+EZ
-
MZ'
2x
2a
and
proach
M
E
M P, the more small
R Z become,
member of
and
if
we
M Z and
neglect them
in the second
therefrom in the
MZ=
E
which
to
it
will then
two equations
T P == ,Mr T>
P
rn-r>
M -Z and MZ
EZ
ax
EZ
last,
TP ==--,
a
This result
is
as above.
it
C P M,
MPT,
RZ
from which
it is
TP
=y
1 53
TV/T
*7
RZ
and
S from
M P has
in
compen-
"
" as
Forasmuch," says
he,
to pass,
ii
G*
154
performed by infinitesimal
A P=
cc,
affair as
Let
differences.
the ordinate
P M = d x, the
AB
P B =y
difference
EN=
of the ordinate
d y. Now, by supposing the
curve to be a polygon, and consequently B 1ST, the increment or difference of the curve to be a straight line
coincident with the tangent, and the differential tri-
N to
BE
angle
subtangent
is
EB PB
that
T P B,
is,
f\i
dy :dx
:y.
the
KN
r\ nf
tangent will be
But then
there
is
an error
dy
arising from the forementioned false supposition (I. e. }
that the curve is a polygon with a great number of
sides),
the truth
for in reality
it
is
i. e. y
i.
e.,
-f-
dy
155
making d y the
defect in
to z
NL
i.
curve y2
=p
dy=-B-
But
if
you multiply y
+ dy
by
itself,
dy=-
2y
therefore,
d 7/^
There was,
truly.
2y
dy
which followed from the erroneous rule of
And
difis
z.
differences.
Therefore
2y
the two errors, being equal and contrary, destroy each
other, the first error of defect being corrected by a
second of excess.
" If
you had committed only one error, you would
not then come at a true solution of the problem. But
triangles,
*
Which
is,
TP
is
equal to 2 x.
156
2x
i/
y
n-\- z
= my
-.
2x
2
2yn +
Likewise from the nature of the parabola y
2
wherefore
n*
n
and
x
n
m\
2y
p my
p
2vn
__^
-f-
n2
and because y*
'V
x,
to
a;.
and
we
x,
=p
= p *_ willn be equal
2
r= m
shall
have
+ 2 = my
-H
2 y2
ft.
n2
-y
that
is.
= 5l = ^.
Q.B.D.*
2y
2y
shown that when we seek
the value of
Thus
it is
is
value of
dy
we throw
shown
it is
from the
that
when
On
in seeking the
dif
~
as infinitely
2y
small in comparison with dy,
d'v 2
by
this quantity
small
by
N L,
But
if
we make dy
we
first
too great
make dy
^
%y
too
'
it
only re-
mains to be shown that these two quantities are exThe Analyst, XXI. and XXII.
422.
II.,
p.
157
"
Bishop of Cloyne, with the addition of the Q. E. D."
That is to say, the error resulting from one " demand
or supposition" of the Leibnitzian
its
method
other
is
corrected
demand or sup-
position.
is
first to
Hence Lagrange,
demonstrations.
it
as his
after
approving
own view
of the
" This
says he,
given of
which I have
wanting nothing either of ex-
it" there
actitude or of generality."
irresistible
Having exhibited
ascertain
his examples,
" the
sign by which
it
Carnot proceeds to
is
known
that the
This
general reasoning," as
M. Comte, and
14
it is
is
it
Philosophy
158
tities
on
the
he
calls imperfect ;
must be
infinitely small.
other
hand,
all
the
only
it
Now,
analytical
operations,
whether of differentiation or of integration, which are
Carnot views, as a
perfect.
and invariable indication of the actual estab-
rules of reasoning
between
finite quantities
alone, since
the
159
not regard
it
as a
"general demonstration."
"be
"It
to
relates, as
with reference to the parabola. Now, this compensation of errors may be demonstrated to take place in
the process for finding the tangent to curve lines in
general.
Let y
= Fx
1.
y
A
7'
D/
X
III., p.
101.
100
AD =
--K
,
dx*
'
1.2.3
dxl
da? 1.2
etc..?
by Taylor's Theorem,
P'D'
or
E T,
do?
line
PT
da;
1.2
dx
Hence
-
dx* 1.2
Now,
the subtangent
is
dx*
.--,.
1.2.3
'
but
E T,
161
Hence P ; is in the
pose of finding the value of s.
method of Leibnitz substituted for
T, and this sub-
stitution is justified
difference
But
h3
ds v
s/
is
by the
etc.
dx* 1.2.3'
.2
P'
still
value
is
made
too
That is
added and then
P' T.
made no
x, as
Fig. 2.
D'
TE
sy
162
made
will be
its place.
.2
which
^__
da; 3
1.2. 3
is
value of
E,
is
was increased by the same amount it had been diminThat value of P 7 T is negative, because the
ished.
curve being concave toward the axis of x,
-
is
d y? 1.2
^
negative, and, since
is
it is
its first
term
supposed very
sum
of
all
the
because of the
facility
with which
it
reduces questions
A P,
which
is
given by
its
equation.
The method
of
MD
MD
MD
* See
any
work on the
Differential Calculus.
triangle.
(This
Barrow.)
Hence,
is,
163
DE
dy
_EN.
B
or the tangent of the angle which the tangent line reTo find the value
quired makes with the axis of x.
of this tangent, then, it is only necessary to ascertain
the value of
dx
the curve.
common parabola,
the
in question
value
x,
to
B, or to
Thus, give
whose equation
may
is
= %p
be easily ascertained.
or
if
+ 2 y dy + d if = 2p x + 2p dx.
Hence
2y
dy
of the second
infinitely small quantity
of 2 y dy,
side
the
as
nothing by
rejected
may
be
+ d f = 2 p dx.
164
dy = p
dx
y'
for
rigorous
exact.
as we have already seen, there are in this protwo errors which correct each other; the one
arising from the false hypothesis that the curve A P
Now,
cess
is
mand
These
tangent to point
The
D'
E=BM
T B'
ME
D E
r
is
unknown,
165
gent
line, the
very thing
Hence we adopt
we
to say,
TV
start
TT
,
with
we take
or
E, just as he does
out with
set
its
limit
is
ME
D E is the
On
-TJ\
ME because
the equation of
D'
D E as the same
we
instead of
DE
its
its
curve,
value
and be-
Now, if we
less,
then will
k
k also decrease; but the ratio
will continually inj
is
fraction
ME
may
li
be made to
differ as little as
we
166
D'E
Iroin
please
r
Jc
But
or -.
ME
,,
and hence
since the
D'E.
ME
is
,DE
.
.,
01
limit
the r
ME
li
D E
f
_ 1S
dy
__
dx
or
E'
=p
That
is
method the
In the method
T) ~W
of limits
D'
of
E
E
we begin with
them
T)
simply
* J because the limit of
"FT
ME
which may
y be
D'
to the constant quantity
E
E
which
easily
y
is
exactly equal
is
the quantity
required.
The
cation.
principle of this case is universal in its appliThat is to say, in the method of limits we
set
j
THE PHILOSOPHY OF MATHEMATICS.
167
same.
we must do
It
is,
it,
do
but in
this,
be the
many
cases
in fact, the
of the infinitesimal
i.
e.,
may
differ so little
first
"
demand
''
tion," the Marquis de L'Hopital says
for example, that we can take
for
:
Ap
P M,
the space
space
MPpw
A M m for
Apm
A P M,
little
sector
angle
pAm
the
little
the
little
MPjpB,
triangle
P A M."
or supposi-
We demand,
A P, pm for
A M S,
Now
the
the
he sup-
168
posed that
we
But, in fact,
jected as nothing with equal impunity.
these quantities can, in the infinitesimal analysis, be
respectively taken for one another, because their limits
are precisely the same, and because, by throwing out
the indefinitely small increments as nothing, or by
making them zeros, we pass to their limits, which are
MR
M Pp
MPpm,
line
P, and because when P p is
equal to zero, or treated as nothing, the limit
reached.
same
"We
"
that
made
M P is
we can take
two quan-
by
can be con-
demand
is
step,
^f
169
caused
15
it
is
an indirect
it direct,
only
to appear absurd.
EC
CHAPTER
VII.
THE
method of Newton,
as delivered
by
himself,
and admirers of the system ; each party showveneration for the great author by imputing its
views to him, and complaining of the misunder-
friends
ing
its
own
of ideas have cleared away the obscurities which originally hung around the great invention of Newton.
But
we would
profit
respect, as well as
nt)
171
is
thus laid in
approach each
other,
and
difference,
are ultimately
equal."
" If
you deny
it,
which
is
than by
sition." *
"
Prop.
is
Lemma
I.
I.)
(Newton,
quantities which constantly tend towards
equality while the hypothesis approaches its ultimate
:
magnitude D.
But by
than any
finite
less
than
equal." f
* Principia, Book
j-
Lemma I.
172
to
meaning
LEMMA
II.
a;
added
A by B
C d,
c,
A B, B
C,
etc.,
and
the sides
B b, C c, D d,
etc.,
D,
a of
and the parallelo-
b I, b L c m,
grams a
d n, etc., are completed.
c
Then if the breadth of those
be
parallelograms
supposed to be diminished, and their
number
to be
AK6LcMc?D,
A.albmcndo'E, and
A a b c d E, will
linear figure
augmented in infinitum /
have
to
curvi-
ratios of equality.
%ures
D o,
is
that
the
is
K L
sum
of the parallelograms
/,
m,
n,
(from the equality of all their bases), the
But
breadth
And
sum
AB
therefore (by
Lem.
AB
less
I.)
a.
is
supthan any
the figure
173
LEMMA
III.
" The
same ultimate ratios are also ratios of equality,
when the breadths
B,
C,
C, etc., of the parallelo-
and
FA af.
This parallelo-
scribed
figures
but,
breadth
because
A F is
diminished
in infinitum, it will
less
its
become
I
Q. E. D.
angle.
"Con.
timate
1.
sum
Hence the
ulIf
of those evanes-
" COR.
Much more will the rectilinear figure comthe chords of the evanescent arcs
under
prehended
a by b c, c dy etc., ultimately coincide with the curvi2.
linear figure.
"CoR.
3.
And
also
the
circumscribed rectilinear
"CoR.
4.
And
their perimeters
174
How, for example, can the circumscribed figures in lemmas two and three ever become equal to the curvilinear space
a E?
If these
lutely insuperable.
A b c d E,
broken
line
line.
I should
require
me to believe it;
that
is,
if
d o, or however
far their
number
m c,
by
AE
d, o
E,
etc.,
if the
A. a.
and
A a.
Or,
if
AaE
line, it
were a straight
Or, again, if the line a b c d
might be proved by the same reasoning that
possible.
175
A E
manifest absurdity.
The truth is, that the
sum of
the circumscribed or
all
fallacy
may be rendered
perfectly obvious.
It
may
leads,
its
logic.
The attempt
is
made
to
sum of
the
Now
it is
we
please.
of the case
may
be
made
is
as small as
be
made
Of
to
"
176
that difference D^
proach nearer to equality than by
If the
True.
which is against the supposition."
and then
sup-
may be
the
first
Hence,
suppose
its
no
its
limit
is
not
D, nor
a variable which
always
near as
Let us apply
this sort of
demonstration to
another
ad
infinitum.
sufficiently far,
it
TSJS
PHILOSOPHY OF MATHEMATICS.
177
may be demonstrated
divided until
its
Hence it
ence."
" If
you deny
[to zero],
will ultimately
it,
and
let
become equal to
zero.
be ultimately unequal
suppose
be its ultimate difference [from
it
must be equal to zero or nothing. That is, the ultimate half of something is exactly equal to nothing
;
Q. E. D.
In
lemma of
first
quences."
He
178
There
is,
therefore,
This objection appears absolutely unanif all quantities, which "during any
finite time
constantly approach each other, and before
the end of thiat time approach nearer than any given
defend,"
For
swerable.
Tint
which
to say,
is
as zero is the
common
limit toward
they continutoward
each
and
other,
ally converge
may be made to
"
nearer
the
one
to
the
other than by any
approach,
tliej all continually converge, so
given difference."
If,
then,
it
c '
" there
is
only one
proportion of equality throughout," and the whole
fabric of the infinitesimal analysis tumbles to the
ultimately equal,"
ground. IFor this fabric results from the fact that, instead of one uniform proportion, there is an infinite
variety of ratios among indefinitely small quantities.
If these veie ultimately equal, then their ultimate ratio
knows,
limits zero
and
infinity.
A.
XXXII.
and
to this
179
Replies were
again made to this, so that the argument assumed the
form of a regular controversy ; in which, though the
fence of Free TJilnldng in Mathematics.
matter quite
fairly,
their adversary." *
science
I merely wish to quote Berkeley's experiamong men, which so nearly coincides with my
own among books. " Believe me, sir," said he to
" I had
Philalethes,
long and maturely considered the
the
modern
of
principles
analysis before I ventured to
troversy.
ence
And,
publish my thoughts thereupon in the Analyst.
since the publication thereof, I have myself freely conversed with mathematicians of all ranks, and some of
the ablest professors, as well as made it my business
to be informed of the opinions of others, being very
desirous to hear
what could be
But
objections.
though you are not afraid or ashamed to represent the
analysts as very clear and uniform in their conception
of these matters, yet I do solemnly affirm (and several
of themselves know it to be true) that I found no har-
my
difficulties
or
answering
my
II.,
Sec. 1.
180
employed
to explain
what
after all
seemed inexplicable.
nothings.
Some reject
and
reject
able.
reductio
call
age
to clear
it
181
Newton, and
his
from
method, the two
away every obscurity
instead
of
disciples,
demolishing Berkeley, got into an
to re-demonstrate the demonstrations of
clear
master.
Now
ated
were frequently such as could never absolutely coinAs, for instance, the parallelograms inscribed
within the curve, in the second lemma of the first book
of Sir Isaac Newton's Prineipia, cannot by any divicide.
sion be
made equal
lemma
it is
they are
asserted that
do become
actually, perfectly,
and abso-
^
yi
182
how any
Newton
and
it
seems
difficult to
that the
expressly asserts
as we have seen,
the
parallelograms will in oil parts coincide with
Curvilinear figure." But Mr. Bobins, in his explana-
iumself,
**
not
tion., understands Newton to mean that they will
as
apparently as plainly
" the coincidence
language could enable him to do so,
of the variable quantity and its limits/' and yet the
in the name of the master, the reality
Newton
Coincide.
asserts,
clisciple denies,
of any
such coincidence.
"Would
and
ultimately equal" to its limit,
seen
have
Robins insists that he must
they
variable becomes
yet Mr.
Newton
"
Now
is
this to inter-
pret, or simply to contradict, Sir Isaac Newton's explanation of his own method? No one could possibly
entertain a doubt respecting the meaning of Mr.
IRoblns. If Newton had meant unequal, could he not
liave said so just as well as Mr. Robins, instead of
saying equal ?
old enee of the
asserted it? It is certain that from Jurin to Whe\vell, and from Whewell to the present mathematicians
of
to
able
quantity and
its limit.
"\Vhewell
equal
??, a,
to
says:
its limit,
ratio of
"A
cides with
183
it
by which
it may be refuted.
The views of Mr. Robins
respecting the
method of
his attempt to
The author of
an interpretation of this method as did no ways require any such coincidence [between the ultimate form
of the variable and its limit].
In his explication of
this doctrine of prime and ultimate ratios he defines
never pass.
And
in like
ratio
magnitude
is
reaches
limit.
its
limit,
Nor
then
is
this all.
Newton
says:
184
Now
of
here, in the definition
Newton
as given
by
is
it
said, that
method on a
It
is,
Newton
utterly impossible.
Mr. Robins rather than believe such a thing of Newwould explain away the obvious sense of his
most explicit statements. But even at the present day,,
;
ton, he
after
the calculus
on
own
which
it
Integral Calculus:
*
Principia, Book
II.,
Section
I.,
Scholium.
185
"
D
AD
and
B C,
co-ordinates.
" Put
the area
O E = x, E P ==y, E F = h, F P' = y
A E P D = A.
"Then when x
and
E F
receives an increment
fi
the area
angle
F S.
But
d 77
+ -*
.
DFP
= 1 H--dy ~ + = d*yHence
d?
--
-Jl*
II
TH
}-)
etc..
2/xA
^
ll
.
Ji
at the limit,
when
li
is
,
;
etc..'
^E FSILOSOPHY OF MATHEMATICS.
186
rectan S les
in
mteimed-ate
curvdinear space
oher
1B
A =fy
EFE
the
as
e
ud
That
un
it
F F P P/
*
]
mm0n
baS6^
is
reduced to 0-
d -y
flx
z
h
if
- H d 1
da?
-Ji?
187
12y
becomes
1 only when all three areas
vanish, or become identical with the right line F P 3
and
this ratio
in consequence of
making k
rectangle
5
F P. so that =
-=
TT
F P,
so that
FP=
FP
is
DFP
'
Hence, instead of
0.
FS
1.'
F P
is
to
equal
itself,
needed no proof.
is
managed.
"when
E P P' F, which
between F P and F S
intermediate in value
come equal
is
must
Not at
;
is
always
beall.
7i
0, as we haye just seen in the
the
three areas vanish and become
that
preceding line,
Thus h is made
to
line
P.
the
0, in
equal
right
It
is
only
when
F E P P'.
But how
will
FS
and
FP
are
curvilinear space
take the sum of such
you
you take the sum of rectangle's
whose variable altitude is y, and whose base is 0?
How will
rectangles ?
less in size,
at the limit,
right lines,
when
7t
0, the rectangles
Hence
vanish into
linos
becomes
188
oo
To
take the
sum
back two
centuries,
lines,
is
which throws us
He makes
= 0" in one
make A
on the other
side of the
biguity.
method of passing
question,
stration.
is
li,
or in the
patent and palpable in the above demonis latent and concealed in the demonstra-
It
tion of
sum
lelogram whatever could be equal to the circumscribed curvilinear space, unless some such ambiguity,
either hidden
lemmas
in question,
indivisibles seems
it is clear,
upon
189
somewhat harsh." *
But, after
all,
from
of such a figure.
linear limit"
a a curvilinear limit"
ultimate form of a polygon be
or figure. It becomes so, says Newton, when the sides
" diminished in
of the polygon are
infinitum."
surely, as long as its sides
it
But,
does
other words, to
method
until it
from the
seems
Indeed,
mind to escape from
it
abandons the
false principle,
and
the false demonstrations of the principle, that parallelograms, or polygons, or any other rectilinear figures
Principia,
Book
I.,
Section
I.,
Scholium.
190
vision, be made
The thing itself
ceived by means
visibles, as it is called
It
is
generally,
by Carnot.
if
not
asserted
universally,
by
writers
example,
we suppose with
Sir Isaac
Newton, or with
Mr. Courtenay,
that the inscribed rectangle, the circumscribed rectangle, and the intermediate curvilinear
which
the
sum of
all
A =Jy dx
is
ydx.
equal to
Now,
OB
Now
the figure.
evident that
it is
sura,
tlie
191
of those
area OBC,
greater than the parabolic
rectangles
and will continue to be greater, however their number
is
may
measured, as
O B C,
area
angles, is
we have
seen,
Now
fy dx.
sum
sum, or
this
of these rect-
fydx,
be easily shown.
From the equation of the parabola
obtain,
by
+ 2pdx,
differentiation, y
or
2y
dy
+ 2y dy +
+ dy* = %p d x.
is,
I say,
This may
= 2jp#, wo
dy* = 2 p x
Hence
p
By
we have
OBC,orA- C(l^
J\ P
Now
sum
of
all
the in-
But
definitely small circumscribed rectangles.
for the
greater than the parabolic area
OBC;
term above, or
C^
T? or
v,
Jb
Clfdy
+
J p
i
-2.
is
first
'^9
+/
it
is
xy
%
n
u,
$ = _ #
= y = %P
y the well-known
J?
.1
sL.
3p
3p
OBC.
two
parts,
namely, of
C^Jj
was made up of
and of
C yd f\ The
J 2p
'
192
first
part alone,
OBC
C-
which was
-x
y was obtained by a compensation of
}
errors
the
sum
excess of the
OB C
^~^J
2 J9
The
method of Leibnitz.
own
reason of this
is,
it is
which makes
really
no difference at
all.
PP
This
is,
R,
in
one of the
fact,
equalities which is specified in the first
of
the
postulate
Marquis de L'H6pital, as we saw
demonstrate
it.
Newton
does
he attempts to
193
the rectangle
FE
possibility.
FP
F E P P';
for
my equation by taking
but then I will correct this error
rejecting from
equation certain small quantities;
Newton, in
is, in fact, precisely what he did.
in the place
like manner, should have said, I put IT
my
by
for this
FEPP
so,
FP
F E P P'.
angle
is
The only
difference
two
and
Newton
figures
infinitely small,
when they had reached their ultimate form or value.
this
equality of the
Hence
result
geometry.
disliked the
nitesimals in
making much use of infinites and infigeometry. Of this number was Sir Isaac
Newton (whose
\\
\{
t
\
194
*
Maclaurin himself entertained the opinion
height.
"
that
the supposition of an infinitely little magnitude"
is "too bold a
postulatum for such a science as geome37
Newton himself
says,
" Since
we have no
ideas of infi-
he
nitely little quantities, he introduced fluxions, that
as
much
finite
as
possimight proceed by
quantities
or
ble." J
limit,
he found
it
them
And
to indivisibles or to points ?
their length
become
if so,
did not
it
became
it
may be
nothing ?
Nor
is
this all.
For he
"
says,
Perhaps
objected that there is no ultimate proportion of evanescent quantities, because the proportion before the
qualities
have vanished
is
when
they are vanished, is none. But by the same argument, it may be alleged, that a body arriving at a
place,
* Introduction to Maelnurin's
Fluxions, p.
f Preface to Fluxions, p. iv.
2.
Eobins' Mathemati-
195
before
arrives at
it
its last
And in like
place and with which the motion ceases.
manner, by the ultimate ratio of evanescent quantities
to be understood the ratio of the quantities not
before they vanish, nor afterwards, but with which
they vanish. In like manner the first ratio of nascent
is
And
quantities is that with which they begin to be.
first or last sum is that with which they begin or
the
is
may
attain,
velocity.
And
there
is
This
is
There
motion
the ultimate
Thus,
nor after they have vanished, but of somethings somewhere between something and nothing. These somethings,
state,
is
" the
The ultimate
ghosts of departed quantities."
ratio of two rectangles, for example, is their ratio,
neither before nor after they have ceased to be rectangles, but while they are somewhere and something
lines.
There
may
be,
if
Principia,
Book
I.,
Section
I.,
Scholium.
f
;
i
i
196
"
D'Alembert," says Carnot, rejected this explication, though he completely adopted in other respects
"
the doctrine of
Newton concerning
the limits or
first
for
clear
clearness
rejection of infinitely
LEMMA
"If
(as
IV.
ber in each rank, and when their breadths are diminished in infinitum, the ultimate ratios of the
parallel of Metaphysique,
etc.,
Chap.
III., p. 182.
197
the
other,
sum of
all in the
sum
one to the
of
all in
the
because (by
Lemma
and
ratio of equality.
Q. E. D."
Now
this demonstration, it will be perceived, proceeds on the principle that the inscribed parallelograms exactly coincide with the circumscribed curvi-
linear figure,
and
if this coincidence
proposition alone is, then, sufficient to show that Newton contended for what his words so clearly express;
namely, that the inscribed parallelograms, in their
by
by
but
it is,
demanded
nevertheless, absolutely
lemma,
as well as
It
is
certain
to
abandon
of curvilinear areas.
17*
193
I have,
it
may
be remembered, demonstrated in a
perfectly clear and unexceptional manner a proposition similar to the above lemma, without supposing the
That
its limit.
is
to say, I
its limit,
will be found
to
ulti-
answer
strated,
it
obscurity to
having perplexed, darkened, and confounded the otherwise transcendently beautiful method of limits.
LEMMA
VI.*
" If
any arc
given in position is subtended
its
chord
by
B, and in any point A, in the middle
of the continued curvature, is touched
by a right line
AGE,
homologous
sides."
It is
deemed
necessary.
is all
then
199
if the points
and
BAD,
and
nitum,
will ultimately
vanish.
" For
if the angle does
not vanish, the arc
CB
gent
A D an
Now
this demonstration is
merely preliminary to
is
in these
The same
proposition
practical conclusion,
ultimate ratios,
lines for
reasoning
use
any one of these
freely
Cor.
III.]
[See
we may
any other."
LEMMA
VIII.
" If the
C B,
E, BE, with the arc
right lines
three
the chord
constitute
and
the
D,
B,
tangent
triangles
A
A
A
E A B, E A C B, E A D,
lemma
200
ratios
angles for
any one of
That
[See Cor.]
indifferently use
any
other."
these triis
to say,
it
is
equal
In
among
themselves."
this eighth
lemma
"
several triangles"
I would ask, is
no form at all ;
Now what,
in a single point.
"
this
ultimate form?"
Perhaps it is
perhaps it is without form and void.
is
It
inscribed in a point.
Or, if
it
were
Nor
is it
the form
it
it is
then, does
a triangle vanish ? Certainly not with the form of a
triangle, for then, it would still be a triangle, which is
Must I
is
conclude,
some unknown
II.,
space
to
201
A a E.
as unnecessary
is,
same
limit
go beyond
error.
A a E.
This
is
perfectly obvious,
this is a supererogation of
and
to
darkness and
B m, C n,
Z,
parallelograms,
obtain an expression for their
Do,
etc.,
and
if
we
A E
a E. Hence,
parallelograms over the constant area
if the variable term which represents the sum of these
little
AaE
will
be obtained, and this is precisely what is done in passing to the limit of the expression for the sum of the
parallelograms.
Now
all this is
if the author
Hence,
palpable.
say that the sum of the parallelograms is never equal
to the area
a E, but that this area is the limit of that
He saw that
in the practical
202
A E
curvilinear space
a
on the wrong ground.
He
on the ground
whereas he should
justified it
For
it is
sum
of infi-
work.*
is true in
regard to the substitution
of the chord, arc, and tangent for each other in the
application of the calculus whenever such substitution
and
still
further, and pronounced
had passed the bounds of the
infinitely small, and ceased to have any magnitude
whatever. But this view, as
Lagrange said, has the
them equal
after they
I.,
Chap. YL,
p. 35.
and become
quantities;
Newton and
203
Both
Leibnitz, however,
"
using of
any one of these quantities for any other,"
on the ground that they became equal. The chord,
the arc, and the tangent are coincident and equal
when
infinitely
ratios,
they
other.
may
But
if
we justify
lines for
any other."
on
put
This true ground
!
is
by Duhamel
"
SECOND THEOREM.
:
The
limit
place these
of which the
"
Let there
tities
a and
/9,
limits of
tlia
that,
be, in fact,
a 1 and
/?'
and of
may
a 1 Bf
~-
may
also
be equal to unity
we
shall
have iden-
/9
tically
* The exclamation. of Carnot when he saw his own theory of the
method of Leibnitz as propounded by Lagrange.
204
~"~
/J
/3'
of*
fl
The
Urn.
ClWj
= 1 and
a_ r
llttl,
Urn.
1,
a!
.
which
it
Now
important theorem.
chord
For as every one knows, the limit of
1, the
arc
this
limit of
1,
tangent
arc
tangent
not equal, yet, in seekany one of them may be
lines are
is
VIII.
For, as
ratio of
may
triangles
1.
Hence, in
"
seeking the limit of their ratios,
any one of these
triangles
may
make no
205
We
clear
still
and unexceptionable
principle.
modes of viewing the infinitesimal method by an example; and I shall select the question of tangency,
since it was the consideration of that question which
led to the creation of the modern analysis.
Let it be
required, then, to determine the tangent line at the
C c. Now, as we know from
point C of the curve
*!
B, which
Trigonometry, the tangent of the angle C
the tangent line
C T makes with the axis of #, is
equal to
CBV
BC
BV
and
,
?
and
T E C,
this,
TE
equal to i-^.
is
CE
TE
C
E'
Hence,
if
we
fl
206
The only
question
rr\
of the ratio
a
j
I
of
BC
-.
CE
is,
then,
Now T
B 6,
how
E,' which
is
the increment
AB
when
is
made
to
T
T
is
substituted for
Now,
.
i
-p
VCT
CE
substitution is justified constitutes precisely the difference between the methods of Leibnitz, of Newton, arid
of Duhamel.
-Let us suppose, then, that the line b e
B C,
making
the lines
E,
moves toward
C c, and C T
According
continually
to Leibnitz,
when
arc
CG
becomes
infinitely small,
C c,
the arc
C c,
as
E.
But,
was
after-
him
in
result, find-
"K*
-, he did so by means of an
\j
JBj
His
207
why
or wherefore.
Such was
Newton
refused, as
He
sider a curve as a
sides, or to
diate one c
whatever.
Accordingly,
order to establish an
in
Quadraturam Curvarum,
We
be considered as a
may
be inscribed in a point
dissimilar triangles then become
may
He
supposes
But he
and
still insists,
be used instead of
T TP
CE'
idea of
to
T E,
G
because Urn.
TE
E=
TE
1.
This
is
evident, for as
it is
obvious that
|
208
o
their difference
Tc
Hence
Urn.
I,
and there-
hi
TP TT
CE
used for
may be
T E.
-E
nn "p
ever.
For
which
is
always constant,
is
evidently
IT
-EE
\j
CE
For
as c
ap-
approaches in value
SLt,
to approach.
it
If, therefore,
TF
ratio
CE
we would
we only have
to obtain
which
is
the value of
unknown
TF
E
C
than which
CHAPTER
VIII.
or kept
-," it
"
if
we suppose a
to
remain con-
p
I
hence
oo
I
,
I'
This kind of
zero obtained
differs analytically
by subtracting a from
= 0.
is
It
from
much
209
210
subject.
About
the absolute
all
posing that they differ from each other, and that the
ratio of two such zeros may be a finite quantity." *
Such
is
zero divided
by zero at
all, it is
It
-.
not
is
quantity 0, represent
different from. 0.
a
oo
=^ as it
.
write -.
is
And
to say
J
it
0. or to
write
as
it is
to
oo
least
origin.
"
"
would seem"
Logical accuracy," says the author,
some other name should be given "to
to require that
if
two mean-
The
truth
is,
there
no use whatever
for
-,
21 1
and
dodge other
to
difficulties
;
causing it to swarm with sophisms
instead of shining with solutions.*
of the calculus
The above
explanation
is
easy, but
it
it
in practical operations.
The author attempts this in
his well-known work on the Differential Calculus. In
ur
Hence
or
= a (x +
uf
x*,
= a x* + 2 a x + a
u=2axh+ a
2
li
A)
he gives
It.
h* 9
2 ax
=a
+a
,
fi.
du
dx
Now we
said,
~
= 2ax
+ a ax.
certainly expected
him
to say this,
but he has
we then have
212
du
dx
What,
2 ax.
then, has
pears to
How is
" It
may be
For
explanation.
if
made
h be
absolutely zero or
an
it
not
if
you
and sometimes
dx
be so easily obtained
justified in his Logic of Mathematics a process seemingly so arbitrary ? Or is the Logic of Mathematics
solecism
is
that A, the
Ma-
213
no rule in arithmetic, nor in algebra, nor. in geometry, nor in the calculus, by which the answer to a
is
"We
have represented by
dx"
which h can
made to assume in conformity with the law of its
change or diminution without becoming zero." But
why should Ji, in the second member and not as well
in the first, obey this law of change ?
Why should it
there, and there alone, kick out of the traces and be"the
last
value of h."
That
is,
"the
last
be
come nothing
The
"
The reason
member and
But
is
it
from
* The
intelligent reader, even if he had not been told in the prewould have known that Dr. Davies had freely used the work
of Boucharlat.
face,
21 4
the calculus ?
particular value of
in which their great creators necessarily left them involved. But they are now anything rather than an
honor to the age in which they continue to be reproSome, it is to be feared, make haste to become
the teachers before they have become the real students
duced.
(p. 61),
as
learned
its
very
first
and enigmas.
which
specting
it
and made
as a rational
lie
215
is,
else in neither.
I must
Hence, we
all.
have
du
dx
-
or
But
if
we adopt
mate expression
~
= 2ax
+ adx
,
= 2a
x.
we
=2a
with
dx
z,
its
shuffling
and
affrightful
But the
limit of 2
ax
ah
is
knowing the. real reanoiiH or prinpretty much as an engineer, who knows nothing
about the mecha.ninm or principles of an engine, is shown how to
work it, by a few superficial and unexplained rules. This may be a
ciples of those rules
216
is -.
Hence, if we are not afraid to
h
trust our fundamental principle or to follow our logic
to its conclusion, we must not shrink from the symbol
limit of
This symbol
is
grange.
defences of the
MZ =
we
tities
nn
-,_.
(9)
is
an equation
M Z,
4-^
iisen to
B,
it is
oKcnlnte o's
=
a
is
false,
appear entirely,
-.:
found in section
please
always
as
B,
y
2
__
" The
equation
exactly
false,
may
dis-
but which
an indeterminate quantity.
is insignificant,
since
is
We
formula which conveys no meaning; and such is precisely the knot of the difficulty in the infinitesimal
>-na1irsis."*
the problem of quadratures, the only alternad to be either to commit an error with Pas* Eeflexions,
etc.,
Chap.
I.,
p. 41.
217
symbol
oo
is
equivalent to the
of the symbol
J.
that, as it
seems
to me, there
lieri's
-.
is
never been adequately understood or explained. Precisely the same thing appears to me perfectly true in
regard to the conception of Newton, which, if properly
understood,
is
is
as well as
-,
any
other.
It
is
*
posed a or 6 as well as any other quantity whatever."
?
* Reflexions,
19
Chap.
etc.,
III., p. 182.
218
who complain
of a want of
ratios of
Even
to
combine." *
to
by a regard
those who,
- as the true
adopt the symbol
to
and
necessary to
is
dx
found by making
But,
2y + z
make also
in the fraction -
Thus -^
"
:
this limit is
in the fraction
=
2y
it
will be said,
z='0
is it
and consequently u
+z
and then we
shall
not
have
is
first
the equation?
Most
D'Aleinbert, although
contact with the
the opinion of
should bring us into actual
assuredly, in
this
~.
symbol
J
* Reflexions,
etc.,
Chap.
I v p. 37,
21 9
" that
this signifies ?"
Ay, that is the very question : what is it that
this symbol signifies?
Has it any sense behind or
it," lie
is
continues,
is
no absurdity in
we
please
for
it,
hence
it
- can be
can be
."
f7
suspected
- of
having any absurdity
the sun.
then
it
True,
may be
if
equal to
if
we
we
please
it ?
it
as well as to
.
simply
so please
please,
but, then,
2y
.
it is
we
value
may be
equal to
But
not this
is
2y
If,
signifies
we
ask,
what
anything, a or
signifies -,
or
6,
2y
quantity
we may
please to name,
Carnot replies,
or
any other
and D'Alembert
it
symbol
re-
- or
to
termination,
which
quently pothing?
signifies
everything,
and
conse-
220
OF MA THEMA TICS.
ratio of z to
limit
is
= and u =
of =
to u =
0, this
0, for
which the
ratio
u approaches
it
Now
there
is
If,
then,
we would
see
The
expression
calculus, not a
"
is,
it
circumstances to which
it
it owes its
origin, then, indeed,
has no particular meaning or signification.
But
nothing, as Bacon somewhere says, can be truly understood if viewed in itself alone, and not in its connection with other things.
This
is
emphatically true in
If abstracted from
its
all its
naked
minate than
is
it
It
-.
221
is,
determinate, more or
upon
be more or
less arbitrary
but
it is
less in-
precisely
of indetermination of which
the
quantity in general
is
is
symbol be objected
No
indeterminate?
Why,
then, should
to
its
value
be determined,
particular
may
and if any one should so mean, he might be easily
The more indeterminate the symbol, says
refuted.
not,
in
each
case,
the symbol
-,
that "
it is
it
is
seriously objected to
trary" or indeterminate f
!
U I have
many
degrees of indetermination of
* [Reflexions,
19*
etc.,
Chap.
I.,
p. 18.
Chap.
III., p. 184*
is
222
his
" It seems to
me that Descartes, by
method of indeterminates, approached very near
cartes,
he says
II
I
|]
;*j
/?
I
.*
tion of the
method of indeterminates" *
then pro-
analysis.
symbol
- as
objectionable on the ground that
indeterminate.
He
ceeds to
but so
It may,
may x and
it is true,
is
it
be " either a or 6
;"
symbols that they are indeterminate. On the contrary, every mathematician has regarded this indetermination as the secret of their power and utility in
the higher mathematics.
This singular crusade of
mathematicians against one poor symbol
-,
etc.,
Chap.
III., p. 208.
is
while
all
certainly
f Ibid., p. 150.
So
far
-, abstractly
223
It
considered,
rank
it is
its
entitled to hold
of geometry.
It
is,
value,
among
the indeterminates
to signify
to infinity.
224
"O
point
A.
AO
BA
is
equal
makes
to the tangent of the angle
O, which S
with the line
successive
and
in
each
and
O,
every
this angle,
approaches A,
b o
and
Ao
is
equal to the
makes with A O. As
and consequently its tanThat is to say, although
it
T A O,
toward which,
con-
Ao
The limit of the angle 6 A o is the
tends.
Ao
tinually increases.
right angle
t,
whose tangent
therefore,
is
the ratio
equal to infinity,
Ao
continually
A becomes indefinitely
A o approaches indefinitely near to
T A O, and
in value
A o approaches
circle,
has, by
very definition, two points in common with
that circumference.
Then, if we pass to the limit by
A
o
0, and consequently b o
0, the equation
making
its
Ao
= tan.
Again,
if
A o will
become
we conceive S
B, making A
always have
= tan. T A o =
7
to revolve
oo
= tan.
a o
Bro.
225
= tan. B r
a
o,
will
become
0.
it
may
also be
tween
angle b
and B.
Pd
Pb
makes with
JL
limit.
tan.
or
as b approaches
Cu
if
we
pass to the
becomes -
tan.
Hence,
Pd
P d,
T P d.
T?d
Precisely the same relation is true in regard to every
B. Hence, if the point of contact
point of the arc
A B from B
-, will
vary from
to co
But
K*
it
T P d,
to
or of
should be particu-
226
iarly observed,
A B, then -
will
for this is
an all-important
defi-
fact
Now
it is
termination of the symbols x and y> abstractly considered, with the capacity to assume, under some
particular supposition, determinate and fixed values,,
that constitutes their great scientific value. Considered
as the co-ordinates of
nrfi
.*
.aiue.
In like manner,
if considered in a
general
and
\j
ci point
of view, or, in other words, with referany point of any curve, it is in-
to a tangent to
But
the
moment you
There
227
and
slip-
be easily given.
In
partial, one-sided,
may
is
not
only indeterminate, but it sometimes arises under circumstances which still leave "it as indeterminate as
This
whatever.
is
speed,
it is
Hence,
together
to
if in
same
mn =
t,'
we make
the
tween the points of departure,
0, and m
ft,
difference between the number of miles they travel per
hour, also
0,
we
shall have, as
we
evidently ought
to have,
Now
in all cases in
which a
fraction,y like
becomes
228
to
becomes, in his
first lessons,
the concrete.
nounce
general,
That
symbol
but also in
is,
indeterminate, because
it
considered by him.
Hence, from the mere blindness
of custom (for it seems utterly impossible to assign any
other reason), he continues to regard it always and
everywhere in the same light. He spreads, without
reflection, this view of the symbol in question over the
its
real signifi-
In the
symbol
arises,
in consequence of one
=
in the case considered by D'Alembert - =
u
2y + z
made =
and
makes
function u =
The
,
0,
this
its
z is
0.
2>
ratio
- always tends,
J
u
as z
2y
limit,
by making
0,
we have
0___
~~ a_
9, v
to the
Now
in this case -
may
value, which
when he
have
a_ .
is
it
has,
error
2?
value,
it
may
as
229
V
;
it
But
terminate.
yet, in
may be
said to be inde-
value stamped on
cnltis, then,
clear
and
it is
its
As
face.
it
no longer indeterminate;
fixed in value.
it is
perfectly
It derives this fixed value
appearance in practice,
other value whatever.
its
it
which -
is
rejected as
an unmeaning
fe
works from
symbol of inde-
230
else,
determinate value of -
when
that value
'the
Thus,
if
not obvious,
assert it has
face.
is
it
were, on
its
very
common
is
2
7/
=ax
makes
2y
the exact value which
metry.
Now
is
2y
tor,
but when
to
no such value.
it
The two
variable
has no existence
u
*
it
2y
Chap. VII.,
+z
p. 77.
231
That
is
one -
the limit
2y
of the other.
Now
here -
is,
as
D'Alembert
says, not
This
is its
and
true character,
it
It
should always be so
the limit, the con-
is
stant quantity,
2y
of contact), toward which the value of the fraction continually converges as
and less.
Hence there
z,
u
and consequently u, becomes
less
-,
as so
is
many mathematicians
Having reached
ni
the position
= 2ax + a
li>
Ji
we make h
0,
we
shall
have
= 2 a x.
in one member of
On the contrary, he makes Ji
d x, or the last value of #, in the
his equation, and
other.
By this means he preserves a trace of the letter
u, as well
member of
his
But
any such
232
For
if he
should
he
= 2a
result
dx
had understood by
but the limit of that
dx
x,
provided ho
ratio, or-
A
the constant value
which
We
by every reflecting mind. It is cersame things are done with far greater
circumspection and concealment by others, not de-
easily detected
We
this in
the
solution of the following problem: "To find the general differential equation of a line which is tangent to
f
a plane curve at a given point x', y
.
1 A
233
ES
passing
" The
equation
f
f
n n
through the points x y and x y
'
',
is
or
a But
if
the secant
ES
ff
where
limit,
dii f
to
dx
E S and T V coincide,
(1) will
will reduce
x rt
x}
;/
But
in order to
y = --(a?
a/).
-,
P"
become
20*
0.
II.,
if
xf
Chap.
is
I.,
the abscissa
p. 148.
234
and x"
cides with
is
and P^coincida,
ordinates y /f
y
it is
f
0.
inaccurate expression
to the
dx
preferred the
symbol
-,
which, in
every such case, is perfectly accurate, as well as perAnd he obtains this inaccurate
fectly determinate.
7
expression by means of the false supposition that P
;/
P may coincide without causing y ff y' } or x n
become
and
xf
which, in the application of the proany particular curve given by its equation, is
just exactly equivalent to making the increment of
x
on one side of the equation and not on the
to
cess to
other.
denned them. Nor is this all. They habitually proceed on the false supposition that the variable reaches
or coincides with
just noticed,
yff
able ratio y-
xn
it is
its limit.
yf
is
its
last
value
yf
~
whereas
its
d xr
real limit lies beyond its last value, and is accurately
2
found only by making y*
x
0.
0, and x
y
as
we
have
it
is
no
value
of
the
For,
repeatedly seen,
x
ratio
That tangent
yff
235
is
yf
^-,
xl
sense.
tities
as variables
which continually
may be supposed
decrease, or
which
we
or
first principles,
ingenuity of
man
or elements,
to
form a
it is
it is
In the discussion
-.
is said,
^-
that
d x'
it
-,
since
it
"
caii-
T3LE
236
PHILOSOPHY OF MATHEMATICS.
minate form
-"*
Now
resorts to -, because
it,
and
he gives the wrong reason for its use. The truth is,
if there are two branches of the curve meeting at one
point, then will
curve
-,
as
foi
values
then will
-,
mon
point
first
and then
have a
different value
Thus, such
is
refer-
the admir-
But
it is
II.,
Chap.
II.,
is
indetermi-
p. 191.
it lias
The
truth
237
two or three or
is,
we
use
it
in
such
mined.
-,
in position,
but by
its
deter-
- in the discussion
But
is
it
is one curve
passing through the point ? Is it
not truly wonderful that it should be thus employed,
because it is indeterminate, and yet rejected for preIt is quite too indeterminate
cisely the same reason ?
there
for use, say all such reasoners, when it arises with one
value on its face ; but yet it may, and must be used,
when
it
arises
just because
it is
its face,
How
indeterminate
away
we
lias
Shall
exploded and
are past ?
dawned
Or may
an era in
238
think, as well as
manipu-
Only one
to the
It
-.
symbol
we
retain this
symbol
bers of an equation by 0.
The
but
easy.
need not
it
Whether we use -
all.
is
rendered accurate,
^-
or
in
dx'
writing the differential equation of a tangent line to
and
dy'
dx
by the
in the one
make any
Now
easily eliminated
substitution of
prac-
- is
just as
its
value in
any 'particular
be found and
out any
case as
if
dy and
dx
f
its
besides
value
its
may
For
is
we
form
dv
dx
and proceed
to apply
it,
we
shall
have
to
commit ao
239
^-.
dx'
2y'dx
How
dv^
f*
Shall
we make
zero by
it
2 yr d x!
and yet
not consider
*
~
dx
then,
making d y
we throw
-, or shall
it is
an
term
=
it
0,
out
infinitely
Both
processes
are sophistical, and yet the one or the other must be
used, or some other equivalent device, if we would arrive
dx
is
found,
y~y f= Q^x ~ x ^
We here see, by means of x
to
T/,
is
II.,
to
be found.
Chap.
I.,
p. 150.
We obtain.
'
240
_p
dy
dy*
dx~~y
2y.dx
of y and
term
dy^ 2
7
2y ax
C\
becomes
and
less
less,X
the
since dy*,
7
*/
and
if
we pass
to that limit
consequently dy,
we
0,
shall
by making d x, and
have
_.
0~V
r
r
or for the point x 9
which substituted
for
we
have
shall
= p-(x
y
x f\
oo
indetermi nation.
It
the formula
which
is,
is
also called a
symbol of
many
nay, in
the symbol of a limit,
indeed, in
cases
There
241
is,
in Dr.
its
value on
an equation.
thus found
X
side of
author.
a E, to
of any such area
be divided off into equal
parts, and represent each
part by h, and the whole
number of parts by n, and
if we conceive a system of
inscribed parallelograms, or
rectangles, erected on those
their
and
let
varying
y represent
altitudes,
we
shall
It
n.
But
this
curvilinear area
21
242
a E, or
approach as near as we please to the area
from it by less than any given area or space.
to
to differ
Hence
AaE
is,
0,
sum
limit co
and
if
we
we
lutely nothing,
of said rectangles
pass to the limit by making li absoshall have for the limit of the sum
<*>
Now
this is not to
be
is
sum
sum
for
if
we
mag-
find the
shall
oo as their respective
Accordingly,
oo for
"
the sum of
tainly most inadequately expressed by
number
of
if
of
as
the
sum
lines, howlines," just
any
area
surface.
Cavaever great, could make up an
or
in refusing to say with Eoberval and
" the sum of the
rectangles," because that sum
never equal to the required area. But, instead of
lieri
was right
Pascal,
is
his
own
the limit
as the
243
To
the symbol -.
interpret these
in fact, to untie all the principal knots of the Differential and Integral Calculus, and cause their maniis,
fold difficulties
and
The symbol
form
obscurities to disappear.
oo
may
a transformation which
~,
is
effected in
every
complete treatise on the calculus. Thus, in Dr. Courtenay's work it is transformed "to find the value of
:
= PXQ,= F# X
which takes
X when x = a. Put P = -. Then
the function w
the form oo
/>
#,
u = ~z=z- when x
He thus
P
reduces oo
ee
the
tion.
oo
to the
form
which he truly
-,
calls
He
X 0,
cession,
oo
oo
oo
all
of which, in suc-
-,
and
limit of
I.,
form
it
Chap. VII., p.
is
85.
-,
and are
dis-
clear that it is
244
symbol
-.
That
suspected,
felt assured,
who
has
the most profoundly revolved the problems of the calculus in his own mind will the most fully appreciate
my
If any one has suspected that in the foregoing reflections on the philosophy of the calculus I have
given undue importance to the question
of,
tangency,
It will be sufficient to
problem of tangents,
it
follows that
we can always
apply the preceding principles to the different problems which are resolved by that calculus, such as the
discovery of maxima and minima, of points of inflex"
ion and of
rcbrousscmcnt," etc.* But, after all, the
of
tangents, however general in its applicaquestion
tion, is
very
245
first
which
it
is
what
cer-
of
its
own
diffi-
21*
246
NOTES.
NOTE
No
less a
geometer than
A,
PAGE
103,
M. Legendre
numbers,
It is also
for
of a surface by a solid
by solid units
NOTE
such as
B,
PAGE
130.
in.
A ym +
variables x
and
?/,
which
is
em-
(B x
+ C) ym ~
-f (Da;
+ E x + F) ym ~
+,
etc.,
247
0,
248
is called algebraic,
and
all
Hence
lines
when
order
its
Thus a
equation
is
line is of the
of the
first,
first,
second, or third
and
others, this denomination has not pregeometers, at the present day, they are universally
called either lines or curves of the second order, though they are
vailed.
By
the simplest of
As we have
all
tion of the
first
an entire order of themselves, are usually called "the conic secon account of their relation to the cone. No class of curves
could be more worthy of our attention, since the great Architect
of the Universe has been pleased to frame the system of the worlds
around us, as well as countless other systems, in conformity with
the mathematical theory of these most beautiful ideal forms.
But these lines, however important or beautiful, should not be
permitted to exclude all others from works on Analytical GeomeFor among lines of tlie third and higher orders there are
try.
many worthy of our most profound attention. If it were otherwise, it would be strange indeed, since there are only three curves
of the second order, while there are eighty of the third, and thousands of the fourth. This vast and fertile field should not, as
usual, be wholly overlooked and neglected by writers on AnalytiThe historic interest connected with some of these
cal Geometry.
curves, the intrinsic beauty of others, and the practical utility of
tions'
many
to be neglected.
PUBLICATIONS OF
J.
LIPPINCOTT COMPANY.
SCHOOLS, ACADEMIES,
By
S. S*
HALDEMAN, A.M.,
author of
cents.
" This
is
guage.
ciseness."
It is
a marvel of con-
New England
Education, July
Journal of
5, 1877.
lish
to
Evening Bulletin.
Con-
Turner on Punctuation.
Hand-Book of
43
cents. -f-
Home
Gymnastics.
For
the Preservation
and
"
gvmThe
of every movement
is explained, and the diagrams and directions make the volume very plain and
physiological effects
useful."
<e
It is
deserves to be
Brooklyn Eagle.
''An excellent little book upon the
preservation of health by exercise. It
contains information and advice that
will be found of benefit to almost every
reader." Boston Saturday Evening
Gazette.
PUBLICATIONS OF
B.
LIPPINCOTT COMPANY.
CONTAINING
MATTERS.
$13. SO.
PUBLICATIONS OF
J.
B.
"A LIBRARY
CHAMBERS
LIPPINCOTT COMPANY.
IN ITSELF."
ENCYCLOPEDIA.
HOUSEHOLD
EDITION.
The
THE TEA<'IIKR,
Revised
some
distinct information.
PUBLICATIONS OF
J. B.
LIPPINCOTT COMPANY.
Worcester's
QUARTO DICTIONARY,
Fully Illustrated.
With Four
Library
WRITERS.
DICTIONARIES*
QUARTO DICTIONARY.
Profusely Illustrated.
Library sheep.
$10.00.
ACADEMIC DICTIONARY. Illustrated. Crown 8vo. Half roan. $i.$cvjCOMPREHENSIVE DICTIONARY. Illustrated, xamo. Half roan.. $1.40.*
NEW COMMON SCHOOL DICTIONARY. Illustrated. i2mo. Half
roan.
90 cents.f
PRIMARY DICTIONARY.
POCKET DICTIONARY.
flexible.
69 cents.f
Illustrated.
Illustrated.
Roan,
i6mo.
2 4 mo.
Half roan.
Cloth.
48 cents.f
50 cents.f
78 cents. f
Roan,