Name: The Origins of −1

Date:

The Impracticality and Eventual Practicality of Negative Numbers

Greek mathematics was grounded in geometry (as opposed to algebra, which was developed in the middle east).
The ancient Greeks, therefore, did not really need to deal with negative numbers; lengths, areas, and volumes
resulting from geometrical constructions necessarily all had to be pos-
itive. Their proofs and mathematical procedures consisted of logical
arguments based on the idea of magnitude. Magnitudes were repre-
sented by a line or an area, and not by a number (like 4 centimeters or
26.5 cubic feet). In this way they could deal with 'awkward' numbers like
square roots by constructing line segments (like the diagonal of a
square). Negative numbers, however, did not have a home in ancient
Greece.

The Greeks did finally venture into algebraic thinking. Around 300 CE,
the Alexandrian mathematician Diophantus wrote Arithmetica, a
collection of problems where he developed a series of symbols to
represent the 'unknown' in a problem. He dealt with what we now call
linear and quadratic equations. In one problem Diophantus presented
the problem 4 = 4x + 20. He understood and demonstrated the
unknown value must be -4. This negative solution, and by extension the
problem itself, were deemed “absurd.” Incidentally, despite his
unwillingness to accept negative numbers, Diophantus was the first
Greek to recognize fractions as numbers.

Negative numbers were understood but were rejected because they did not seem to have any “real” application.

Bookkeeping records from 7th-century India and a chapter of a work by the Hindu astronomer Brahmagupta
provide the first practical application of negative numbers. In the 10th century, the Persian mathematician Abul
Wafa Buzjani used negative numbers to represent a debt in a guidebook for businessmen. This seems to be the
only place where negative numbers have been found in medieval Arabic mathematics. Buzjani explained that
subtraction of 5 from 3 gives a "debt" of 2. He then multipled this by 10 to obtain a "debt" of 20, which when added
to a 'fortune' of 35 gave 15.

The earliest documented use of negative numbers in Europe was not until 1545.
By the early 17th century, Renaissance mathematicians were explicitly using
them, but were met with heavy opposition; René Descartes called negative roots
"false roots", and Blaise Pascal was convinced that numbers "less than zero"
couldn't exist. Gottfried Leibnitz admitted that they could lead to some absurd
conclusions, but defended them as useful aids in calculation.

By the middle of the 18th century, negative numbers became more or less
accepted as numbers. In 1770, Leonhard Euler wrote:

Since negative numbers may be considered as debts, because positive numbers

represent real possessions, we say that negative numbers are less than nothing.
Thus, when a man has nothing of his own, and owes 50 crowns, it is certain that
he has 50 crowns less than nothing; for if any one were to make him a present of
50 crowns to pay his debts, he would still be only at the point of nothing, though Leonhard Euler
really richer than before.
Truncated Square Pyramids

If people had a hard time accepting negative numbers, they

had a really hard time accepting you could take the square
root of a negative number. The first person to point out
the absurdity of considering the square root of a negative
number was a Greek living in Egypt named Heron of Alex-
andria. In book II of his work Metrica, Heron described the
measurement of volumes of various three dimensional fig-
ures such as spheres, cylinders, cones, prisms, and pyr-
amids. In one section, he reworked an ingenious formula
for finding the volume of a truncated square pyramid:

V= 1
3
h(a2 + ab + b2)

where a and b are side lengths of the bottom and top squares
of the pyramid, respectively, and h is the height of the pyramid.
This formula, derived in Egypt almost 2000 years prior to the
writing of Metrica is impossible to derive without using the tools
of calculus, so we will not explore a proof for it here.

Heron was a Greek and was therefore only interested in the

physical practicality of mathematics. The formula for the
volume of a truncated square pyramid was an impressive
achievement of Egyptian mathematics, but it was impractical
because it relied on knowing the height of the pyramid. The
height could not be measured directly, only calculated using
other dimensions of the pyramid. Unless you drilled a hole
straight down through the top of the pyramid it would be
impossible to measure the height directly. Heron thought it
would be more practical to define the volume of a truncated
square pyramid in terms of a, b, and c, where c is the slanted
edge of the pyramid where two sides of the pyramid meet.
Define the Height

Use the diagram here to define h in terms

of a, b, and c.

Find the height of the following truncated square pyramids:

1. a = 20 b = 12 c = 30 2. a = 18 b= 2 c = 12

3. a = 13 b = 13 c= 7 4. a = 28 b= 4 c = 15

5. Find values of a, b, and c that result in a 6. Find values of a, b, and c that result in a
pyramid with a height of 10. pyramid with a height of 0.

If your formula for h is correct, your answer for #4 should be − 63 .

Heron did this same calculation but wrote instead h = 63 . In doing
so, Heron missed being the earliest known scholar to have derived the
square root of a negative number in a mathematical analysis of a physical
problem. It would be a thousand years more before a mathematician
would even bother to take notice of such a thing—and then simply to dis-
miss it as obvious nonsense—and yet five hundred years more before the
square root of a negative number would be taken seriously (but still
considered a mystery).
A Quadratic Riddle

In 1545 Gerolamo Cardan, an Italian mathematician, physician,

gambler, and philosopher published a book called Ars Magna (The
Great Art). In it he described an algebraic procedure for solving
cubic and quartic equations (equations with x3 and x4, respectively)
which were hot topics at the time. We’ll investigate his work on
cubic equations later; for now we’ll take a look at a problem he
proposed that has more to do with quadratics (equations with x2).
He wrote:

If some one says to you, divide 10 into two parts, one of which
multiplied into the other shall produce 40, it is evident that this
case or question is impossible.

What did he mean that this problem was impossible?

Consider the two equations that represent the situation presented

by Cardan.

x + y = 10 “divide 10 into two parts”

xy = 40 “one of which multiplied into the other shall produce 40”

You shall now attempt to solve this riddle by solving this system of
equations for x and y. To do so, you should utilize two algebraic tools:
substitution and completing the square.

1. SUBSTITUTION

(a) Let x + y = 10. What is y equal to, in terms of x? y = ____________

(b) Use the substitution method: rewrite the equation xy = 40 by replacing y with the expression above.

2. COMPLETING THE SQUARE

(a) Solve the equation x2 + 4x = 5 by completing the square.

(b) Solve the equation x2- 14x = -38 by completing the square

(c) Rewrite the equation from 1.(a) so it is in the form x2 + bx = c : ____________________

(d) Solve the equation from 2.(c) by completing the square.
As Subtle As It Is Useless

By using substitution and completing the square, Cardan found values for x and y that satisfied the parameters.
However, those numbers were:

He added these numbers and got 10, and multiplied them to get 40. After that, he didn't do much else with this and
concluded that the result was "as subtle as it is useless."

(
1. Verify that 5 + ) ( )
−15 + 5 − 15 is 10.

(
2. Verify that 5 + )(
−15 5 − 15 ) is 40.

3. Define a problem of your own like that of Cardan’s . Define equations in terms of two numbers (x and y). One
equation should represent the sum of x and y and the other should represent the product. Use substitution and
completing the square to find solutions. Like Cardan’s, the result of your problem should include the square
roots of negative numbers. Verify your results by adding and multiplying them.
Sombody Finally Takes the Negative Root Seriously

In Ars Magna, Cardan shared a formula for finding the solution

of a cubic equation:

For any equation in the form x3 = px + q,

q q 2 p3 3 q q 2 p3
x=3 + − − − − −
2 4 27 2 4 27

The derivation of this rather unwieldy formula by Cardan’s con-

temporaries was a great accomplishment for Italian Renais-
sance mathematicians. The formula was also the catalyst for
understanding how to do deal with roots of negative numbers.
It was a follower of Cardan named Rafael Bombelli who used
this formula to make the first significant strides towards under-
standing the mechanics and usefulness of negative roots.

He presented the following equation: x3 = 15x + 4

With just a little arithmetic, it can be shown that x = 4 is a solution to the equation. However, applying Cardan’s
formula to the problem gives instead the result 3 2 + − 121 + 3 2 − − 121 . This certainly does not look like the
number 4, especially since there are negative square roots in the formula. However, Bombelli was able to show
that that this expression was really the number 4 in disguise.

Through a series of sophisticated algebraic steps, Bombelli was able to show that 3 2 + − 121 = 2 + − 1 and
3
2 − − 121 = 2 − − 1 . When 2 − − 1 and 2 + − 1 are added together the negative roots cancel each other out,

and we’re just left with 2 + 2 = 4.

Your job is to show that the results of Bombelli’s algebraic tinkering are legit. The process is started for you:

( )
3
Step one - cube both sides :  3 2 + − 121  = 2 + − 1
3
We must show that : 2 + − 121 = 2 + − 1 3

 

( )
3
Step one - cube both sides :  3 2 − − 121  = 2 − − 1
3
We must show that : 2 − − 121 = 2 − − 1 3

 
What To Do With Imaginary Numbers?

It is said that the term "imaginary number" was coined by René Descartes in the
seventeenth century to describe the square roots of negative numbers. He meant it
to be a derogatory reference since, obviously, such numbers did not exist. Two
hundred years after Descartes, imaginary numbers were renamed complex numbers
in order to lend them a little more legitimacy. However, the symbol i was chosen as
the basic symbol of the complex number system (equal to √-1), so the name
imaginary has stuck around.

It took some work to figure out how to think about i as a number. Even the great
Leonhard Euler struggled with what to make of i in relation to “normal” numbers:

“Because all conceivable numbers are either greater than zero or less than 0 or
equal to 0, then it is clear that the square roots of negative numbers cannot be
included among the possible numbers. Consequently we must say that these are
impossible numbers. And this circumstance leads us to the concept of such
number, which by their nature are impossible, and ordinarily are called imaginary
or fancied numbers, because they exist only in imagination.”

If they weren’t to be included among possible numbers, where were they to be included? Up until complex
numbers came along, it was easy to think about numbers existing on a one-dimensional number line. All the
different types of numbers have a home on the number line:

The real numbers can be divided into two categories: the

rational numbers and the irrational numbers. The rational
numbers can be categorized further: all integers are rational
numbers, all whole numbers are integers, and all natural
numbers are whole numbers.

So where to complex numbers fit in?

Instead of trying to work complex numbers into the system of real
numbers, real numbers were worked into complex numbers! The
definition of number was expanded to include imaginary numbers.
In other words, all real numbers are complex numbers. They are
just complex numbers with no imaginary component.

There was no home for complex numbers on the standard

one-dimensional number line. The solution was to
introduce a second axis and make the number line two
dimensional. If an imaginary number could not be
understood on the number line, why not put it above or
below the number line?

1. Which of the points represent purely real numbers?

2. Which of the points represent purely imaginary

numbers?

3. The point B represents the complex number

-1 + 4i, where the real part of the number is -1
and the imaginary part is 4.

What number does F represent?

What number does C represent?

What number does E represent?

What number does F represent?

4. Plot the point 4 – i and label it G