The philosophy of mathematics Part 15

In order to complete the philosophical exposition of the conception which serves as the base of a.n.a.lytical geometry, I have yet to notice the considerations relating to the choice of the system of co-ordinates which is in general the most suitable. They will give the rational explanation of the preference unanimously accorded to the ordinary rectilinear system; a preference which has. .h.i.therto been rather the effect of an empirical sentiment of the superiority of this system, than the exact result of a direct and thorough a.n.a.lysis.

_Two different Points of View._ In order to decide clearly between all the different systems of co-ordinates, it is indispensable to distinguish with care the two general points of view, the converse of one another, which belong to a.n.a.lytical geometry; namely, the relation of algebra to geometry, founded upon the representation of lines by equations; and, reciprocally, the relation of geometry to algebra, founded on the representation of equations by lines.

It is evident that in every investigation of general geometry these two fundamental points of view are of necessity always found combined, since we have always to pa.s.s alternately, and at insensible intervals, so to say, from geometrical to a.n.a.lytical considerations, and from a.n.a.lytical to geometrical considerations. But the necessity of here temporarily separating them is none the less real; for the answer to the question of method which we are examining is, in fact, as we shall see presently, very far from being the same in both these relations, so that without this distinction we could not form any clear idea of it.

1. _Representation of Lines by Equations._ Under _the first point of view_--the representation of lines by equations--the only reason which could lead us to prefer one system of co-ordinates to another would be the greater simplicity of the equation of each line, and greater facility in arriving at it. Now it is easy to see that there does not exist, and could not be expected to exist, any system of co-ordinates deserving in that respect a constant preference over all others. In fact, we have above remarked that for each geometrical definition proposed we can conceive a system of co-ordinates in which the equation of the line is obtained at once, and is necessarily found to be also very simple; and this system, moreover, inevitably varies with the nature of the characteristic property under consideration. The rectilinear system could not, therefore, be constantly the most advantageous for this object, although it may often be very favourable; there is probably no system which, in certain particular cases, should not be preferred to it, as well as to every other.

2. _Representation of Equations by Lines._ It is by no means so, however, under the _second point of view_. We can, indeed, easily establish, as a general principle, that the ordinary rectilinear system must necessarily be better adapted than any other to the representation of equations by the corresponding geometrical _loci_; that is to say, that this representation is constantly more simple and more faithful in it than in any other.

Let us consider, for this object, that, since every system of co-ordinates consists in determining a point by the intersection of two lines, the system adapted to furnish the most suitable geometrical _loci_ must be that in which these two lines are the simplest possible; a consideration which confines our choice to the _rectilinear_ system.

In truth, there is evidently an infinite number of systems which deserve that name, that is to say, which employ only right lines to determine points, besides the ordinary system which a.s.signs the distances from two fixed lines as co-ordinates; such, for example, would be that in which the co-ordinates of each point should be the two angles which the right lines, which go from that point to two fixed points, make with the right line, which joins these last points: so that this first consideration is not rigorously sufficient to explain the preference unanimously given to the common system. But in examining in a more thorough manner the nature of every system of co-ordinates, we also perceive that each of the two lines, whose meeting determines the point considered, must necessarily offer at every instant, among its different conditions of determination, a single variable condition, which gives rise to the corresponding co-ordinate, all the rest being fixed, and const.i.tuting the _axes_ of the system, taking this term in its most extended mathematical acceptation. The variation is indispensable, in order that we may be able to consider all possible positions; and the fixity is no less so, in order that there may exist means of comparison. Thus, in all _rectilinear_ systems, each of the two right lines will be subjected to a fixed condition, and the ordinate will result from the variable condition.

_Superiority of rectilinear Co-ordinates._ From these considerations it is evident, as a general principle, that the most favourable system for the construction of geometrical _loci_ will necessarily be that in which the variable condition of each right line shall be the simplest possible; the fixed condition being left free to be made complex, if necessary to attain that object. Now, of all possible manners of determining two movable right lines, the easiest to follow geometrically is certainly that in which, the direction of each right line remaining invariable, it only approaches or recedes, more or less, to or from a constant axis. It would be, for example, evidently more difficult to figure to one's self clearly the changes of place of a point which is determined by the intersection of two right lines, which each turn around a fixed point, making a greater or smaller angle with a certain axis, as in the system of co-ordinates previously noticed. Such is the true general explanation of the fundamental property possessed by the common rectilinear system, of being better adapted than any other to the geometrical representation of equations, inasmuch as it is that one in which it is the easiest to conceive the change of place of a point resulting from the change in the value of its co-ordinates. In order to feel clearly all the force of this consideration, it would be sufficient to carefully compare this system with the polar system, in which this geometrical image, so simple and so easy to follow, of two right lines moving parallel, each one of them, to its corresponding axis, is replaced by the complicated picture of an infinite series of concentric circles, cut by a right line compelled to turn about a fixed point. It is, moreover, easy to conceive in advance what must be the extreme importance to a.n.a.lytical geometry of a property so profoundly elementary, which, for that reason, must be recurring at every instant, and take a progressively increasing value in all labours of this kind.

_Perpendicularity of the Axes._ In pursuing farther the consideration which demonstrates the superiority of the ordinary system of co-ordinates over any other as to the representation of equations, we may also take notice of the utility for this object of the common usage of taking the two axes perpendicular to each other, whenever possible, rather than with any other inclination. As regards the representation of lines by equations, this secondary circ.u.mstance is no more universally proper than we have seen the general nature of the system to be; since, according to the particular occasion, any other inclination of the axes may deserve our preference in that respect. But, in the inverse point of view, it is easy to see that rectangular axes constantly permit us to represent equations in a more simple and even more faithful manner; for, with oblique axes, s.p.a.ce being divided by them into regions which no longer have a perfect ident.i.ty, it follows that, if the geometrical _locus_ of the equation extends into all these regions at once, there will be presented, by reason merely of this inequality of the angles, differences of figure which do not correspond to any a.n.a.lytical diversity, and will necessarily alter the rigorous exactness of the representation, by being confounded with the proper results of the algebraic comparisons. For example, an equation like: _x^m_ + _y^m_ = _c_, which, by its perfect symmetry, should evidently give a curve composed of four identical quarters, will be represented, on the contrary, if we take axes not rectangular, by a geometric _locus_, the four parts of which will be unequal. It is plain that the only means of avoiding all inconveniences of this kind is to suppose the angle of the two axes to be a right angle.

The preceding discussion clearly shows that, although the ordinary system of rectilinear co-ordinates has no constant superiority over all others in one of the two fundamental points of view which are continually combined in a.n.a.lytical geometry, yet as, on the other hand, it is not constantly inferior, its necessary and absolute greater apt.i.tude for the representation of equations must cause it to generally receive the preference; although it may evidently happen, in some particular cases, that the necessity of simplifying equations and of obtaining them more easily may determine geometers to adopt a less perfect system. The rectilinear system is, therefore, the one by means of which are ordinarily constructed the most essential theories of general geometry, intended to express a.n.a.lytically the most important geometrical phenomena. When it is thought necessary to choose some other, the polar system is almost always the one which is fixed upon, this system being of a nature sufficiently opposite to that of the rectilinear system to cause the equations, which are too complicated with respect to the latter, to become, in general, sufficiently simple with respect to the other. Polar co-ordinates, moreover, have often the advantage of admitting of a more direct and natural concrete signification; as is the case in mechanics, for the geometrical questions to which the theory of circular movement gives rise, and in almost all the cases of celestial geometry.

In order to simplify the exposition, we have thus far considered the fundamental conception of a.n.a.lytical geometry only with respect to _plane curves_, the general study of which was the only object of the great philosophical renovation produced by Descartes. To complete this important explanation, we have now to show summarily how this elementary idea was extended by Clairaut, about a century afterwards, to the general study of _surfaces_ and _curves of double curvature_. The considerations which have been already given will permit me to limit myself on this subject to the rapid examination of what is strictly peculiar to this new case.

SURFACES.

_Determination of a Point in s.p.a.ce._ The complete a.n.a.lytical determination of a point in s.p.a.ce evidently requires the values of three co-ordinates to be a.s.signed; as, for example, in the system which is generally adopted, and which corresponds to the _rectilinear_ system of plane geometry, distances from the point to three fixed planes, usually perpendicular to one another; which presents the point as the intersection of three planes whose direction is invariable. We might also employ the distances from the movable point to three fixed points, which would determine it by the intersection of three spheres with a common centre. In like manner, the position of a point would be defined by giving its distance from a fixed point, and the direction of that distance, by means of the two angles which this right line makes with two invariable axes; this is the _polar_ system of geometry of three dimensions; the point is then constructed by the intersection of a sphere having a fixed centre, with two right cones with circular bases, whose axes and common summit do not change. In a word, there is evidently, in this case at least, the same infinite variety among the various possible systems of co-ordinates which we have already observed in geometry of two dimensions. In general, we have to conceive a point as being always determined by the intersection of any three surfaces whatever, as it was in the former case by that of two lines: each of these three surfaces has, in like manner, all its conditions of determination constant, excepting one, which gives rise to the corresponding co-ordinates, whose peculiar geometrical influence is thus to constrain the point to be situated upon that surface.

This being premised, it is clear that if the three co-ordinates of a point are entirely independent of one another, that point can take successively all possible positions in s.p.a.ce. But if the point is compelled to remain upon a certain surface defined in any manner whatever, then two co-ordinates are evidently sufficient for determining its situation at each instant, since the proposed surface will take the place of the condition imposed by the third co-ordinate. We must then, in this case, under the a.n.a.lytical point of view, necessarily conceive this last co-ordinate as a determinate function of the two others, these latter remaining perfectly independent of each other. Thus there will be a certain equation between the three variable co-ordinates, which will be permanent, and which will be the only one, in order to correspond to the precise degree of indetermination in the position of the point.

_Expression of Surfaces by Equations._ This equation, more or less easy to be discovered, but always possible, will be the a.n.a.lytical definition of the proposed surface, since it must be verified for all the points of that surface, and for them alone. If the surface undergoes any change whatever, even a simple change of place, the equation must undergo a more or less serious corresponding modification. In a word, all geometrical phenomena relating to surfaces will admit of being translated by certain equivalent a.n.a.lytical conditions appropriate to equations of three variables; and in the establishment and interpretation of this general and necessary harmony will essentially consist the science of a.n.a.lytical geometry of three dimensions.

_Expression of Equations by Surfaces._ Considering next this fundamental conception in the inverse point of view, we see in the same manner that every equation of three variables may, in general, be represented geometrically by a determinate surface, primitively defined by the very characteristic property, that the co-ordinates of all its points always retain the mutual relation enunciated in this equation. This geometrical locus will evidently change, for the same equation, according to the system of co-ordinates which may serve for the construction of this representation. In adopting, for example, the rectilinear system, it is clear that in the equation between the three variables, _x_, _y_, _z_, every particular value attributed to _z_ will give an equation between at _x_ and _y_, the geometrical locus of which will be a certain line situated in a plane parallel to the plane of _x_ and _y_, and at a distance from this last equal to the value of _z_; so that the complete geometrical locus will present itself as composed of an infinite series of lines superimposed in a series of parallel planes (excepting the interruptions which may exist), and will consequently form a veritable surface. It would be the same in considering any other system of co-ordinates, although the geometrical construction of the equation becomes more difficult to follow.

Such is the elementary conception, the complement of the original idea of Descartes, on which is founded general geometry relative to surfaces.

It would be useless to take up here directly the other considerations which have been above indicated, with respect to lines, and which any one can easily extend to surfaces; whether to show that every definition of a surface by any method of generation whatever is really a direct equation of that surface in a certain system of co-ordinates, or to determine among all the different systems of possible co-ordinates that one which is generally the most convenient. I will only add, on this last point, that the necessary superiority of the ordinary rectilinear system, as to the representation of equations, is evidently still more marked in a.n.a.lytical geometry of three dimensions than in that of two, because of the incomparably greater geometrical complication which would result from the choice of any other system. This can be verified in the most striking manner by considering the polar system in particular, which is the most employed after the ordinary rectilinear system, for surfaces as well as for plane curves, and for the same reasons.

In order to complete the general exposition of the fundamental conception relative to the a.n.a.lytical study of surfaces, a philosophical examination should be made of a final improvement of the highest importance, which Monge has introduced into the very elements of this theory, for the cla.s.sification of surfaces in natural families, established according to the mode of generation, and expressed algebraically by common differential equations, or by finite equations containing arbitrary functions.

CURVES OF DOUBLE CURVATURE.

Let us now consider the last elementary point of view of a.n.a.lytical geometry of three dimensions; that relating to the algebraic representation of curves considered in s.p.a.ce, in the most general manner. In continuing to follow the principle which has been constantly employed, that of the degree of indetermination of the geometrical locus, corresponding to the degree of independence of the variables, it is evident, as a general principle, that when a point is required to be situated upon some certain curve, a single co-ordinate is enough for completely determining its position, by the intersection of this curve with the surface which results from this co-ordinate. Thus, in this case, the two other co-ordinates of the point must be conceived as functions necessarily determinate and distinct from the first. It follows that every line, considered in s.p.a.ce, is then represented a.n.a.lytically, no longer by a single equation, but by the system of two equations between the three co-ordinates of any one of its points. It is clear, indeed, from another point of view, that since each of these equations, considered separately, expresses a certain surface, their combination presents the proposed line as the intersection of two determinate surfaces. Such is the most general manner of conceiving the algebraic representation of a line in a.n.a.lytical geometry of three dimensions. This conception is commonly considered in too restricted a manner, when we confine ourselves to considering a line as determined by the system of its two _projections_ upon two of the co-ordinate planes; a system characterized, a.n.a.lytically, by this peculiarity, that each of the two equations of the line then contains only two of the three co-ordinates, instead of simultaneously including the three variables.

This consideration, which consists in regarding the line as the intersection of two cylindrical surfaces parallel to two of the three axes of the co-ordinates, besides the inconvenience of being confined to the ordinary rectilinear system, has the fault, if we strictly confine ourselves to it, of introducing useless difficulties into the a.n.a.lytical representation of lines, since the combination of these two cylinders would evidently not be always the most suitable for forming the equations of a line. Thus, considering this fundamental notion in its entire generality, it will be necessary in each case to choose, from among the infinite number of couples of surfaces, the intersection of which might produce the proposed curve, that one which will lend itself the best to the establishment of equations, as being composed of the best known surfaces. Thus, if the problem is to express a.n.a.lytically a circle in s.p.a.ce, it will evidently be preferable to consider it as the intersection of a sphere and a plane, rather than as proceeding from any other combination of surfaces which could equally produce it.

In truth, this manner of conceiving the representation of lines by equations, in a.n.a.lytical geometry of three dimensions, produces, by its nature, a necessary inconvenience, that of a certain a.n.a.lytical confusion, consisting in this: that the same line may thus be expressed, with the same system of co-ordinates, by an infinite number of different couples of equations, on account of the infinite number of couples of surfaces which can form it; a circ.u.mstance which may cause some difficulties in recognizing this line under all the algebraical disguises of which it admits. But there exists a very simple method for causing this inconvenience to disappear; it consists in giving up the facilities which result from this variety of geometrical constructions.

It suffices, in fact, whatever may be the a.n.a.lytical system primitively established for a certain line, to be able to deduce from it the system corresponding to a single couple of surfaces uniformly generated; as, for example, to that of the two cylindrical surfaces which _project_ the proposed line upon two of the co-ordinate planes; surfaces which will evidently be always identical, in whatever manner the line may have been obtained, and which will not vary except when that line itself shall change. Now, in choosing this fixed system, which is actually the most simple, we shall generally be able to deduce from the primitive equations those which correspond to them in this special construction, by transforming them, by two successive eliminations, into two equations, each containing only two of the variable co-ordinates, and thereby corresponding to the two surfaces of projection. Such is really the princ.i.p.al destination of this sort of geometrical combination, which thus offers to us an invariable and certain means of recognizing the ident.i.ty of lines in spite of the diversity of their equations, which is sometimes very great.

IMPERFECTIONS OF a.n.a.lYTICAL GEOMETRY.

Having now considered the fundamental conception of a.n.a.lytical geometry under its princ.i.p.al elementary aspects, it is proper, in order to make the sketch complete, to notice here the general imperfections yet presented by this conception with respect to both geometry and to a.n.a.lysis.

_Relatively to geometry_, we must remark that the equations are as yet adapted to represent only entire geometrical loci, and not at all determinate portions of those loci. It would, however, be necessary, in some circ.u.mstances, to be able to express a.n.a.lytically a part of a line or of a surface, or even a _discontinuous_ line or surface, composed of a series of sections belonging to distinct geometrical figures, such as the contour of a polygon, or the surface of a polyhedron. Thermology, especially, often gives rise to such considerations, to which our present a.n.a.lytical geometry is necessarily inapplicable. The labours of M. Fourier on discontinuous functions have, however, begun to fill up this great gap, and have thereby introduced a new and essential improvement into the fundamental conception of Descartes. But this manner of representing heterogeneous or partial figures, being founded on the employment of trigonometrical series proceeding according to the sines of an infinite series of multiple arcs, or on the use of certain definite integrals equivalent to those series, and the general integral of which is unknown, presents as yet too much complication to admit of being immediately introduced into the system of a.n.a.lytical geometry.

_Relatively to a.n.a.lysis_, we must begin by observing that our inability to conceive a geometrical representation of equations containing four, five, or more variables, a.n.a.logous to those representations which all equations of two or of three variables admit, must not be viewed as an imperfection of our system of a.n.a.lytical geometry, for it evidently belongs to the very nature of the subject. a.n.a.lysis being necessarily more general than geometry, since it relates to all possible phenomena, it would be very unphilosophical to desire always to find among geometrical phenomena alone a concrete representation of all the laws which a.n.a.lysis can express.

There exists, however, another imperfection of less importance, which must really be viewed as proceeding from the manner in which we conceive a.n.a.lytical geometry. It consists in the evident incompleteness of our present representation of equations of two or of three variables by lines or surfaces, inasmuch as in the construction of the geometric locus we pay regard only to the _real_ solutions of equations, without at all noticing any _imaginary_ solutions. The general course of these last should, however, by its nature, be quite as susceptible as that of the others of a geometrical representation. It follows from this omission that the graphic picture of the equation is constantly imperfect, and sometimes even so much so that there is no geometric representation at all when the equation admits of only imaginary solutions. But, even in this last case, we evidently ought to be able to distinguish between equations as different in themselves as these, for example,

_x_ + _y_ + 1 = 0, _x6_ + _y4_ + 1 = 0, _y_ + _e^x_ = 0.

We know, moreover, that this princ.i.p.al imperfection often brings with it, in a.n.a.lytical geometry of two or of three dimensions, a number of secondary inconveniences, arising from several a.n.a.lytical modifications not corresponding to any geometrical phenomena.

Our philosophical exposition of the fundamental conception of a.n.a.lytical geometry shows us clearly that this science consists essentially in determining what is the general a.n.a.lytical expression of such or such a geometrical phenomenon belonging to lines or to surfaces; and, reciprocally, in discovering the geometrical interpretation of such or such an a.n.a.lytical consideration. A detailed examination of the most important general questions would show us how geometers have succeeded in actually establis.h.i.+ng this beautiful harmony, and in thus imprinting on geometrical science, regarded as a whole, its present eminently perfect character of rationality and of simplicity.

_Note._--The author devotes the two following chapters of his course to the more detailed examination of a.n.a.lytical Geometry of two and of three dimensions; but his subsequent publication of a separate work upon this branch of mathematics has been thought to render unnecessary the reproduction of these two chapters in the present volume.

THE END.