CHAPTER II

HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE HYPERSPACE MOVEMENT

Egypt the Birthplace of Geometry--Precursors: NASIR-EDDIN, CHRISTOPH

CLAVIUS, SACCHERI, LAMBERT, LA GRANGE, KANT--Influence of the

_Mecanique Analytique_--The Parallel-Postulate the Root and Substance

of the Non-Euclidean Geometry--The Three Great Periods: The Formative,

Determinative and Elaborative--RIEMANN and the Properties of Analytic

Spaces.

The evolution of the idea of a fourth dimension of space covers a long

period of years. The earliest known record of the beginnings of the

study of space is found in a hieratic papyrus which forms a part of the

Rhind Collection in the British Museum and which has been deciphered by

EISENLOHR. It is believed to be a copy of an older manuscript of date

3400 B. C., and is entitled "_Directions for Knowing All Dark Things_"

The copy is said to have been made by AHMES, an Egyptian priest

between 1700 and 1100 B. C. It begins by giving the dimensions of

barns; then follows the consideration of various rectilineal figures,

circles, pyramids, and the value of pi ([Greek: p]). Although many of

the solutions given in the manuscript have been found to be incorrect

in minor particulars, the fact remains that Egypt is really the

birth-place of geometry. And this fact is buttressed by the knowledge

that THALES, long before he founded the Ionian School which was the

beginning of Greek influence in the study of mathematics, is found

studying geometry and astronomy in Egypt.

The concept of hyperspace began to germinate in the latter part of the

first century, B. C. For it was at this date that GEMINOS of RHODES

(B. C. 70) began to think seriously of the mathematical labyrinth

into which EUCLID'S parallel-postulate most certainly would lead if

an attempt at demonstrating its certitude were made. He recognized

the difficulties which would engage the attention of those who might

venture to delve into the mysterious possibilities of the problem.

There is no doubt, too, but that EUCLID himself was aware, in some

measure at least, of these difficulties; for his own attitude towards

this postulate seems to have been one of noncommittance. It is,

therefore, not strange that the astronomer, PTOLEMY (A. D. 87-165),

should be found seeking to prove the postulate by a consideration of

the possibilities of interstellar triangles. His researches, however,

brought him no relief from the general dissatisfaction which he felt

with respect to the validity of the problem itself.

For nearly one thousand years after the attempts at solving the

postulate by GEMINOS and PTOLEMY, the field of mathematics lay

undisturbed. For it was at this time that there arose a strange

phenomenon, more commonly known as the "Dark Ages," which put an

effectual check to further research or independent investigations.

Mathematicians throughout this long lapse of time were content to

accept EUCLID as the one incontrovertible, unimpeachable authority,

and even such investigations as were made did not have a rebellious

tendence, but were mainly endeavors to substantiate his claims.

Accordingly, it was not until about the first half of the thirteenth

century that any real advance was made. At this time there appeared

an Arab, NASIR-EDDIN (1201-1274) who attempted to make an improvement

on the problem of parallelism. His work on EUCLID was printed in

Rome in 1594 A. D., about three hundred and twenty years after his

demise and was communicated in 1651 by JOHN WALLIS (1616-1703) to the

mathematicians of Oxford University. Although his calculations and

conclusions were respectfully received by the Oxford authorities no

definite results were regarded as accomplished by what he had done.

It is believed, however, that his work reopened speculation upon

the problem and served as a basis, however slight, for the greater

work that was to be done by those who followed him during the next

succeeding eight hundred years.

About twenty years before the printing of the work of NASIR-EDDIN,

CHRISTOPH CLAVIUS (1574) deduced the axiom of parallels from the

assumption that a line whose points are all equidistant from a straight

line is itself straight. In his consideration of the parallel-postulate

he is said to have regarded it as EUCLID'S XIIIth axiom. Later BOLYAI

spoke of it as the XIth and later still, TODHUNTER treated it as the

XIIth. Hence, there does not seem to have been any general unanimity

of opinion as to the exact status of the parallel-postulate, and

especially is this true in view of the uncertainty now known to have

existed in EUCLID'S mind concerning it.

GIROLAMO SACCHERI (1667-1733), a learned Jesuit, born at San Remo,

came next upon the stage. And so important was his work that it will

perpetuate the memory of his name in the history of mathematics. He was

a teacher of grammar in the Jesuit _Collegio di Brera_ where TOMMASO

CEVA, a brother of GIOVANNI, the well-known mathematician, was teacher

of mathematics. His association with the CEVA brothers was especially

beneficial to him. He made use of CEVA'S very ingenious methods in his

first published book, 1693, entitled _Solutions of Six Geometrical

Problems Proposed by Count Roger Ventimiglia_.

A +--------------------------------+ B

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

C +--------------------------------+ D

FIG. 1.

SACCHERI attacked the problem of parallels in quite a new way.

Examining a quadrilateral, _ABCD_, in which the angles _A_ and _B_ are

right angles and the sides _AC_ and _BD_ are equal, he determined to

show that the angles _C_ and _D_ are equal. He also sought to prove

that they are either right angles, obtus acute. He undertook to prove

the falsity of the latter two propositions (that they are either

obtuse or acute), leaving as the only possibility that they must be

right angles. In doing so, he found that his assumptions led him into

contradictions which he experienced difficulty in explaining.

His labors in connection with the solution of the problems proposed by

COUNT VENTIMIGLIA, including his work on the question of parallels,

led directly into the field of metageometrical researches, and perhaps

to him as to no other who had preceded him, or at least to him in a

larger degree, belongs the credit for a continued renewal of interest

in that series of investigations which resulted in the formulation of

the non-Euclidean geometry.

The last published work of SACCHERI was a recital of his endeavors at

demonstrating the parallel-postulate. This received the "Imprimatur"

of the Inquisition, July 13, 1733; the Provincial Company of Jesus

took possession of the book for perusal on August 16, 1733; but

unfortunately within two months after it had been reviewed by these

authorities, SACCHERI passed away.

All efforts which had been made prior to the work of SACCHERI were

based upon the assumption that there must be an equivalent postulate

which, if it could be demonstrated, would lead to a direct, positive

proof of EUCLID'S proposition. Although these and all other attempts

at reaching such a proof have signally failed and although it may

correctly be said that the entire history of demonstrations aiming at

the solution of the famous postulate has been one long series of utter

failures, it can be asserted with equal certitude that it has proven

to be one of the most fruitful problems in the history of mathematical

thought. For out of these failures has been built a superstructure

of analytical investigations which surpasses the most sanguine

expectations of those who had labored and failed.

In 1766 JOHN LAMBERT (1728-1777) wrote a paper upon the _Theory

of Parallels_ dated Sept. 5, 1766, first published in 1786, from

the papers left by F. BERNOULLI, which contained the following

assertions:[2]

1. The parallel-axiom needs proof, since it does not hold for geometry

on the surface of the sphere.

2. In order to make intuitive a geometry in which the triangle's sum

is less than two right angles, we need an "imaginary" sphere (the

pseudosphere).

3. In a space in which the triangle's sum is different from two right

angles there is an absolute measure (a natural unit for length).

At this time IMMANUEL KANT (1724-1804), the noted German metaphysician,

was in the midst of his philosophical labors. And it is believed that

it was he who first suggested the idea of different _spaces_. Below is

given a statement taken from his _Prolegomena_[3] which corroborates

this view.

"That complete space (which is itself no longer the boundary of

another space) has three dimensions, and that space in general

cannot have more, is based on the proposition that not more than

three lines can intersect at right angles in one point.... That we

can require a line to be drawn to infinity, a series of changes to

be continued (for example, _spaces_ passed through by motion) in

indefinitum, presupposes a representation of space and time which

can only attach to intuition."

[2] Vide _New York Mathematical Society Bulletin_, Vol. III,

1893-4, p. 79, G. B. HALSTEAD on _Lambert's Non-Euclidean Geometry_.

[3] _Prolegomena_, KANT, p. 37, Trans. by J. P. MAHAFFY and J.

H. BERNARD.

His differentiation between space in general and space which may be

considered as the "boundary of another space" shows, in the light of

the subsequent developments of the mathematical idea of space that

he very fully appreciated the marvelous scope of analytic spaces. His

conception of space, therefore, must have had a profound influence

upon the mathematic thought of the day causing it to undergo a rapid

reconstruction at the hands of geometers who came after him.

Under the masterly influence of LA GRANGE (1736-1813) the idea of

different spaces began to take definite shape and direction; the

geometry of hyperspace began to crystallize; and the field of mathesis

prepared for the growth of a conception the comprehension of which

was destined to be the profoundest undertaking ever attempted by the

human mind. Unlike most great men whom the world learns tardily to

admire, LA GRANGE lived to see his talents and genius fully recognized

by his compeers; for he was the recipient of many honors both from his

countrymen and his admirers in foreign lands. He spent twenty years in

Prussia where he went upon the invitation of FREDERICK the Great who in

the Royal summons referred to himself as the "greatest king in Europe"

and to LA GRANGE as the "greatest mathematician" in Europe. In Prussia

the _Mecanique Analytique_ and a long series of memoirs which were

published in the Berlin and Turin Transactions were produced. LA GRANGE

did not exhibit any marked taste for mathematics until he was 17 years

of age. Soon thereafter he came into possession of a memoir by HALLEY

quite by accident and this so aroused his latent genius that within one

year after he had reviewed HALLEY'S memoir he became an accomplished

mathematician.

He created the calculus of variations, solved most of the problems

proposed by Fermat, adding a number of theorems of his own contrivance;

raised the theory of differential equations to the position of a

science rather than a series of ingenious methods for the solution

of special problems and furnished a solution for the famous

isoperimetrical problem which had baffled the skill of the foremost

mathematicians for nearly half a century. All these stupendous tasks he

performed by the time he reached the age of nineteen.

The _Mecanique Analytique_ is his greatest and most comprehensive

work. In this he established the law of virtual work from which,

by the aid of his calculus of variations, he deduced the whole of

mechanics, including both solids and liquids. It was his object in the

_Analytique_ to show that the whole subject of mechanics is implicitly

embraced in a single principle, and to lay down certain formulae from

which any particular result can be obtained. He frequently made the

assertion that he had, in the _Mecanique Analytique_, transformed

mechanics which he persistently defined as a "geometry of four

dimensions"[4] into a branch of analytics and had shown the so-called

mechanical principles to be the simple results of the calculus.

Hence, there can be no doubt but that LA GRANGE not only completed

the foundation, but provided most of the material in his analyses and

other "abstract results of great generality" which he obtained in his

numerous calculations, for the superstructure subsequently known as the

geometry of hyperspace, and in which the fourth dimensional concept

occupies a very fundamental place.

[4] In 1754 D'ALEMBERT (1717-1783) published an article in the

famous old _Encyclopedia_ edited by DIDEROT and himself on _Dimension_.

In this article the idea of the fourth dimension is dwelt upon at

length. The view which he expressed in this article, of course, served

greatly to popularize the conception among the learned men of the day,

and owing to the close relationship existing between D'ALEMBERT and LA

GRANGE, it is not surprising that the latter should have been very much

enamored of the idea.

It is as if for nearly seventeen hundred years workmen, such as

GEMINOS, of RHODES, PTOLEMY, SACCHERI, NASIR-EDDIN, LAMBERT, CLAVIUS,

and hundred of others who struggled with the problem of parallels,

had made more or less sporadic attempts at the excavation of the land

whereon a marvelously intricate building was to be constructed. There

is no historical evidence to show that any of them ever dreamed that

the results of their labors would be utilized in the manner in which

they have been used. Then came KANT with the wonderfully penetrating

searchlight of his masterful intellect who from the elevation which

he occupied saw that the site had great possibilities, but he had not

the mathematical talent to undertake the work of actual, methodical

construction. Indeed his task was of a different sort. However, he

succeeded in opening the way for LA GRANGE and others who followed

him. LA GRANGE immediately seized upon the idea which for more than

a thousand years had been impinging upon the minds of mathematicians

vainly seeking lodgment and began the elaboration of a plan in

accordance with which minds better skilled in the pragmatic application

of abstract principles than his could complete the work begun.

Unfortunately, on account of his intense devotion and loyalty to the

study of pure mathematics, and when he had reached the summit of

his greatness where he stood "without a rival as the foremost living

mathematician," his health became seriously affected, causing him to

suffer constant attacks of profound melancholia from which he died on

April 10, 1813.

We come now to one of the most remarkable periods in the history of

mental development. During the six hundred years between the birth of

NASIR-EDDIN and the death of LA GRANGE the entire world of mathesis

was being reconstituted. Since there had been gradually going on an

internal process which, when completed, forever would liberate the mind

from the narrow confines of consciousness limited to the three-space,

it is not surprising that we should find, in the mathematical thought

of the time, an absolutely epoch-making departure. The innumerable

attempts at the solution of the parallel-postulate, all failures in the

sense that they did not prove, have intensified greatly the esteem in

which the never-dying elements of EUCLID are held to-day. And despite

the fact that there may come a time when his axioms and conclusions

may be found to be incongruent with the facts of sensuous reality; and

though all of his fundamental conceptions of space in general, his

theorems, propositions and postulates may have to give way before the

searching glare of a deeper knowledge because of some revealed fault,

the perfection of his work in the realm of pure mathematics will remain

forever a master piece demanding the undiminished admiration of mankind.

The parallel-postulate, as stated by EUCLID in his _Elements of

Geometry_, reads as follows:

"If a straight line meet two straight lines so as to make the two

interior angles on the same side of it taken together less than

two right angles, these straight lines being continually produced,

shall at length meet upon that side on which are the angles which

are less than two right angles."

On this postulate hang all the "law and the prophets" of the

non-Euclidean Geometry. In it are the virtual elements of three

possible geometries. Furthermore, it is both the warp and the woof

of the loom of present-day metageometrical researches. It is the

golden egg laid by the god SEB at the beginning of a new life cycle in

psychogenesis. Its progeny are numerous--hyperspaces, sects, straights,

digons, equidistantials, polars, planars, coplanars, invariants,

quaternions, complex variables, groups and many others. A wonderfully

interesting breed, full of meaning and pregnant with the power of final

emancipations for the human intellect!

When the conclusions which were systematically formulated as a result

of the investigations along the lines of hypotheses which controverted

the parallel-postulate were examined it was found that they fell into

three main divisions, namely: the synthetic or hyperbolic; the analytic

or RIEMANNIAN and the elliptic or CAYLEY-KLEIN. These divisions or

groups are based upon the three possibilities which inhere in the

conception taken of the sum of the angles referred to in the above

postulate as to whether it is equal to, greater or less than two right

angles.

The assumption that the angular sum is congruent to a straight angle is

called the Euclidean or parabolic hypothesis and is to be distinguished

from the synthetic or hyperbolic hypothesis established by GAUSS,

LOBACHEVSKI and BOLYAI and which assumes that the angular sum is less

than a straight angle. The elliptic or CAYLEY-KLEIN hypothesis assumes

that the angular sum is greater than a straight angle. LOBACHEVSKI,

however, not satisfied with the statement of the parallel-postulate

as given by EUCLID and which had caused the age-long controversy,

substituted for it the following:

"All straight lines which, in a plane, radiate from a given

point, can, with respect to any other straight line, in the same

plane, be divided into two classes--the intersecting and the

non-intersecting. The boundary line of the one and the other class

is called parallel to the given line."

This is but another way of saying about the same thing that EUCLID had

declared before, and yet, curiously enough it afforded just the liberty

that LOBACHEVSKI needed to enable him to elaborate his theory.

For the purposes of this sketch the field of the development of

non-Euclidean geometry is divided into three periods to be known as:

(1) the _formative_ period in which mathematical thought was being

formulated for the new departure; (2) the _determinative_ period during

which the mathematical ideas were given direction, purpose and a

general tendence; (3) the _elaborative_ period during which the results

of the former periods were elaborated into definite kinds of geometries

and attempts made at popularizing the hypotheses.

The Formative Period

CHARLES FREDERICH GAUSS (1777-1855) by some has been regarded as the

most influential mathematician that figured in the formulation of

the non-Euclidean geometry; but closer examination into his efforts

at investigating the properties of a triangle shows that while his

researches led to the establishment of the theorem that a regular

polygon of seventeen sides (or of any number which is prime, and also

one more than a power of two) can be inscribed, under the Euclidean

restrictions as to means, in a circle, and also that the common

spherical angle on the surface of a sphere is closely connected with

the constitution of the area inclosed thereby, he cannot justly be

designated as the leader of those who formulated the synthetic school.

And this, too, for the simple reason that, as he himself admits in

one of his letters to TAURINUS, he had not "published anything on the

subject." In this same letter he informs TAURINUS that he had pondered

the subject for more than thirty years and expressed the belief that

there could not be any one who had "concerned himself more exhaustively

with this second part (that the sum of the angles of a triangle cannot

be more than 180 degrees)" than he had.

Writing from Göttingen to TAURINUS, November 8, 1824, and commenting

upon the geometric value of the sum of the angles of a triangle, he

says:

"Your presentation of the demonstration that the sum of the angles

of a plane triangle cannot be greater than 180 degrees does,

indeed, leave something to be desired in point of geometrical

precision. But this could be supplied, and there is no doubt

that the impossibility in question admits of the most rigorous

demonstration. But the case is quite different with the second

part, namely, that the sum of the angles cannot be smaller than

180 degrees; this is the real difficulty, the rock upon which

all endeavors are wrecked.... The assumption that the sum of the

three angles is smaller than 180 degrees leads to a new geometry

entirely different from our Euclidean--a geometry which is

throughout consistent with itself, and which I have elaborated

in a manner entirely satisfactory to myself, so that I can solve

every problem in it with the exception of the determining of a

constant which is not _a priori_ obtainable."

It appears from this correspondence that GAUSS had in the privacy

of his own study elaborated a complete non-Euclidean geometry, and

had so thoroughly familiarized himself with its characteristics and

possibilities that the solution of every problem embraced within it was

very clear to him except that of the determination of a constant. He

concluded the above letter by saying:

"All my endeavors to discover contradiction or inconsistencies in

this non-Euclidean geometry have been in vain, and the only thing

in it that conflicts with our reason is the fact that if it were

true there would necessarily exist in space a linear magnitude

quite determinate in itself; yet unknown to us."

Judging from the correspondence between GAUSS and GERLING (1788-1857),

BESSEL (1784-1846), SCHUMACHER and TAURINUS, the nephew of SCHWEIKART,

and that between SCHWEIKART and GERLING, there had grown up a general

dissatisfaction in the minds of mathematicians of this period with

Euclidean geometry and especially the parallel-postulate and its

connotations. BESSEL expresses this general discontent in one of his

letters to GAUSS, dated February 10, 1829, in which he says:

"Through that which LAMBERT said and what SCHWEIKART disclosed

orally, it has become clear to me that our geometry is incomplete,

and should receive a correction, which is hypothetical, and if the

sum of the angles of the plane triangle is equal to 180 degrees,

vanishes."

The opinion of leading mathematicians at this time seems to have been

crystallizing very rapidly. Unconsciously the men of this formative

period were adducing evidence which would give form and tendence to the

developments in the field of mathesis at a later date. They appear to

have been reaching out for that which, ignis fatuus-like, was always

within easy reach, but not quite apprehensible.

A bolder student than GAUSS was FERDINAND CARL SCHWEIKART (1780-1857)

who also has been credited with the founding of the non-Euclidean

geometry. In fact, if judged by the same standards as GAUSS, he would

be called the "father of the geometry of hyperspace"; for he really

published the first treatise on the subject. This was in the nature of

an inclosure which he inserted between the leaves of a book he loaned

to GERLING. He also asked that it be shown to GAUSS that he might give

his judgment as to its merits.

SCHWEIKART'S treatise, dated Marburg, December, 1818, is here quoted in

full:

"There is a two-fold geometry--a geometry in the narrower sense,

the Euclidean, and an astral science of magnitude.

"The triangles of the latter have the peculiarity that the sum of

the three angles is not equal to two right angles.

"This presumed, it can be most rigorously proven: (_a_) That the

sum of the three angles in the triangle is less than two right

angles.

"(_b_) That this sum becomes ever smaller, the more content

the angle incloses. (_c_) That the altitude of an isosceles

right-angled triangle indeed ever increases, the more one

lengthens the side; that it, however, cannot surpass a certain

line which I call the constant."

Squares have consequently the following form:

[Illustration: FIG. 2.]

"If this constant were for us the radius of the earth (so that

every line drawn in the universe, from one fixed star to another,

distant 90° from the first, would be a tangent to the surface of

the earth) it would be infinitely great in comparison with the

spaces which occur in daily life."

The above, being the first published, not printed, treatise on the new

geometry occupies a unique place in the history of higher mathematics.

It gave additional strength to the formative tendencies which

characterized this period and marked SCHWEIKART as a constructive and

original thinker.

The nascent aspects of this stage received a fruitful contribution

when NICOLAI LOBACHEVSKI (1793-1847) created his _Imaginary Geometry_

and JANOS BOLYAI (1802-1860) published as an appendix to his father's

_Tentamen_, his _Science Absolute of Space_. LOBACHEVSKI and BOLYAI

have been called the "Creators of the Non-Euclidean Geometry." And this

appellation seems richly to be deserved by these pioneers. Their work

gave just the impetus most needed to fix the status of the new line

of researches which led to such remarkable discoveries in the more

recent years. The _Imaginary Geometry_ and the _Science Absolute of

Space_ were translated by the French mathematician, J. HOÜEL in 1868

and by him elevated out of their forty-five years of obscurity and

non-effectiveness to a position where they became available for the

mathematical public. To BOLYAI and LOBACHEVSKI, consequently, belong

the honor of starting the movement which resulted in the development of

metageometry and hence that which has proved to be the gateway of a new

mathematical freedom.

GAUSS, SCHWEIKART, LOBACHEVSKI, WOLFGANG and JANOS BOLYAI were the

principal figures of the formative period and the value of their

work with respect to the formulation of principles upon which was

constructed the Temple of Metageometry cannot be overestimated.

The Determinative Period

This period is characterized chiefly by its close relationship to the

theory of surfaces. RIEMANN'S Habilitation Lecture on _The Hypotheses

Which Constitute the Bases of Geometry_ marks the beginning of this

epoch. In this dissertation, RIEMANN not only promulgated the system

upon which GAUSS had spent more than thirty years of his life in

elaborating, for he was a disciple of GAUSS; but he disclosed his own

views with respect to space which he regarded as a particular case

of manifold. His work contains two fundamental concepts, namely, the

_manifold_ and the _measure of curvature_ of a continuous manifold,

possessed of what he called _flatness_ in the smallest parts. The

conception of the measure of curvature is extended by RIEMANN from

surfaces to spaces and a new kind of space, finite, but unbounded, is

shown to be possible. He showed that the dimensions of any space are

determined by the number of measurements necessary to establish the

position of a point in that space. Conceiving, therefore, that space

is a manifold of finite, but unbounded, extension, he established the

fact that the passage from one element of a manifold to another may

be either discrete or continuous and that the manifold is discrete or

continuous according to the manner of passage. Where the manifold

is regarded as discrete two portions of it can be compared, as to

magnitude, by counting; where continuous, by measurement. If the whole

manifold be caused to pass over into another manifold each of its

elements passing through a one-dimensional manifold, a two-dimensional

manifold is thus generated. In this way, a manifold of _n_-dimensions

can be generated. On the other hand, a manifold of _n_-dimensions can

be analyzed into one of one dimension and one of (_n_-1) dimensions.

To RIEMANN, then, is due the credit for first promulgating the

idea that space being a special case of manifold is generable, and

therefore, _finite_. He laid the foundation for the establishment of

a special kind of geometry known as the "elliptic." Space, as viewed

by him, possessed the following properties, viz.: generability,

divisibility, measurability, ponderability, finity and flexity.

These are the six pillars upon which rests the structure of hyperspace

analyses.[5]

[5] Vide _Nature_, Vol. VIII, pp. 14-17; 36, 37 (1873); also

_Mathematical Papers_, pp. 65-71.

_Generability_ is that property of geometric space by virtue of which

it may be generated, or constructed, by the movement of a line, plane,

surface or solid in a direction without itself. _Divisibility_ is that

property of geometric space by virtue of which it may be segmented

or divided into separate parts and superposed, or inserted, upon

or between each other. _Measurability_ is that property by virtue

of which geometric space is determined to be a manifold of either

a positive or negative curvature, also by which its extent may be

measured. _Ponderability_ is that property of geometric space by virtue

of which it may be regarded as a quantity which can be manipulated,

assorted, shelved or otherwise disposed of. _Finity_ is that property

by virtue of which geometric space is limited to the scope of the

individual consciousness of a unodim, a duodim or a tridim and by

virtue of which it is finite in extent. _Flexity_ is that property by

virtue of which geometric space is regarded as possessing curvature,

and in consequence of which progress through it is made in a curved,

rather than a geodetic line, also by virtue of which it may be flexed

without disruption or dilatation.

RIEMANN who thus prepared the way for entrance into a veritable

labyrinth of hyperspaces is, therefore, correctly styled "The father

of metageometry," and the fourth dimension is his eldest born. He

died while but forty years of age and never lived long enough fully

to elaborate his theory with respect to its application to the

measure of curvature of space. This was left for his very energetic

disciple, EUGENIO BELTRAMI (1835-1900) who was born nine years after

RIEMANN and lived thirty-four years longer than he. His labors mark

the characteristic standpoint of the determinative period. BELTRAMI'S

mathematical investigations were devoted mainly to the non-Euclidean

geometry. These led him to the rather remarkable conclusion that the

propositions embodied therein relate to figures lying upon surfaces of

constant negative curvature.

BELTRAMI sought to show that such surfaces partake of the nature of the

pseudosphere, and in doing so, made use of the following illustration:

[Illustration: FIG. 3.]

[Illustration: FIG. 4.]

If the plane figure _aabb_ is made to revolve upon its axis of symmetry

_AB_ the two arcs, _ab_ and _ab_ will describe a pseudospherical

concave-convex surface like that of a solid anchor ring. Above and

below, toward _aa_ and _bb_, the surface will turn outward with

ever-increasing flexure till it becomes perpendicular to the axis

and ends at the edge with one curvature infinite. Or, the half of a

pseudospherical surface may be rolled up into the shape of a champagne

glass, as in Fig. 4. In this way, the two straightest lines of the

pseudospherical surface may be indefinitely produced, giving a kind of

space (pseudospherical) in which the axiom of parallels does not hold

true.

The determinative period marks the most important stage in the

development of non-Euclidean geometry and certainly the most

significant in the evolution of the idea of hyperspaces and multiple

dimensionality. RIEMANN and BELTRAMI are chief among those whose labors

characterize the scope of this period. Their work gave direction and

general outline for later developments and all subsequent researches

along these lines have been conducted in strict conformity with the

principles laid down by these pioneer constructionists. They laid out

the field and designated its confines beyond which no adventurer has

since dared to pass.

The great importance of the work of RIEMANN at this time may be seen

further in the fact that it not only marked the beginning of a new

epoch in geometry; but his pronouncement of the hypothesis that space

is unbounded, though finite, is really the first time in the history

of human thought that expression was ever given to the idea that space

may yet be only of limited extent. Before that time the minds of all

men seemed to have been unanimous in the consideration of space as an

illimitable and infinite quantity.

The Elaborative Period

The elaborative stage includes the work of all those who, working upon

the bases laid down by LOBACHEVSKI, BOLYAI, SCHWEIKART and RIEMANN,

have sought to amplify the conclusions reached by them. Among those

whose investigations have greatly multiplied the applications of

hyperspace conceptions are HOÜEL (1866) and FLYE ST. MARIE (1871)

of France; HELMHOLTZ (1868), FRISCHAUF (1872), KLEIN (1849), and

BALTZER (1877) of Germany; BELTRAMI (1872) of Italy; DE TILLY (1879)

of Belgium; CLIFFORD and CAYLEY (1821) of England; NEWCOMB (1835) and

HALSTEAD of America.

These have been most active in popularizing the subject of

non-Euclidean geometry and incidentally the idea of the fourth

dimension. The great mass of non-professional mathematical readers,

therefore, owe these men an immeasurable debt of gratitude for the work

that they have done in the matter of rendering the conceptions which

constitute the fabric of metageometry understandable and thinkable. A

glance at the bibliography appended at the end of this volume will give

some idea of the enormous amount of labor that has been expended in an

effort to translate the most abstract mathematical principles into a

language that could easily be comprehended by the average intelligent

person.

The characteristic standpoint of this period is the popular

comprehension of the hyperspace concept and the consequent mental

liberation which follows. For there is no doubt but that unheard of

possibilities of thought have been revealed by investigations into

the nature of space. An entirely new world has been opened to view and

only a beginning has been made at the exploration of its extent and

resources.

One of the notable incidents of the early years of this period is the

position taken by FELIX KLEIN who stands in about the same relation

to CAYLEY as BELTRAMI does to RIEMANN, in that he assumed the task of

completing the work of his predecessor. KLEIN held that there are only

two kinds of RIEMANNIAN _space_--the elliptical and the spherical. Or

in other words, that there are only two possible kinds of space in

which the propositions announced by RIEMANN could apply. SOPHUS LIE,

called the "great comparative anatomist of geometric theories," carried

his classifications to a final conclusion in connection with spaces of

all kinds and decided that there are possible only four kinds of three

dimensional spaces.

But whether men with peering, microscopic, histological vision shall

establish the existence of one or many spaces, and regardless of the

mathematic rigor with which they shall demonstrate the self-consistency

of the doctrines which they hold, the fact remains that the hypotheses

thus maintained, while they may be regarded as true descriptions of

the spaces concerned, are, nevertheless, incompatible. All of them

cannot be valid. It will perhaps be found that none of them are

valid, especially objectively so. The only true view, therefore, of

these systems of hyperspaces is that which assigns them to their

rightful place in the infinitely vast world of pure mathesis where

their validity may go unchallenged and their existence unquestioned;

for in that domain of unconfined mentation, in that realm of divine

intuitability, the marvelous wonderland of ideas and notions, one is

not only disinclined to doubt their logical actuality, but is quite

willing to accede their claims.

The mystery of space · 第 2 / 11 章