the history and evolution of the concept of infinity

71
The History and Evolution of the Concept of Infinity John H. Batchelor Honors 499 Senior Project Dr. Bruce Mericle, Project Advisor July 26, 2002

Upload: john-batchelor

Post on 08-Jan-2017

400 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

The History and Evolution of the Concept of Infinity

John H. Batchelor

Honors 499 – Senior Project

Dr. Bruce Mericle, Project Advisor

July 26, 2002

Batchelor 2

Table of Contents.

Page Chapter / Section

3 Introduction.

4 1. A Brief History of Infinity.

7 2. The Contributions of Euclid and Euler.

16 3. Gauss’s Contributions.

18 4. The Contributions of Georg Cantor.

29 5. Cardinal Numbers and One-to-One Correspondence.

36 6. The Uncountable Set of Real Numbers.

37 7. Limits and Convergence.

39 8. The Geometric and Harmonic Series.

40 9. Fermat’s Theorems.

42 10. Geographic Maps and Inversion in a Circle.

43 11. Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity.

44 12. Special Categories of Numbers.

48 13. Non-Euclidean Geometry.

51 14. Religion and Infinity.

52 15. Astronomy and Infinity.

55 16. Infinity and Art.

57 17. Paradoxes and Antinomies.

59 18. Unsolved Problems Regarding Infinity.

62 Afterword.

63 Appendices.

63 I. Timeline of Major Events.

68 II. Proof that2 is an Irrational Number.

70 Works Cited / Bibliography Page.

Batchelor 3

Introduction.

People interpret the concept of infinity in a variety of ways. People often see

infinity as a “number” that is greater than all other numbers. Many philosophers and

theologians believe that infinity represents God or eternity. In some primitive tribes,

infinity began at three, since the members referred to anything larger than three as

“many” and did not considered it countable (Maor 2). The early Greeks were the first

people to study infinity in a formal setting. They began to acknowledge the concept of

infinity during the sixth century B.C. (Maor 3). The Greeks feared infinity, but later

mathematicians such as Euler and Cantor studied it enthusiastically (Dunham, Master

47). Georg Cantor had a profound impact on the study of the infinite. He made the

remarkable discovery of the one-to-one correspondence between the square and the

interval (Dauben 55). In 1900, David Hilbert emphasized the importance of Cantor’s

Continuum Hypothesis. The Continuum Hypothesis states that there is no transfinite

cardinal number strictly between 0א and c (Dunham, Genius 282). Other mathematicians

such as Gauss, Newton, and Fermat have also made significant contributions to the study

of infinity (Laubenbacher 13). Numerous paradoxes related to infinity exist, and they

continue to puzzle mathematicians. For example, Russell’s Paradox involves sets that do

not contain themselves as elements (Maor 255). Mathematicians continue to study many

unsolved problems. Goldbach’s Conjecture, the infinitude of twin primes, and the search

for an odd perfect number all represent unsolved problems related to infinity (Maor 23).

The concept of infinity has had a major effect on religion, art, and astronomy.

Astronomers have long wondered whether the universe is finite or infinite. Based on

Einstein’s general theory of relativity, it appears that the universe is finite but unbounded

Batchelor 4

(Laubenbacher 16). The study of the infinitesimal has led to questions of the existence of

an “ultimate particle” from which all matter is created (Maor 225). Artists such as M.C.

Escher have creatively depicted infinity through their paintings and sculptures

(Laubenbacher 53). Infinity is a fascinating concept that has evolved and matured since

the early Greeks first studied it.

1. A Brief History of Infinity.

The early Greeks were the first people to study the concept of infinity in a formal

setting. They were the first people to use a mathematical process to determine the value

of π. The previous attempts to determine this value involved actual measurements of a

circle’s diameter and circumference (Maor 5). Despite the good intentions and

enthusiasm of the Greek mathematicians, other mathematicians accused them of being

too ambiguous in their study of infinity (Dauben 107). The Greeks believed that

everything in nature could be represented using ratios of integers, and they assumed that

√2 was a rational number. One can express rational numbers as ratios of integers, but one

cannot express irrational numbers in this way. After they discovered that √2 is an

irrational number, they temporarily refused to accept that √2 is a number at all (Maor 46).

According to Tobias Dantzig, “The attempt to apply rational arithmetic to a problem in

geometry resulted in the first crisis in the history of mathematics. The two relatively

simple problems – the determination of the diagonal of a square and that of the

circumference of a circle – revealed the existence of new mathematical beings for which

no place could be found within the rational domain” (qtd. in Maor 44). Mathematicians

have since discovered many other important irrational numbers. The golden ratio, which

is denoted φ, is an irrational number (Maor 51). Archimedes developed a method for

Batchelor 5

determining the circumference and area of a circle. To determine a circle’s

circumference, he circumscribed a circle by regular polygons with progressively more

sides. Polygons with greater numbers of sides provide a better approximation of a circle’s

circumference. The Greeks used this method to determine a value for π. To approximate

π, they simply divided the value for the polygon’s perimeter by the circle’s diameter. The

value for π represents the limit of these values as the number of sides of the regular

polygon approaches infinity (Dunham, Genius 29, 91). Archimedes made the following

statement about large but finite numbers in The Sand-Reckoner: “Many people believe,

King Gelon, that the grains of sand are without number. Others think that although their

number is not without limit, no number can ever be named which will be greater than the

number of grains of sand. But I shall try to prove to you that among the numbers which I

have named there are those which exceed the number of grains in a heap of sand the size

not only of the earth, but even of the universe” (qtd. in Maor 16). Aristotle also studied

the concept of infinity, particularly with regard to its paradoxes. He believed in the

potential infinite, but he did not believe in the idea of the actual infinite (Laubenbacher

54). Bertrand Russell was originally skeptical of the concept of the actual infinite, but he

later recognized the similarities between Cantor’s theory of the infinite and his own

theory (Miller 2).

Bernhard Bolzano, a theologian, also studied the concept of infinity. He took a

particular interest in the paradoxes related to infinity. Bolzano emphasized the property

of a one-to-one correspondence between a set and a proper subset of the set. He is famous

for his distinction between potential and actual infinities (Laubenbacher 55). A one-to-

one correspondence can exist between an infinite set and a subset of the set.

Batchelor 6

Mathematicians refer to this as Galileo’s Paradox (Maor 57). An important connection

exists between mathematics and philosophy with regard to the study of the infinite. Georg

Cantor took a particular interest in developing a philosophical approach to analyzing

infinite sets. Many philosophers and theologians were opposed to Cantor’s theory of the

actual infinite. Cantor defended his theory against such arguments as Aristotle’s concept

of “annihilation of number.” Cantor pointed out that the arguments against his theory

relied on the assumption that infinite sets will behave according to the properties of finite

sets. He showed that this assumption is not always true, and he proved that the

“annihilation of number” concept was not true for infinite sets (Dauben 122).

Georg Cantor made many important contributions to the study of set theory. He

proved the important Uniqueness Theorem with regard to finite exceptional sets (Dauben

35). Ernst Zermelo, a German mathematician, successfully axiomatized Cantor’s set

theory (Laubenbacher 67). He developed a system of seven axioms for set theory.

Zermelo is particularly famous for his proof of the Well-Ordering Theorem (Dauben

253). Adolf Fraenkel contributed to set theory, and his contributions included the

Substitution Axiom. Fraenkel revised Zermelo’s set theory, and mathematicians now

refer to the resulting theory as Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory (Cohen 76). The Axiom of

Choice is a particularly fascinating part of the Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory (Cohen 85).

In 1963, Paul Cohen showed that the Axiom of Choice is independent of the other set

theory axioms (Laubenbacher 67). Many mathematicians have contributed to the study of

infinity, including Euclid, Euler, Fermat, Cantor, and Gauss. Non-Euclidean geometry is

an important concept related to infinity. There are many paradoxes and unsolved

problems involving the concept of infinity. Some theologians have objected to the study

Batchelor 7

of the actual infinite, since they feel that it contradicts their understanding of God (Maor

190). Astronomers are also concerned with infinity, since they have long wondered

whether the universe is finite. Artists such as M.C. Escher and Max Bill have depicted

infinity in their drawings and sculptures (Laubenbacher 52).

2. The Contributions of Euclid and Euler.

Between 440 B.C. and 300 B.C., several mathematicians and philosophers

contributed to the study of infinity. When Plato was young, he studied in Athens under

the direction of Socrates. Plato’s work represents historians’ primary source of

information with regard to Socrates. In 387 B.C., Plato founded the Academy in Athens.

This was a well-respected institution, and people regarded it as one of the finest

intellectual centers in Greece. Although historians generally do not regard Plato as a

mathematician, he believed that mathematics was the perfect training for the human

mind. He took a particular interest in geometry, and he believed that a solid

understanding of geometry was essential for his students’ success (Dunham, Genius 28).

Eudoxus was a great mathematician, and he was one of the Academy’s best students. He

attended Plato’s lectures at the Academy, and he was enthusiastic about the motion of the

moon and the planets. Sir Thomas Heath once stated, “[Eudoxus] was a man of science if

ever there was one” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 28). Eudoxus developed the theory of

proportion, and his contributions to the method of exhaustion represent his most

remarkable work. He developed this method in order to prove some of Democritus’s

discoveries with regard to the volumes of pyramids and cones. Book XII of Euclid’s

Elements includes a section about the method of exhaustion (Laubenbacher 99).

Mathematicians can use the method of exhaustion to determine the volumes and areas of

Batchelor 8

complex geometric figures. Archimedes applied this method when he determined the

formula for a circle’s area. The method of exhaustion is similar to the concept of limits in

calculus (Maor 12). In 332 B.C., Alexander the Great established the city of Alexandria

in Egypt. He formed the Alexandrian Library, which became the most prestigious

academic institution in the world (Dunham, Genius 29).

Euclid went to Alexandria in 300 B.C., and he intended to establish a school of

mathematics. He is most famous for the Elements, which is a collection of 465

propositions related to plane geometry, solid geometry, and number theory (Dunham,

Master 1). The Elements became the accepted text for geometry, and mathematicians

often refer to it as the “Bible of mathematics” (Dunham, Genius 30). There have been

approximately 2,000 different editions of the Elements. Isaac Newton studied Euclid’s

Elements, and Abraham Lincoln became very interested in the Elements. Carl Sandburg,

Lincoln’s biographer, stated that Lincoln “… bought the Elements of Euclid, a book

twenty-three centuries old … [It] went into his carpetbag as he went out on the circuit. At

night … he read Euclid by the light of a candle after others had dropped off to sleep”

(qtd. in Dunham, Genius 30). Bertrand Russell was also fascinated with the Elements. In

his autobiography, he stated, “At the age of eleven, I began Euclid, with my brother as

tutor. This was one of the great events of my life, as dazzling as first love” (qtd. in

Dunham, Genius 31). Euclid presented his mathematical theory in a very clear and

logical manner (Maor 121). He used a system of axioms as the foundation of his theory.

First, he stated five general axioms, five postulates, and 23 definitions. Then, he used

these foundations as the basis for proving his propositions. He developed the axiomatic

method in a careful manner in order to avoid circular reasoning (Laubenbacher 174).

Batchelor 9

In Book I of the Elements, Euclid stated the following definitions concerning

plane geometry:

Definition. A point is that which has no part.

Definition. A line is breadthless length.

Definition. A straight line is a line that lies evenly with the points on itself (Dunham,

Genius 32).

In modern geometric theory, mathematicians regard point and line as undefined

concepts. Euclid stated several postulates and common notions. Some mathematicians

were skeptical of Euclid’s work. Bertrand Russell commented, “I had been told that

Euclid proved things, and was much disappointed that he started with axioms. At first, I

refused to accept them unless my brother could offer me some reason for doing so, but he

said, ‘If you don’t accept them, we cannot go on,’ and, as I wished to go on, I reluctantly

admitted them” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 37). In 1902, Russell offered the following

additional criticism of Euclid’s work: “[Euclid’s] definitions do not always define, his

axioms are not always indemonstrable, his demonstrations require many axioms of which

he is quite unconscious. A valid proof retains its demonstrative force when no figure is

drawn, but very many of Euclid’s earlier proofs fail before this test … The value of his

work as a masterpiece of logic has been very grossly exaggerated” (qtd. in Dunham,

Genius 38). Despite these harsh criticisms, Euclid’s Elements is clearly the top

“bestseller” in the history of mathematical literature (Laubenbacher 173). Euclid was not

the first person to discover the Pythagorean Theorem, but he provided a unique proof of

the theorem. Mathematicians regard his proof of the Pythagorean Theorem as one of the

most important mathematical proofs ever completed (Hartshorne 8). The figure that

Batchelor 10

Euclid used to demonstrate the proof resembles the structure of a windmill, and people

often refer to the proof as The Windmill for this reason (Dunham, Genius 51). Euclid also

proved the converse of the Pythagorean Theorem. He used the Pythagorean Theorem in

the process of proving its converse. The Pythagorean Theorem is one of the most well

known and widely used mathematical theorems (Maor 44).

Euclid stated the following postulate in Book I of the Elements.

Postulate 5. If a straight line falling on two straight lines make the interior angles on the

same side less than two right angles, the two straight lines, if produced indefinitely,

meet on that side on which are the angles less than the two right angles.

This is Euclid’s famous Parallel Postulate, and it is the most controversial statement

associated with Greek mathematics (Dunham, Genius 35). Other mathematicians did not

challenge the fact that the Parallel Postulate was true. However, they challenged the

classification of the Parallel Postulate as a postulate instead of as a proposition. Adrien-

Marie Legendre attempted to prove the Parallel Postulate, and Gauss tried to show that

the Parallel Postulate was really a theorem (Laubenbacher 24). According to the writer

Proclus, “This [Parallel Postulate] ought even to be struck out of the Postulates

altogether; for it is a theorem …” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 53). However, no one

succeeded in proving the Parallel Postulate. Wolfgang Bolyai warned his son, Johann, not

to try to prove the Parallel Postulate. He stated, “You must not attempt this approach to

parallels. I know this way to its very end. I have traversed this bottomless night, which

extinguished all light and joy of my life …. I entreat you, leave the science of parallels

alone” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 56). This statement reflects the profound frustration that

mathematicians experienced when they were unable to prove the Parallel Postulate.

Batchelor 11

Legendre offered several proofs of the Parallel Postulate, but other mathematicians

showed that his proofs were not valid (Laubenbacher 26).

Georg Friedrich Bernhard Riemann strongly questioned the assumption that

geometric lines have infinite length. He stated, “… We must distinguish between

unboundedness and infinite extent …. The unboundedness of space possesses … a

greater empirical certainty than any external experience. But its infinite extent by no

means follows from this” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 57). Gauss, Bolyai, Riemann, and

Nikolai Lobachevski were very influential with regard to the early study of non-

Euclidean geometry. Lobachevski was a Russian mathematician who published an early

interpretation of non-Euclidean geometry (Maor 125). In 1868, Eugenio Beltrami proved

that non-Euclidean geometry is just as logically valid as Euclidean geometry (Dunham,

Genius 57). In non-Euclidean geometry, the sum of the angles of a triangle is not the

same for all triangles.

In Book VII of the Elements, Euclid addressed the concept of number theory.

He defined prime numbers, composite numbers, and perfect numbers. A perfect number

is a whole number that equals the sum of its proper divisors (Moews 1). For example, 6 is

a perfect number, since 6 = 1 + 2 + 3 (Dunham, Master 2). Euclid stated the Fundamental

Theorem of Arithmetic, which says that a number can be factored as a product of prime

numbers in only one way. Euclid’s Proposition IX.20 states that the set of prime numbers

is an infinite set. Euclid proved this statement, which is called the infinitude of primes.

G.H. Hardy, a British mathematician, made the following comment regarding Euclid’s

proof of this theorem: “[The proof is] as fresh and significant as when it was discovered –

two thousand years have not written a wrinkle on [it]” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 73). The

Batchelor 12

following theorem represents Proposition IX.36 of the Elements, stated using modern

terminology.

Theorem. If 2k – 1 is prime and if N = 2

k–1(2

k – 1), then N is a perfect number.

This theorem provides a method that one can use to generate perfect numbers (Dunham,

Master 3). In his Proposition XII.10, Euclid proved that a cone’s volume is one third of

the volume of the cylinder with the same base and height. This relationship can be

expressed using the formula, Vcone = (1/3)πr2h. Archimedes commented, “… though these

properties were naturally inherent in the figures all along, yet they were in fact unknown

to all the many able geometers who lived before Eudoxus, and had not been observed by

anyone” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 77). In the final proposition of the Elements, Euclid

showed that there are exactly five regular solids. The five regular solids are the

tetrahedron, cube, octahedron, dodecahedron, and icosahedron (Maor 104). This proof

relied on the following formula, which Euler discovered in 1752: Every simple

polyhedron must satisfy the equation, V – E + F = 2, where V = number of vertices, E =

number of edges, and F = number of faces (Maor 103).

Leonhard Euler made major contributions to the study of analytic number theory.

This branch of mathematics applies the concepts of calculus and analysis to the study of

the whole numbers. While analysis traditionally involves the study of continuous

phenomena such as convergence and divergence, number theory generally involves

discrete phenomena. Analytic number theory is particularly important because it

combines these two concepts (Dunham, Master 61). Euler also studied the field of

indeterminate analysis (Euler 299). Euclid originally proved that the set of prime

numbers is an infinite set. Every odd prime number has the form 4k+1 or 4k–1.

Batchelor 13

Throughout the first 200 positive integers, there are more 4k–1 odd prime numbers than

4k+1 odd primes. However, this majority switches in favor of the 4k+1 odd primes after

the first 26,861 positive integers. J.E. Littlewood proved that this majority switches back

and forth between the 4k–1 odd prime numbers and the 4k+1 odd primes infinitely many

times as one progresses through the positive integers (Dunham, Master 63). Fermat

proposed that a 4k+1 prime number can be expressed as the sum of two perfect squares in

exactly one way, while a 4k–1 prime number cannot be expressed as the sum of two

perfect squares in any manner. Euler proved this proposition, and he was very interested

in the study of prime numbers. Fermat made the conjecture that every number of the form

22n + 1 is a prime number. In 1732, Euler disproved this conjecture by showing that

225 + 1 = 2

32 + 1 = 4,294,967,297 = (641)(6,700,417) (Laubenbacher 160). Euler studied

the concepts of indeterminate equations of the first degree and the second degree (Euler

465).

In 1774, Euler completed a paper called On a table of prime numbers up to a

million and beyond. He wished to determine an exact sum for the infinite series,

1/15 + 1/63 + 1/80 + 1/255 + 1/624 + . Euler clarified the nature of this series by stating

that the terms of the series represented reciprocals “whose denominators are one less than

all perfect squares which simultaneously are other powers” (qtd. in Dunham, Master 65).

For example, 15 is a denominator in the series, since 16 = 42 = 2

4. This means that 16 is

both a perfect square and a fourth power at the same time. He previously proved that

(π2)/6 = 1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + 1/16 + 1/25 + 1/36 + 1/49 + 1/64 + 1/81 + . Euler applied this

result and proved that the sum of the series equals 7/4 – (π2)/6. Euler studied the

harmonic series, and he proved the following result.

Batchelor 14

1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + 1/5 + = (2*3*5*7*11*13*)/(1*2*4*6*10*12*) (Dunham,

Master 67). This result established a significant connection between the prime numbers

and the harmonic series. On the equation’s right side, the numerator represents the

product of all prime numbers. The denominator represents the product of all numbers that

are one less than prime numbers. In 1737, Euler considered the sum of the reciprocals of

the prime numbers, which can be expressed as

S = 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/5 + 1/7 + 1/11 + 1/13 + 1/17 + . Euler proved that the set S diverges

(Ingham 10).

Now suppose that one wished to find the sum of the reciprocals of all of the

positive integers whose only prime number factors are 2 and 3. This is the sum,

T = 1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + 1/6 + 1/8 + 1/9 + 1/12 + 1/16 + 1/18 + 1/24 + 1/27 + 1/32 + .

Euler proved that this sum can be expressed in the following way:

T = [1/(1 – 1/2)]*[1/(1 – 1/3)] = (2*3)/(1*2). Another way to express Euler’s result is

1k

1/k)( = p

1/p)]-[1/(1 , where the sum on the left side represents positive integers k,

and the product on the right side represents prime numbers p. Euler’s result involved a

combination of number theory and analysis. The fact that the set of prime numbers is an

infinite set follows as a corollary to Euler’s result (Dunham, Master 70).

In 1775, Euler considered the infinite series,

V = 1/3 – 1/5 + 1/7 + 1/11 – 1/13 – 1/17 + 1/19 + 1/23 – 1/29 + . This series consists of

the reciprocals of the odd prime numbers. In the series, a positive sign precedes each

prime number with the form 4k – 1. A negative sign precedes each prime number with

the form 4k + 1. Euler showed that the sum V has an approximate value of 0.3349816.

Batchelor 15

After proving that the series converges, Euler claimed that the set of 4k + 1 prime

numbers is an infinite set (Dunham, Master 77). In 1837, Peter Gustav Lejeune-Dirichlet

proved that every arithmetic progression with the form,

a, a + b, a + 2b, a + 3b, , a + kb, , must include an infinite number of prime numbers,

as long as a and b are selected as relatively prime numbers. Two numbers are relatively

prime if there does not exist any number greater than 1 that is a factor of both of the

numbers (Moews 4).

Leonhard Euler made several important contributions to the study of number

theory. Number theory involves the study of the positive integers. In 1772, Euler wrote to

Daniel Bernoulli and stated that he had proved that 231

– 1 is a prime number. This

implies that 230

(231

– 1) = 2,305,843,008,139,952,128 is a perfect number (Laubenbacher

159). Euler attempted to find four different numbers such that when any two numbers are

added, the sum is a perfect square. He provided a correct solution when he showed that

the numbers 18,530; 38,114; 45,986; and 65,570 satisfy this condition. Four of the

volumes of Euler’s Opera Omnia cover the topic of number theory. Harold Edwards

stated that even if this were Euler’s only mathematical accomplishment, “his

contributions to number theory alone would suffice to establish a lasting reputation in the

annals of mathematics” (qtd. in Dunham, Master 7). In 1747, Euler stated, “Whether …

there are any odd perfect numbers is a most difficult question” (qtd. in Dunham, Master

13). The question of whether or not any odd perfect numbers exist represents an unsolved

problem in mathematics. While no odd perfect numbers have been found, no one has ever

proved that they cannot exist (Laubenbacher 160). In 1748, Leonhard Euler discovered

the formula, eπi

+ 1 = 0. This is called Euler’s formula, and it is significant because it

Batchelor 16

provides a relation between the constants of arithmetic, geometry, analysis, and complex

numbers (Maor 53). During the same year, Euler discovered the following formula for

the irrational constant, e:

e = 1 + 1/1 + 1/(1*2) + 1/(1*2*3) + 1/(1*2*3*4) + 1/(1*2*3*4*5) + (Maor 52).

3. Gauss’s Contributions.

In 1777, Carl Friedrich Gauss was born in Brunswick. He demonstrated

outstanding mathematical ability from a very young age. His first major accomplishment

occurred in 1796, when he showed that a straightedge and compass could be used to

construct a 17-sided regular polygon (Hartshorne 249). He later showed that an N-sided

regular polygon could be constructed using a straightedge and compass, if N is prime and

has the form 22n + 1 (Maor 123). This means that one can use a straightedge and compass

to construct a 257-sided regular polygon or even a 65,537-sided regular polygon. In 1799,

Gauss received his doctoral degree from the University of Helmstadt. His dissertation

was entitled, “A New Proof of the Theorem That Every Integral Rational Algebraic

Function Can Be Decomposed into Real Factors of the First or Second Degree”

(Dunham, Genius 239). Gauss is famous for his proof of the Fundamental Theorem of

Algebra. Let P denote a polynomial whose coefficients are real. The theorem states that

one can factor P into a product of real quadratic and/or real linear factors. In other words,

every real polynomial with degree n can be decomposed into n linear factors, some of

which may be complex (Laubenbacher 216). Euler had unsuccessfully attempted to prove

this theorem in 1749. In 1801, Gauss published his Disquisitiones Arithmeticae. This was

a major work on the topic of number theory. Gauss made a conjecture with regard to the

distribution of the prime numbers among the whole numbers. Mathematicians now refer

Batchelor 17

to this conjecture as the Prime Number Theorem (Ingham 25). Let σ(N) denote the

number of prime numbers below the integer N. The Prime Number Theorem states that

σ(N) approaches 1/ln(N) as N approaches infinity. In 1896, Jacques Hadamard and de la

Vallée Poussin proved the Prime Number Theorem (Maor 23). Gauss believed in the

potential infinite, but he did not believe in the actual infinite. In 1831, he told

Schumacher, “I must protest most vehemently against your use of the infinite as

something consummated, as this is never permitted in mathematics. The infinite is but a

façon de parler, meaning a limit to which certain ratios may approach as closely as

desired when others are permitted to increase indefinitely” (qtd. in Maor 55). Gauss

stated, “Mathematics is the queen of the sciences, and the theory of numbers is the queen

of mathematics” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 240). Gauss was often concerned about how

his ideas would be received in the mathematical community, and he was afraid of public

scrutiny of his ideas.

Carl Friedrich Gauss encouraged the work of Sophie Germain, who was a

mathematician during the early part of the 1800s. At this time, society held the opinion

that women were not supposed to become mathematicians. Germain’s parents did not

permit her to study mathematics. Sophie Germain used the pseudonym, Antoine LeBlanc,

in order to avoid revealing her gender. She made significant efforts toward developing a

proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem (Laubenbacher 185). In 1807, Gauss learned Sophie

Germain’s true identity. Gauss continued to encourage her, and he recognized the gender

inequity that existed in mathematics. Gauss wrote,

The taste for the abstract sciences in general and, above all, for the mysteries of

numbers, is very rare: this is not surprising, since the charms of this sublime

Batchelor 18

science in all their beauty reveal themselves only to those who have the courage to

fathom them. But when a woman, because of her sex, our customs, and prejudices,

encounters infinitely more obstacles than men in familiarizing herself with their

knotty problems, yet overcomes these fetters and penetrates that which is most

hidden, she doubtless has the most noble courage, extraordinary talent, and

superior genius. (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 242)

Gauss lived by the motto, “Pauca sed matura.” This means, “Few but ripe.” Gauss

published a relatively small number of papers. He refused to publish his results until they

were perfect enough to satisfy his standards (Dunham, Genius 243). He was hesitant to

publish his ideas because he feared public scrutiny. When he discovered non-Euclidean

geometry, he did not receive recognition because he refused to publish his results.

Because of this, Lobachevsky and Bolyai took credit for the discovery (Maor 125).

4. The Contributions of Georg Cantor.

In 1845, Georg Cantor was born in Russia (Dunham, Genius 252). Cantor studied

under Kronecker, Kummer, and Weierstrass (Golba 1). His primary interest was in

number theory. A mathematician named Edward Heine inspired Cantor to study

trigonometric series. Cantor proved the following requirements for integrating a function:

“If one sets f(x) = A0 + A1 + + An + Rn, for any given quantity there must exist an

integer m such that, for n ≥ m, the absolute value of Rn is less than for all values of x

which come into consideration” (qtd. in Dauben 32). Cantor proved the following

important theorem.

Uniqueness Theorem. If a function of a real variable f(x) is given by a trigonometric

series convergent for every value of x, then there is no other series of the same form

Batchelor 19

which likewise converges for every value of x and represents the function f(x)

(Dauben 34). In 1871, Cantor began to consider exceptional sets. He attempted to

generalize his previous results, and this led him to the rigorous study of algebraic and

transcendental numbers (Laubenbacher 57). In 1874, Cantor showed that most real

numbers are transcendental numbers. Cantor objected to other mathematicians’ previous

efforts to define irrational numbers with respect to infinite series. He stated, “Here there

would be a logical error, since the definition of the sum ∑av would first be won by

equating it with the finished number b, necessarily defined beforehand. I believe that this

logical error, first avoided by Weierstrass, was earlier committed quite generally, and was

not noticed because it belongs to the rare cases in which real errors can cause no

significant harm in calculations” (qtd. in Dauben 37). Cantor defined fundamental

sequences and the order relations between them. Cantor observed that when comparing

two sequences a and b, either b = a, b < a, or b > a. This represents a trichotomy for the

fundamental sequences (Dauben 39).

Georg Cantor wished to develop a method through which one could precisely

identify complex groups of points distributed in specific ways throughout the geometric

continuum. When he introduced the concept of derived sets of the first species, Cantor

emphasized that a point should always be associated with a specific numerical value.

Cantor stated the following definition of limit points: “By a limit point of a point set P I

mean a point of the line for which in any neighborhood of same, infinitely many points of

P are found, whereby it can happen that the [limit] point itself also belongs to the set. By

a neighborhood of a point is understood an interval which contains the point in its

interior. Accordingly, it is easy to prove that a point set consisting of an infinite number

Batchelor 20

of points always has at least one limit point” (qtd. in Dauben 41). This definition is

related to the Bolzano-Weierstrass Theorem, which states that all infinite bounded point

sets must contain at least one limit point (Laubenbacher 71). Every set of points P must

have a set of limit points. Cantor denoted the set of limit points P′, and he referred to this

set as the “first derived point set of P.” Let P′ denote an infinite set of points. Then there

must exist a second derived point set, P′′. Cantor stated that this progression continues

until “one finds through v such transitions the concept of the vth

derived point set P(v)

of

P” (qtd. in Dauben 41). This progression is related to Cantor’s uniqueness theorem. After

v repetitions of the process, the derived set of points P(v)

contains a finite number of

points. Therefore, the set P(v+1)

cannot exist. Now consider the Riemann function,

F(x) = C0*(xx/2) – C2/4 – – Cn/(nn) – . Cantor stated that F(x) is continuous in the

neighborhood of any value of x. In addition, he claimed that F(x) is a linear function

throughout the interval (0,2π). When considering derived sets of the second species,

Cantor considered sets such as P(∞)

. He demonstrated the direct relationship between the

concepts of derived sets and limit points. As he developed the uniqueness theorem,

Cantor frequently referred to the previous work of Heine, Riemann, and Schwarz

(Dauben 45).

In 1883, Georg Cantor published a paper about set theory. He developed the paper

to address the mathematical and philosophical issues associated with transfinite set

theory. In 1874, Cantor had proved the existence of infinite sets that have different and

distinct magnitudes. He demonstrated how to count infinite sets, how to determine

powers, and how to define equivalence. Cantor stated the following definition of set

equivalence: “Two sets M and N are equivalent … if it is possible to put them, by some

Batchelor 21

law, in such a relation to one another that to every element of each one of them

corresponds one and only one element of the other” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 253). In

1878, Cantor proved that one could restrict the analysis of continuity to the domain of the

real line (Maor 59). He showed that the same number of points exist on an infinite

straight line as on a finite segment of a line. Cantor considered the linear interval (0,1),

and he considered the square that is bounded by the interval (0,1) on the x-axis and by the

interval (0,1) on the y-axis. When he discovered that there is a one-to-one

correspondence between the square and the interval, he stated, “I see it but I do not

believe it!” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 273). In 1879, Cantor published the first of a group

of six papers about infinite linear sets of points. He defined sets of the second species as

sets for which P(v)

is not an empty set for any finite value of v. Cantor provided the

following definition of everywhere-dense sets.

Definition. If P lies partially or entirely in the interval (α, β), then the remarkable case

can occur that any arbitrarily small interval (γ, δ) in (α, β) contains points of P. In

such a case we will say that P is everywhere-dense in the interval (α, β) (Dauben 78).

This definition states that a set P is everywhere-dense on an interval (α, β) whenever its

first derived set P′ contains the interval (α, β). Everywhere-dense sets are always sets of

the second species. In 1879, Paul du Bois-Reymond made the following statement

regarding the terminology for this concept.

A distribution of points is called pantachisch if, for any arbitrarily small interval,

points of the distribution in question occur. One is led to such distributions of

points (of which I have various examples) if one studies accumulation points of

infinite order, the existence of which I wrote to Cantor in Halle years ago. At

Batchelor 22

another opportunity I will discuss these distributions, the accumulation points of

finite and infinite order of increasingly diminishing intervals, and finally my choice

of the expression pantachisch compared with the expression of everywhere-dense

adopted later by Cantor. (qtd. in Dauben 93)

Cantor defined sets of the same power as sets for which a one-to-one correspondence

between the respective elements is possible (Maor 60). Cantor identified the concepts of

denumerable sets and non-denumerable sets. Denumerable sets have the same power as

the set of natural numbers, . Non-denumerable sets have the same power as the set of

real numbers, . Denumerable sets include the rational numbers and the algebraic

numbers; every set of the first species is denumerable. Cantor proved that and are

distinct sets (Dauben 79). Cantor rejected the concept of infinitesimal numbers. He

formally presented this rejection in the following theorem.

Theorem. Non-zero linear numbers ζ (in short, numbers which may be thought of as

bounded, continuous lengths of a straight line) which would be smaller than any

arbitrarily small finite number do not exist, that is, they contradict the concept of

linear numbers (Dauben 130).

In 1880, Georg Cantor published a short paper about transfinite symbols and

derived sets. He showed that sets of the first species could be completely described by

their derived sets, but second species sets could not be completely described by their

derived sets. Let P denote a general point set of the second species. Cantor showed that

P′, the first derived set of P, could be disjointly decomposed into two sets, Q and R:

P′ {Q, R}. In this decomposition, Q denotes the set of points that belong to the first

species sets of P′. R denotes the set of points that are contained in all derived sets of P′;

Batchelor 23

therefore, R is a second species set. He showed that R P(∞)

, and he referred to P(∞)

as the

derived set of P with order ∞ (Dauben 80). Cantor developed a method that one could use

to produce a hierarchy of infinite sets (Maor 64). He believed that the concept of

denumerability was based on the following two theorems.

Theorem I. Every infinite part of a denumerable set constitutes an infinitely

denumerable set (Dauben 84).

Theorem II. Given a finite or denumerably infinite set of sets (E), (E′), (E′′), , each of

which is denumerable, then the union of all elements of (E), (E′), (E′′), is likewise

a denumerable set (Dauben 84).

Next, Cantor provided the following definition of sets of negligible content.

Definition: A point set P is said to be of negligible content if its elements can be

enclosed in intervals (cv,dv) such that the sum of the lengths of these intervals,

(dv – cv) may be made arbitrarily small, in other words, lim (dv – cv) = 0 (Dauben

89).

Georg Cantor provided proofs of several additional theorems related to point sets of the

first and second species.

Cantor believed that an important connection existed between mathematics and

philosophy. Georg Cantor suffered several nervous breakdowns, and he made the

following statement to Mittag-Leffler after the first breakdown: “I thank you heartily for

your kind letter of May 15; I would have answered it sooner, but recently I have not felt

so fresh as I should, and consequently I don’t know when I shall return to the

continuation of my scientific work. At the moment I can do absolutely nothing with it,

and limit myself to the most necessary duty of my lectures; how much happier I would be

Batchelor 24

to be scientifically active, if only I had the necessary mental freshness!” (qtd. in Dauben

136). Leopold Kronecker was a professor in Berlin. He was a very harsh critic of

Cantor’s work, and Cantor was not able to convince Kronecker that his transfinite

numbers were legitimate (Laubenbacher 74). After this, Cantor became somewhat

disillusioned with his study of mathematics. In 1884, Cantor resumed his effort to prove

the Continuum Hypothesis, which states that there is no transfinite cardinal number that

falls strictly between 0א and c. The cardinal number c represents the cardinal number of

the continuum (Maor 60). The Continuum Hypothesis can be expressed as 2א

The .1א = 0

Continuum Hypothesis can be generalized to state that 2א

α = אα+1 (Laubenbacher 63).

Cantor announced that he had proved that the real line has the same power as the second

class of numbers. He stated, “Thus you see that everything comes down to defining a

single closed set of the second power. When I’ve put it all in order, I will send you the

details” (qtd. in Dauben 137). Gösta Mittag-Leffler was a Swedish mathematician who

had previously supported Cantor’s efforts (Laubenbacher 75). Cantor became frustrated

when he was unable to prove the Continuum Hypothesis. Later in 1884, Cantor told

Mittag-Leffler that the Continuum Hypothesis was a complete failure. He stated, “The

eventual elimination of so fatal an error, which one has held for so long, ought to be all

the greater an advance” (qtd. in Dauben 137). In 1900, David Hilbert spoke at the Second

International Congress of Mathematicians, which was held in Paris. During his lecture, he

described twenty-three unsolved mathematical problems that he considered important for

the twentieth century. The first problem on Hilbert’s list was Cantor’s Continuum

Hypothesis (Laubenbacher 64). In 1963, Kurt Gödel and Paul Cohen showed that the

Batchelor 25

Continuum Hypothesis is independent of the other axioms in the Zermelo-Fraenkel

system (Maor 258).

In 1885, Gösta Mittag-Leffler made the following statement to Cantor, cautioning

him against publishing his new work: “I am convinced that the publication of your new

work, before you have been able to explain new positive results, will greatly damage your

reputation among mathematicians. I know very well that basically this is all the same to

you. But if your theory is once discredited in this way, it will be a long time before it will

again command the attention of the mathematical world. It may well be that you and your

theory will never be given the justice you deserve in our lifetime” (qtd. in Dauben 138).

Cantor previously had a close professional relationship with Mittag-Leffler, and Cantor

had published his work in Mittag-Leffler’s journal, Acta Mathematica (Laubenbacher

75). After receiving Mittag-Leffler’s criticism, Cantor nearly decided to abandon

mathematics entirely. He decided that he would no longer publish in the journal, Acta

Mathematica. Whenever someone seriously criticized Cantor’s work, he took the

criticism very personally. One of the original criticisms was the concept of “annihilation

of number.” Aristotle and other intellectuals believed that based on Cantor’s theory of the

infinite, finite numbers would be “annihilated” by infinite numbers. They pointed out the

property that for finite positive numbers m and n, m + n > m and m + n > n. If infinite

numbers were allowed, the equation m + ∞ = ∞ would appear to violate this property. In

this way, the infinite number would “annihilate” the finite number. However, Cantor

disproved this argument by pointing out that one cannot assume that infinite numbers will

behave according to the properties of finite numbers. In addition, Cantor distinguished

between the infinite numbers ω and ω + 1. This distinction proved that adding a finite

Batchelor 26

number to an infinite number does not result in the “annihilation” of the finite number

(Dauben 122). Mittag-Leffler’s letter appears to be the primary source of Cantor’s

disillusionment with mathematics (Dauben 139). Cantor began to devote his energy to the

study of theology and philosophy (Golba 1). He found that he experienced a greater sense

of belonging and encouragement among Roman Catholic theologians than he did among

mathematicians (Golba 2).

Pope Leo XIII tried to reconcile scientific discoveries with religious scripture and

with the leaders of the Catholic Church. This led several Catholic intellectuals to pursue

the study of natural science. He encouraged the study of Thomistic philosophy. Pope Leo

XIII believed that science could function to further the goals of the Catholic Church. He

stated, “Above all [education] must be wholly in harmony with the Catholic faith in its

literature and system of training, and chiefly in philosophy, upon which the foundation of

other sciences in great measure depends” (qtd. in Dauben 142). Cantor’s work received

criticism from Mittag-Leffler and Leopold Kronecker, who did not believe in the concept

of the actual infinite (Maor 65). In addition, Aristotle stated, “The infinite has a potential

existence …. There will not be an actual infinite” (qtd. in Maor 55). Some members of

the Roman clergy strongly resisted Pope Leo XIII’s effort to encourage the study of

Thomistic philosophy. Constantin Gutberlet studied theology and philosophy at the

Collegio Romano. In 1888, Gutberlet founded the journal, Philosophisches Jahrbuch der

Görres-Gesellschaft. In 1886, he had published an article based on Cantor’s set theory.

He recognized that Cantor’s work represented a new phase for the study of infinity.

Gutberlet worried that mathematical infinity could represent a challenge to the absolute

infinity associated with God’s existence. Previous mathematicians and theologians

Batchelor 27

believed that absolute infinity represented God’s greatness and omnipotence (Maor 8).

However, Cantor believed that the transfinite numbers did not diminish the extent of

God’s greatness. He believed that the existence of these numbers enhanced it (Dauben

143). Gutberlet supported the concept of the actual infinite. He presented Cantor’s work

in order to support his own ideas against the opposition of some theologians. He stated

that he hoped that after he described Cantor’s work, readers could decide, “if they were

correct, when they supposed they could dispose of my theory of actually infinite

magnitude so easily. Above all we now want to explain the Cantorian theory and then to

defend our conception against criticism, which this journal published, with Cantor’s

corresponding interpretation of infinite magnitude” (qtd. in Dauben 143). Gutberlet

encouraged Cantor’s interest in the theological and philosophical aspects of his own

work. In addition, other philosophers in the Catholic Church showed an interest in

Cantor’s work (Golba 2).

Thomas Esser studied the implications of Cantor’s work for theology. Cardinal

Johannes Franzelin originally objected to Cantor’s views regarding infinity. Later, he

accepted Cantor’s theory. He reassured Cantor that his theory did not pose any

theological threats to religious beliefs (Dauben 146). Pope Leo XIII’s enthusiasm for

Cantor’s work helped Cantor to overcome his previous setbacks and become interested in

mathematics again. Cantor believed that God inspired him to do his work (Laubenbacher

76). In 1888, Cantor wrote to Jeiler and stated, “I entertain no doubts as to the truth of the

transfinites, which I have recognized with God’s help and which, in their diversity, I have

studied for more than twenty years; every year, and almost every day brings me further in

this science” (qtd. in Dauben 147). Cantor turned to the study of theology after he

Batchelor 28

became disillusioned with mathematics. However, his study of theology actually

encouraged him to continue with his study of infinite numbers (Laubenbacher 76).

Charles Hermite was a French mathematician who studied the nature of the number π

(Dunham, Genius 24). In 1894, Cantor told Hermite, “But now I thank God, the all-wise

and all-good, that He always denied me the fulfillment of this wish [for a position at a

university in Göttingen or Berlin], for He thereby constrained me, through a deeper

penetration into theology, to serve Him and His Holy Roman Catholic Church better than

I have been able with my exclusive preoccupation with mathematics” (qtd. in Dauben

147). Georg Cantor helped to demystify the concept of infinity by encouraging a

systematic study of the infinite. Cantor believed that his mathematical talent was given to

him so that he could serve the Catholic Church. In 1896, he told Esser, “From me,

Christian Philosophy will be offered for the first time the true theory of the infinite” (qtd.

in Dauben 147). Cantor emphasized the study of pure mathematics, and he encouraged

the study of mathematical theory with no restrictions based on the applications of

mathematics to other sciences. However, Cantor preferred to use the term free

mathematics instead of pure mathematics. He stated, “Because of this extraordinary

position which distinguishes mathematics from all other sciences, and which produces an

explanation for the relatively free and easy way of pursuing it, it especially deserves the

name of free mathematics, a designation which I, if I had the choice, would prefer to the

now customary pure mathematics” (qtd. in Dauben 132). Other mathematicians were

impressed with Cantor’s work. David Hilbert stated, “No one will expel us from the

paradise that Cantor has created” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 281).

Batchelor 29

5. Cardinal Numbers and One-to-One Correspondence.

Georg Cantor recognized that mathematicians needed a method for comparing the

sizes of sets. The term equinumerosity is used to describe sets that have the same size

(Dunham, Genius 253). Cantor studied the concept of one-to-one correspondence. He

developed several examples to show that one does not need the ability to count objects in

order to make a determination of whether two sets are equinumerous. The cardinality or

power of a set is the number of elements that are contained in the set (Maor 253). Two

subsets belong to the same equivalence class if they have the same cardinal number

(Cohen 65). Cantor stated the following definition of equivalent sets.

Definition. Two sets M and N are equivalent … if it is possible to put them, by some

law, in such a relation to one another that to every element of each one of them

corresponds one and only one element of the other (Dunham, Genius 253).

Mathematicians say that two sets have the same cardinality or power if they satisfy this

definition and are equivalent (Maor 253). Cantor’s definition is very important because it

does not require the sets to be finite. One can use the definition to compare infinite sets.

Other mathematicians were not pleased with Cantor’s concept of the completed infinite.

They preferred to restrict the analysis of infinity to the study of the potential infinite.

Gauss stated, “… I protest above all against the use of an infinite quantity as a completed

one, which in mathematics is never allowed. The Infinite is only a manner of speaking

…” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 254). Consider the two sets of numbers (the set of natural

numbers) and E, the set of even natural numbers. Cantor showed that based on his

definition, the sets and E have the same cardinality. This means that the two sets have

the same size. Cantor also showed that the sets and (the set of all integers) have the

Batchelor 30

same cardinality. Georg Cantor stated that any set that could be placed in a one-to-one

correspondence with was denumerable or countably infinite. He introduced the

transfinite cardinal number 0א to represent the number of items contained in a countably

infinite set (Maor 57). Cantor studied the concept of well-ordered sets. All nonempty

subsets of a well-ordered set must contain a least element. The concept of well-ordered

sets was the basis for Cantor’s theory of ordinal numbers. Cantor explained that the

ordinal numbers represent the different order types for well-ordered sets. Cantor showed

that one can add ordinal numbers, but this kind of addition is not commutative

(Laubenbacher 62).

Georg Cantor used the set of natural numbers, , as the basis for extending the

number system beyond the finite realm. Let M denote the cardinality of the set M.

Cantor next considered , the set of rational numbers. Between any two integers, there

exist an infinite number of rational numbers. Based on this information, it would appear

that there are more rational numbers than natural numbers. However, Cantor showed that

Q .This means that the set of rational numbers is countably infinite (Dauben 79) .0א =

Based on Cantor’s definition, the number of rational numbers equals the number of

natural numbers. However, the collection of all real numbers is a non-denumerable set. In

1874, Cantor showed that no interval of real numbers can be placed in a one-to-one

correspondence with the set of natural numbers. A continuum is an interval containing

real numbers. Mathematicians refer to the interval (0,1) as the unit interval. Cantor

proved that the interval of real numbers between 0 and 1 (the unit interval) is not

countably infinite (Dauben 51). This theorem can be proved using the method of proof by

contradiction. Cantor used a diagonalization process to show that many infinite sets have

Batchelor 31

cardinality 0א. The interval of real numbers between 0 and 1 is infinite, and Cantor proved

that it has a higher “degree” of infinity than the set of natural numbers. The entire set of

real numbers, , has the same cardinality as the interval (0,1) (Dunham, Genius 263).

Georg Cantor tried to formalize the concepts of less than and greater than with

regard to transfinite cardinal numbers. Cantor stated the following definition for the

ordering of transfinite cardinal numbers:

Definition. For two sets A and B, A B if there is a one-to-one correspondence from

all points of A to a subset of the points of B (Dunham, Genius 268).

Cantor then defined strict orderings, stating that A B if A B , but there is not a one-

to-one correspondence between the elements of A and B. Cantor proved that there does

not exist a one-to-one correspondence between and (0,1). He showed that N < (0,1) . By

substitution, this implies that 0א < c. After establishing that it is possible to compare the

cardinalities of two sets, Cantor made the following assertion: If A B and B A , then

A = B (Dunham, Genius 270). Ernst Schröder and Felix Bernstein independently proved

this result, so mathematicians now call it the Schröder-Bernstein Theorem. One can use

the Schröder-Bernstein Theorem in order to determine the cardinality of the set I (the set

of all irrational numbers). The fact that I is not a denumerable set implies that I .0א <

Therefore, the set of irrational numbers represents a subset of the real numbers. One can

express this relationship symbolically as I c. In addition, there exists a one-to-one

correspondence between all real numbers and some irrational numbers. One can express

this relationship as c I . Applying the Schröder-Bernstein theorem, the conclusion is that

I = c (Maor 63). Cantor wanted to determine whether there were any cardinal numbers

Batchelor 32

greater than c. He considered the interval (0,1) and the square bounded by the interval

(0,1) on the x-axis and by the interval (0,1) on the y-axis. In 1877, Cantor discovered that

a one-to-one correspondence exists between the square and the interval. After making

this discovery, Cantor exclaimed, “I see it, but I do not believe it!” (qtd. in Dauben 55).

The power set of a set consists of all subsets of the original set. The power set of

the set A is denoted P[A]. For example, let A = {1,2,3}. Then,

P[A] = {φ, {1}, {2}, {3}, {1,2}, {1,3}, {2,3}, {1,2,3}}. A set containing n elements will

always have 2n subsets. One can express this as P[A] = 2

n. Georg Cantor showed that a

power set always contains more elements than the set from which it was generated (Maor

253). This is called Cantor’s Theorem, and it states that for every set A, A < P[A].

Cantor’s Theorem applies to finite sets and infinite sets. In order to find a set that has

cardinality greater then c, Cantor considered the set P[(0,1)]. Applying Cantor’s

Theorem, one can obtain the result P[(0,1)] > (0,1) = c. This implies that P[(0,1)] > c.

Next, Cantor considered the power set of P[(0,1)]. Applying Cantor’s Theorem,

]P[P[(0,1)] > P[(0,1)] . By repeating this process indefinitely, one can obtain the following

increasing sequence of numbers:

c < P[(0,1)] > 0א < )]]1,0[(P[P < )]]]P[P[P[(0,1 < ,1)]]]]P[P[P[P[(0 < (Dunham,

Genius 277). Georg Cantor made the following statement about his views with regard to

the infinite: “This view, which I consider to be the sole correct one, is held by only a few.

While possibly I am the very first in history to take this position so explicitly, with all of

its logical consequences, I know for sure that I shall not be the last!” (qtd. in Dunham,

Genius 280). The following logical paradox is a direct result of Cantor’s Theorem. Let U

represent the universal set, or the set of all sets. Since U contains all possible sets, one

Batchelor 33

cannot possibly enlarge it. Next, consider the power set P[U]. Cantor’s Theorem implies

that P[U]> U . Therefore, P[U] is a larger set than U. This represents a logical

contradiction (Maor 255). When mathematicians formally axiomatized set theory, they

carefully chose the axioms in such a way that they prohibited this kind of logical paradox.

During the 1600s, Galileo Galilei discovered an important paradox related to one-to-one

correspondences. He showed that the number of perfect squares equals the number of

natural numbers. He reasoned that since not every natural number is a perfect square,

there must be more natural numbers than perfect squares. He also observed that the

perfect squares become progressively less abundant as the natural numbers increase.

Galileo stated, “The attributes larger, smaller, and equal have no place either in

comparing infinite quantities with each other or comparing infinite with finite quantities”

(qtd. in Laubenbacher 55).

In his Contributions to the Founding of the Theory of Transfinite Numbers,

Cantor addressed the concepts of less than and greater than with regard to cardinal

numbers. He established that for cardinal numbers a, b, and c, if a < b and b < c, then

a < c. Cantor also stated the trichotomy principle, which says that for any two cardinal

numbers m and n, either m = n, m < n, or m > n. Cantor addressed the concepts of adding

and multiplying cardinal numbers. Let A and B denote two sets that have no elements in

common. The notation AB represents the union of A and B. Let A and B have cardinal

numbers a and b, respectively. Cantor showed that a + b = BA , and the following

additional properties apply to the addition of cardinal numbers (Dauben 173). For

cardinal number addition, a + b = b + a. For cardinal numbers a, b, and c,

Batchelor 34

a+(b+c) = (a+b)+c. The following equation represents the definition of multiplication of

cardinal numbers: a*b = BA , where AB denotes the Cartesian product of A and B.

For the multiplication of cardinal numbers, a*b = b*a, and a*(b*c) = (a*b)*c. In addition,

a*(b+c) = a*b + a*c. These equations represent the associative, commutative, and

distributive properties for the addition and multiplication of cardinal numbers. In Section

4 of his Contributions to the Founding of the Theory of Transfinite Numbers, Cantor

addressed the concept of exponentiation with regard to cardinal numbers. The following

properties apply to the exponentiation of cardinal numbers. Let a, b, and c represent

cardinal numbers. Then ab*a

c = a

b+c, (a*b)

c = a

c*b

c, and (a

b)c = a

b*c (Dauben 174). Now

let X represent the totality of real numbers x for which 0 x 1. Let X denote the

cardinal number of X. Then, X = 2א

0. Georg Cantor defined the exponentiation of cardinal

numbers based on the set of functions from one set to another set (Laubenbacher 84). In

Section 6 of his Contributions to the Founding of the Theory of Transfinite Numbers,

Cantor addressed the concept of 0א, the smallest cardinal number that is transfinite.

Cantor referred to sets that have finite cardinal numbers as finite aggregates. He referred

to sets that have transfinite cardinal numbers as transfinite aggregates. Cantor stated the

equation, 0א = v , referring to the totality of cardinal numbers v, which are finite. He

showed that 0א = 1 + 0א, and he established that 0א is greater than μ, where μ denotes any

finite number. Cantor also showed that 0א = 0א*0א (Laubenbacher 86). In 1891, Cantor

wrote a paper entitled On an Elementary Question in the Theory of Sets. Let a denote any

cardinal number. In this paper, Cantor established that for all a, 2a > a. More specifically,

Therefore, the set of real numbers has cardinality greater than the cardinality of .0א < 0

Batchelor 35

the set of natural numbers. In addition, the set of real numbers has cardinality greater than

the cardinality of the set of rational numbers (Maor 64).

Bernhard Bolzano, an Austrian mathematician, emphasized the importance of a

one-to-one correspondence between a set and a proper subset of the set (Hall 45). A one-

to-one correspondence between sets exists if one can pair the elements of two sets in a

manner such that every element of one set is matched with a unique element of the other

set. Cantor’s Continuum Hypothesis states that there does not exist a transfinite cardinal

number strictly between 0א and c (Dunham, Genius 281). David Hilbert referred to

Cantor’s Continuum Hypothesis as “a very plausible theorem, which, nevertheless, in

spite of the most strenuous efforts, no one has succeeded in proving” (qtd. in Dunham,

Genius 282). Later, Kurt Gödel used the axiomatized set theory to prove that Cantor’s

Continuum Hypothesis is logically consistent with all of the other axioms of set theory.

In 1963, Paul Cohen showed that one could not use the axiomatized set theory to prove

the Continuum Hypothesis. Therefore, Cantor’s Continuum Hypothesis is independent of

the other axioms of set theory (Dauben 269). Cantor was very confident about the

validity of his theory. In 1888, he stated, “My theory stands as firm as a rock; every

arrow directed against it will return quickly to its archer. How do I know this? Because I

have studied it from all sides for many years; because I have examined all objections

which have ever been made against the infinite numbers; and above all because I have

followed its roots, so to speak, to the first infallible cause of all created things” (qtd. in

Dunham, Genius 283).

Batchelor 36

6. The Uncountable Set of Real Numbers.

Georg Cantor studied the properties of rational and irrational numbers. The

decimal representation of a rational number either terminates or has a group of repeating

digits. The decimal representation of an irrational number does not terminate or have a

group of repeating digits. Between any two rational numbers, there exist an infinite

number of irrational numbers. Between any two irrational numbers, there exist an infinite

number of rational numbers. However, the set of rational numbers and the set of irrational

numbers are not interchangeable collections of numbers. Cantor recognized the need for a

method of comparing the sizes of sets. Mathematicians use the term equinumerosity to

describe sets that have the same size. Cantor defined set equivalence and emphasized the

importance of one-to-one correspondences. He studied the concept of infinity, and he

believed that the concept of the completed infinite was a legitimate idea (Dauben 172).

Cantor analyzed the set of natural numbers and the set of even natural numbers. Based on

his definition, the two sets have the same cardinality. In addition, the set of natural

numbers has the same cardinality as the set of all integers. Cantor’s definition stated that

any set that could be placed in a one-to-one correspondence with the set of natural

numbers was denumerable or countably infinite. He introduced the transfinite cardinal

number 0א to represent the number of items contained in a countably infinite set

(Dunham, Genius 255).

Georg Cantor proved that the set of rational numbers is denumerable. However,

the collection of all real numbers is a non-denumerable set (Laubenbacher 57). In 1874,

Cantor showed that no interval of real numbers can be placed in a one-to-one

correspondence with the set of natural numbers (Dunham, Genius 259). A continuum is

Batchelor 37

an interval containing real numbers, and the interval (0,1) is called the unit interval.

Cantor proved that the unit interval is not countably infinite. One can prove this theorem

using the method of proof by contradiction (Dunham, Genius 259). He showed that the

interval of real numbers between 0 and 1 has a higher “degree” of infinity than the set of

natural numbers, even though both sets are infinite sets. Cantor formalized the concept of

ordering of cardinal numbers. He succeeded in producing a hierarchy of infinite sets, and

he made several important discoveries regarding transfinite cardinal numbers. In 1910,

Bertrand Russell stated, “The solution of the difficulties which formerly surrounded the

mathematical infinite is probably the greatest achievement of which our age has to boast”

(qtd. in Maor 64).

7. Limits and Convergence.

The concept of the limit is one of the most important concepts of calculus (Hall

146). Newton tried to address the concept of continuous functions, and he developed his

idea of ultimate ratios. The ultimate ratios that Newton described were actually the limits

of mathematical ratios. Newton stated that a quantity’s ultimate ratio “… is to be

understood as the ratio of the quantities, not before they vanish, nor after, but that with

which they vanish” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 248). Newton’s theory of ultimate ratios

was flawed because the ratio 0/0 is undefined. Leibniz also studied limits, and he

developed a theory of infinitely small quantities. An infinitely small quantity was a

number that was not equal to zero but had the property that one could not decrease it any

further. Leibniz’s statements about the infinitely small quantities were often imprecise.

For example, he stated,

It will be sufficient if, when we speak of … infinitely small quantities (i.e., the very

Batchelor 38

least of those within our knowledge), it is understood that we mean quantities that

are … indefinitely small …. If anyone wishes to understand these [the infinitely

small] as the ultimate things …, it can be done …, ay even though he think that

such things are utterly impossible; it will be sufficient simply to make use of them

as a tool that has advantages for the purpose of calculation, just as the algebraists

retain imaginary roots with great profit. (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 249)

Bishop George Berkeley was not pleased with the ambiguity of the mathematicians’

statements. He made the following famous comment: “And what are these fluxions? The

velocities of evanescent increments. And what are these same evanescent increments?

They are neither finite quantities, nor quantities infinitely small, nor yet nothing. May we

not call them the ghosts of departed quantities…?” (qtd. in Dunham, Genius 250).

Mathematicians recognized that they needed to make the concept of the limit

more logically precise. Augustin-Louis Cauchy defined limits and used his definition to

prove major theorems of calculus (Laubenbacher 141). Karl Weierstrass provided the

following definition, which is called the static definition of the limit.

Definition. L is the limit of the function f(x) as x approaches a if for any > 0, there

exists a > 0 so that, if 0 < x – a < , then f(x) – L < (Dunham, Genius 251).

The idea of convergence is an important concept of calculus. Consider the sum,

1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 + . When a finite number of terms of the series are added,

the sum will never equal 1. This series has the property that it converges to 1. In other

words, the number 1 is the limit of the series as the number of terms approaches infinity.

The concepts of convergence and limits are fundamental for the study of calculus.

Batchelor 39

8. The Geometric and Harmonic Series.

The geometric series is the most famous convergent series. A geometric

progression grows very quickly, and compound interest is an example of a geometric

progression. The geometric series has the form, α + α2 + α

3 + α

4 + α

5 + + α

k + , where

-1 < α < 1 (Dunham, Genius 194). This restriction on the values of α is necessary because

the values of the terms of the series must become progressively smaller as one progresses

through the series. Radioactive decay represents an infinite geometric progression. A

substance’s half-life is the amount of time necessary for a quantity of the substance to

decay to one-half of the initial quantity (Maor 31). One can predict the limit of some

geometric series using the following formula: a + aq + aq2 + aq

3 + = a/(1 – q), if and

only if -1 < q < 1 (Dunham, Genius 194). A convergent series has a distinct sum, but a

divergent series does not. Applications of infinite geometric series occur in geometry,

engineering, and physics. Euler devoted a great deal of attention to geometric series. He

discovered that 1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + 1/16 + 1/25 + = (π2)/6 (Dunham, Master 47). This is

considered one of the most remarkable theorems of mathematical analysis (Maor 35).

Niels Henrik Abel once said, “With the exception of the geometric series, there does not

exist in all of mathematics a single infinite series whose sum has been determined

rigorously” (qtd. in Maor 29).

The harmonic series consists of the sum of the reciprocals of the counting

numbers. One can express this series as 1/1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + 1/5 + (Maor 26). The

first person to prove that the harmonic series diverges was the French scholar Nicolae

Oresme. The terms of the harmonic series become progressively smaller, but the series

does not converge. When one adds the first million terms of the series, the sum is

Batchelor 40

approximately equal to 14.357. When one adds the first trillion terms, the sum is

approximately equal to 28. While the value of the sum of the series increases very slowly,

the series does not converge to a finite sum. Johann Bernoulli studied the harmonic

series, and mathematicians referred to the series as a “pathological counterexample.” This

means that mathematicians considered the behavior of the series to be very bizarre and

counterintuitive (Dunham, Genius 194). The sum of the reciprocals of all prime numbers

also diverges. However, the sum of the reciprocals of all of the twin primes converges to

a finite value (Maor 28).

9. Fermat’s Theorems.

Pierre de Fermat was a great French mathematician. In 1631, he received a degree

in law, and he practiced law in France. During his spare time, he conducted research

regarding mathematical concepts. During the 1600s, he made significant contributions to

the study of calculus, and he contributed to the study of analytic geometry. However, he

is most famous for his work in number theory (Laubenbacher 159). He studied the perfect

numbers extensively, and he analyzed the previous work of Diophantus. He wrote the

following comments in his own copy of the Arithmetica: “But it is impossible to divide a

cube into two cubes, or a fourth power [quadratoquadratum] into two fourth powers, or

generally any power beyond the square into two like powers; of this I have found a

remarkable demonstration. This margin is too narrow to contain it” (qtd. in Dunham,

Genius 159). Fermat had the irritating habit of claiming to have proven theorems without

providing proofs of them. Fermat’s statement represents an unsolved problem in

mathematics. Fermat stated the following theorem, which Euler proved in 1736.

Batchelor 41

Fermat’s Little Theorem. Given a prime number p and an integer a that is not divisible

by p, then ap-1

has remainder 1 under division by p. Furthermore, there exists a least

positive integer n such that an has remainder 1 under division by p, n divides p – 1,

and akn

has remainder 1 under division by p for all positive integers k (Laubenbacher

160). Based on this theorem, if a number with the form 2n – 1 is prime, then the

number n must also be prime.

In 1729, Goldbach wrote a letter to Euler, in which he made the following

statement: “Is Fermat’s observation known to you, that all numbers 22n + 1 are primes? He

said he could not prove it; nor has anyone else to my knowledge” (qtd. in Dunham,

Genius 229). Fermat’s observation would have represented a formula that

mathematicians could use to generate prime numbers. Euler considered the number

225 + 1 = 2

32 + 1 = 4,294,967,297. He showed that 4,294,967,297 = (641)(6,700,417).

Therefore, this is not a prime number, and Fermat’s claim is not valid in all cases. Primes

with the form 22n + 1 are called Fermat primes (Laubenbacher 160). Fermat stated the

following theorem, but he did not provide a proof of it.

Fermat’s Last Theorem. No cube can be split into two cubes, nor any biquadrate into

two biquadrates, nor generally any power beyond the second into two of the same kind

(Laubenbacher 164). This theorem states that for n > 2, the equation xn + y

n = z

n does

not have any integer solutions. Fermat claimed that he had proved this theorem, but he

did not provide a proof to other mathematicians. Many mathematicians made

unsuccessful attempts to prove Fermat’s Last Theorem. In 1993, Andrew Wiles finally

proved the theorem. He solved a mathematical problem that had stumped mathematicians

for about 300 years (Laubenbacher 156).

Batchelor 42

10. Geographic Maps and Inversion in a Circle.

Inversion in the unit circle is a fascinating concept related to the study of infinity.

Definition. An inversion is a specific transformation from a two-dimensional point set to

another two-dimensional set of points (Maor 88).

Consider the circle where O denotes the center, and the radius is 1. Let P denote a point

in the circle’s interior, and let OP denote the distance from O to P. The point P will be

“mapped” to a point Q on the ray OP . The distance from O to Q, denoted OQ, will be

determined by the formula, OQ = 1/OP. All points inside the circle will be mapped to

points outside the circle. All points outside the circle will be mapped to points inside the

circle. This inversion is symmetric. If Q denotes the image of P, then P will be the image

of Q. In addition, inversion in a circle is conformal or angle-preserving (Hartshorne 338).

The points along the unit circle will be mapped onto themselves. A straight line that does

not pass through the origin will be mapped onto a circle that passes through the origin.

Lines closer to the center O will result in larger image circles. The image of a parabola is

a cardioid. The image of an ellipse is a curve that corresponds to a fourth-degree equation

(Maor 90).

One important application of inversion is the making of geographic maps that

represent the earth on a two-dimensional surface. Cartography is the science of making

maps. A projection method must be used in order to represent the earth’s surface on a

two-dimensional map. In order to use a projection method, a cartographer must transform

each point on the earth’s surface onto a unique point on the map. The stereographic

projection is often used to represent the earth’s surface on a flat map. The parallels of

latitude are represented by concentric circles surrounding the north or south pole. The

Batchelor 43

meridians of longitude are represented by straight lines passing through the north or south

pole. The stereographic projection is conformal or angle-preserving (Maor 98). One can

use a sphere to represent a finite model of a plane, using the concept of inversion. A path

that crosses every meridian of longitude at the same angle is called a loxodrome. On a

stereographic projection map, a loxodrome will be represented by a logarithmic spiral.

Gerhardus Mercator, a Flemish geographer, developed a world map in which loxodromes

are represented by straight lines. In 1569, he published his map, which represents the

earth using a rectangular grid. Inversion is an important concept related to the science of

cartography (Maor 99).

11. Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity.

Albert Einstein is famous for his general theory of relativity. Astronomers

consider this theory very important, since it provides an explanation of the nature of the

universe. Einstein’s theory is consistent with Riemann’s theory of non-Euclidean

geometry (Laubenbacher 16). According to Einstein’s theory of gravitation, space and

time represent a single, four-dimensional entity. Scientists refer to this entity as the

space-time continuum. Every point in the space-time continuum is called an event.

Einstein defined a straight line as the path traveled by a ray of light. While Newton

believed in an infinite universe, Einstein believed that the universe is finite but

unbounded. Sir Arthur Eddington made the following comment regarding Einstein’s

theory.

There was just one place where [Einstein’s] theory did not seem to work properly,

and that was – infinity. I think Einstein showed his greatness in the simple and

drastic way in which he disposed of difficulties at infinity. He abolished infinity.

Batchelor 44

He slightly altered his equations so as to make space at great distances bend round

until it closed up. So that, if in Einstein’s space you keep going right on in one

direction, you do not get to infinity; you find yourself back at your starting-point

again. Since there was no longer any infinity, there could be no difficulties at

infinity. (qtd. in Maor 221)

Although many scientists were originally skeptical of Einstein’s theory, it has

withstood many tests. Most scientists now accept it as the best modern theory of the

universe (Laubenbacher 16). According to his theory of general relativity, a material

object cannot move faster than the speed of light. Light has a velocity of approximately

300,000 kilometers per second. According to his theory, a ray of light will be bent if it

passes through a major gravitational field. The field surrounding a large star is one

example of such a gravitational field. In 1919, Einstein’s theory passed an important test,

and this helped to satisfy the scientists who were previously skeptical of it. A total eclipse

of the sun occurred on May 29, 1919. Scientists went to Brazil and Africa’s west coast

and photographed the eclipse. The same region of the sky was photographed

approximately six months later. The locations of the stars on the two sets of pictures were

compared. The scientists determined that the positions of the stars had shifted by the

exact amount that Einstein’s theory predicted. Most scientists now regard Einstein’s

general theory of relativity as the best theory of the nature of the universe (Maor 133).

12. Special Categories of Numbers.

A real number r is algebraic if it satisfies an equation of the form,

anxn + an-1x

n-1 + an-2x

n-2 + + a1x + a0 = 0, with an, an-1, an-2, … , a1, and a0 representing

integers (Laubenbacher 57). A real number is transcendental if it is not algebraic. In

Batchelor 45

1873, Charles Hermite showed that e is a transcendental number. In 1882, F. Lindemann

showed that π is a transcendental number (Laubenbacher 58). In 1844, Joseph Liouville

provided the following example of a transcendental number:

10-1!

+ 10-2!

+ 10-3!

+ 10-4!

+ = 0.110001000000000000000001000. When Liouville

discovered this number, mathematicians regarded transcendental numbers as

mathematical oddities. However, in 1874, Cantor proved that most real numbers are

transcendental numbers (Maor 53). The fact that π is a transcendental number is

particularly important. Mathematicians have long wondered if it is possible to square a

circle, or to use a compass and straightedge to construct a square with an area equal to the

area of a specific circle. The fact that π is a transcendental number implies that this

construction is not possible (Maor 53).

Cantor proved that the set of all algebraic numbers is a countable set. This means

that the set of all algebraic numbers has the same cardinality as the set of natural

numbers. In 1851, Joseph Liouville proved a theorem stating that every interval of real

numbers must contain an infinite number of transcendental numbers. Cantor expanded on

Liouville’s work when he proved that all intervals of real numbers have cardinality

strictly larger than the cardinality of the natural numbers. Therefore, every interval of real

numbers must contain an infinite number of transcendental numbers (Laubenbacher 58).

This discovery led to the important distinction between the set of real numbers, which is a

continuous set, and the set of integers, which is a discrete set.

Amicable numbers are pairs of numbers such that the sum of the proper divisors

of the first number equals the second number, and the sum of the proper divisors of the

second number equals the first number. The numbers 220 and 284 are an example of a

Batchelor 46

pair of amicable numbers. Mathematicians have not determined whether there are an

infinite number of pairs of amicable numbers (Moews 2). A perfect whole number is a

whole number that equals the sum of its proper divisors. For example, 6 is perfect, since

6 = 1 + 2 + 3 (Laubenbacher 159). Ancient Greek mathematicians were familiar with four

perfect numbers. These numbers were 6, 28, 496, and 8128. Nicomachus was an early

Greek mathematician. He recognized the rarity of perfect numbers. He stated that the

perfect numbers were remarkable, “even as fair and excellent things are few … while

ugly and evil ones are widespread” (qtd. in Dunham, Master 2). Euclid studied the

perfect numbers extensively. He stated the following proposition as Proposition 36 of

Book IX of the Elements:

Proposition. If as many numbers as we please beginning from a unit be set out

continuously in double proportion, until the sum of all becomes prime, and if the sum

multiplied into the last make some number, the product will be perfect (Dunham,

Master 3).

The following theorem is equivalent to Euclid’s proposition:

Theorem. If 2k – 1 is a prime number and if N = 2

k-1(2

k – 1), then N is a perfect number

(Laubenbacher 159).

Proof. Let p = 2k – 1 denote a prime number. Let N = 2

k-1(2

k – 1) = 2

k-1p. The number N

can be factored into prime numbers in exactly one way. Therefore, the proper divisors of

N will only contain the prime numbers p and 2. One can express the sum of these proper

divisors as follows:

Let N′ = Sum of all proper divisors of N, where N = 2k-1

p.

N′ = 1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + + 2k-1

+ p + 2p + 4p + 8p + 2k-2

p

Batchelor 47

N′ = (1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + + 2k-1

) + p(1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + + 2k-2

)

N′ = (2k – 1) + p(2

k-1 – 1)

N′ = p + p2k-1

– p

N′ = p2k-1

N′ = N

Therefore, the number N is equal to the sum of all of the proper divisors of N. N is a

perfect number (Dunham, Master 4). One can apply this theorem in the following way.

Let k = 3. The number 23 – 1 = 8 – 1 = 7 is a prime number. Then, the number

22(2

3 – 1) = 4*7 = 28 is a perfect number. Prime numbers with the form p = 2

k – 1 are

called Mersenne primes (Laubenbacher 160). Mathematicians have devoted a great deal

of effort to the search for Mersenne primes. In 1772, Euler told Daniel Bernoulli that he

had proved that 231

– 1 is a prime number. The fact that 231

– 1 is prime implies that

230

(231

– 1) = 2,305,843,008,139,952,128 is a perfect number. During the early part of the

1800s, a mathematician stated that this number was “… the greatest [perfect number] that

will ever be discovered, for, as they are merely curious without being useful, it is not

likely that any person will attempt to find one beyond it” (qtd. in Dunham, Master 5).

However, mathematicians have discovered larger Mersenne primes. Computers have

helped with the search for larger Mersenne primes and perfect numbers. In 1998,

mathematicians discovered that the number 23021377

– 1 is a prime number. Euclid’s

theorem then implies that 23021376

(23021377

– 1) represents a perfect number. This perfect

number contains over 1,800,000 digits (Dunham, Master 5).

The question of whether or not there are any odd perfect numbers represents an

important unsolved problem in mathematics (Laubenbacher 160). Carolus Bovillus

Batchelor 48

provided a proof that all perfect numbers are even in 1509. However, his proof was

flawed; he had assumed that all perfect numbers must have the structure, 2k-1

(2k – 1).

This assumption is not valid, since no one has successfully proved that every perfect

number must have this structure. In 1747, Euler stated, “Whether … there are any odd

perfect numbers is a most difficult question” (qtd. in Dunham, Master 13). While no odd

perfect numbers have ever been discovered, no one has ever proved that they cannot

exist. Mathematicians have proved several properties that any odd perfect number must

have. If there is an odd perfect number, it must be greater than 10300

(Dunham, Master

15). In addition, any odd perfect number has to contain a minimum of eight different

prime factors. J.J. Sylvester was very skeptical about the likelihood that any odd perfect

numbers actually exist. In 1888, he made the following statement: “… a prolonged

meditation on the subject has satisfied me that the existence of any one such – its escape,

so to say, from the complex web of conditions which hem it in on all sides – would be

little short of a miracle” (qtd. in Dunham, Master 16).

13. Non-Euclidean Geometry.

The concept of non-Euclidean geometry has caused mathematicians and scientists

to reexamine their understanding of the physical world. This concept was “inspired” by

the question of what properties parallel lines have at great distances from the observer.

Euclidean geometry is based on a set of ten axioms that Euclid accepted as true without

proof. The following postulate is Euclid’s Parallel Postulate, and it is Euclid’s most

controversial postulate (Hartshorne 296).

Parallel Postulate. If a straight line falling on two straight lines makes the interior angles

on the same side less than two right angles, the two straight lines, if produced

Batchelor 49

indefinitely, meet on that side on which the two angles are less than two right angles

(Maor 119).

This was Euclid’s original statement of the Parallel Postulate. The following is a modern

way of stating the Parallel Postulate.

Postulate. Given a line ℓ and a point P that is not located on ℓ, there exists exactly one

line m, located in the plane of P and ℓ, which is parallel to the line ℓ (Maor 119).

Some mathematicians did not believe that the Parallel Postulate was as self-evident as

Euclid’s other axioms. Proclus stated, “This [Parallel Postulate] ought even to be struck

out of the Postulates altogether; for it is a theorem involving many difficulties, which

Ptolemy, in a certain book, set himself to solve, and it requires for the demonstration of it

a number of definitions as well as theorems” (qtd. in Laubenbacher 3). During the 1600s,

some mathematicians believed that Euclid’s Parallel Postulate was actually a theorem

(Hall 108). Many mathematicians made unsuccessful attempts to prove the Parallel

Postulate using Euclid’s other axioms. Girolano Saccheri, an Italian priest, tried to prove

the Parallel Postulate using the method of proof by contradiction.

Carl Friedrich Gauss suspected that the Parallel Postulate was independent of

Euclid’s other axioms. Since Gauss did not publish this conclusion, Nicolai Lobachevsky

and Janos Bolyai took credit for discovering non-Euclidean geometry (Laubenbacher 13).

These mathematicians assumed that two or more parallels to a given line can pass

through a point that is not located on that line. This directly implies that given a point P

not located on a line ℓ, there exist infinitely many lines through P that are parallel to ℓ.

Hyperbolic geometry is based on this new postulate, along with Euclid’s other nine

axioms (Hartshorne 373). In hyperbolic geometry, the angles of a triangle have a sum less

Batchelor 50

than 180°, and this sum depends on the triangle’s size (Maor 125). Euclid’s second axiom

states that one can extend a line indefinitely in either direction. Bernhard Riemann

replaced this with an axiom stating that a straight line is not bounded. Riemann

emphasized the importance of distinguishing between infinite extent and unboundedness.

Riemann’s theory of geometry states that through a point not on a line, there exist no

parallels to the line. Riemann’s theory of geometry is called elliptic geometry. In elliptic

geometry, the angles of a triangle have a sum greater than 180°. This sum depends on the

triangle’s size. In addition, if two triangles are similar, then they are congruent

(Laubenbacher 16).

A great circle is one that divides a sphere into two hemispheres that are equal. For

example, the equator is a great circle if the earth is assumed to be a sphere. A sphere can

serve as a model of elliptic geometry (Hall 103). The tractroid represents a model of

hyperbolic geometry (Maor 130). Gauss stated, “Finite man cannot claim to be able to

regard the infinite as something to be grasped by means of ordinary methods of

observation” (qtd. in Maor 131). He was concerned with the implications of non-

Euclidean geometry with regard to physics. He conducted an experiment in which he

measured a large triangle’s angles, but he found the sum to be equal to 180°. In 1868,

Eugenio Beltrami proved that non-Euclidean geometry is as logically acceptable as

Euclidean geometry (Dunham, Genius 56). In 1916, Albert Einstein published a theory of

gravitation in which space and time represent a single, four-dimensional entity. This

entity is called the space-time continuum. He defined a straight line as the path traveled

by a ray of light. He believed that rays of light are bent when a strong gravitational field

is present. Einstein’s general theory of relativity is consistent with Riemann’s theory of

Batchelor 51

geometry. Although Einstein’s theory was originally met with skepticism, it has

withstood many tests. Most scientists accept Einstein’s theory as the best modern

scientific theory of the universe (Laubenbacher 16).

14. Religion and Infinity.

After Georg Cantor became disillusioned with his study of mathematics, he began

to devote most of his energy to the study of theology and philosophy. The Catholic

Church objected to Cantor’s theory of the actual infinite. Many theologians believed that

Cantor’s concept of the actual infinite was not congruent with their concept of God.

However, Pope Leo XIII believed that natural science could help to further the goals of

the Catholic Church (Dauben 141). He tried to reconcile scientific discoveries with

religious scripture. In addition, his enthusiasm for Cantor’s work helped Cantor to

overcome his setbacks and to become interested in mathematics again (Dauben 142). The

Jewish kabbalists believed that God had a transcendental nature, and their belief in God

led them to the study of the infinite (Maor 179). In 1886, Gutberlet stated that he feared

that mathematical infinity could represent a challenge to the absolute infinity associated

with God’s existence. However, Cantor believed that the transfinite numbers did not

diminish the extent of God’s greatness. Rather, he believed that the existence of these

numbers enhanced it (Dauben 143). Several theologians and philosophers in the Catholic

Church expressed an interest in Cantor’s work. Gutberlet presented Cantor’s work in

order to support his own ideas against the opposition of some theologians. Thomas Esser

participated in a complex study of the implications of Cantor’s work with regard to

theology. Cardinal Johannes Franzelin initially objected to Cantor’s views regarding

infinity. However, he later accepted Cantor’s theory. He reassured Cantor that his theory

Batchelor 52

did not represent a theological threat to religious beliefs. Cantor believed that God

inspired him to complete his work (Dauben 147).

The Kabbalah states that God does not reveal Himself directly, but only through

His deeds and virtues. In 1638, Galileo Galilei stated, “Infinities and indivisibles

transcend our finite understanding, the former on account of their magnitude, the latter

because of their smallness; Imagine what they are when combined” (qtd. in Maor 179).

Followers of Judaism believed that infinity represented their search for the divine spirit.

Followers of Buddhism and Hinduism believed in eternity and the infinite reincarnation

of the human soul. The Christian concept of the resurrection led to the building of large

cathedrals and churches (Dauben 146). In 1711, Sir Christopher Wren completed

building St. Paul’s Cathedral (Maor 182). The Gothic cathedral provided visitors with the

illusion that they could reach infinite heights. William Wordsworth referred to the Gothic

cathedral’s “spires whose silent finger points to heaven” (qtd. in Maor 181).

15. Astronomy and Infinity.

Throughout history, people have wondered whether the universe is finite. Edmond

Halley once stated, “… I have heard urged that if the number of Fixed Stars were more

than finite, the whole superficies of their apparent Sphere would be luminous …” (qtd. in

Maor 204). Many people have wondered whether the universe has an outer boundary.

Albert Einstein said, “We never cease to stand like curious children before the great

Mystery into which we are born” (qtd. in Maor 185). The early Greeks transformed

astronomy into a science. Early astronomical models placed the earth at the center of the

universe. Aristotle’s model was complex, consisting of 56 spheres which surrounded the

earth. Democritus first suggested that the Milky Way could be a large collection of stars,

Batchelor 53

not a continuous band of light. Hipparchus developed the science of trigonometry, which

he used to calculate the distance between the earth and the moon. In the Almagest,

Ptolemy asserted that the earth was located at the universe’s center. The Roman Catholic

Church officially accepted this theory (Dunham, Genius 106). Many astronomers were

afraid to publicize their theories because they were afraid of how the Catholic Church

might react to them. Giordano Bruno was killed in 1600 after he insisted that the universe

is infinite (Maor 198). Galileo Galilei was under house arrest for the last years of his life,

and the Catholic Church forced him to recant his theory (Maor 200). In 1600, William

Gilbert stated, “How immeasurable then must be the space which stretches to those

remotest of the fixed stars! How vast and immense the depth of that imaginary sphere!

How far removed from the earth must the most widely separated stars be and at a distance

transcending all sight, all skill and thought!” (qtd. in Maor 190). Nicolaus of Cusa

believed that the universe was infinite and did not have a center. He was fascinated with

the concept of mathematical infinity.

In 1473, Nicolaus Copernicus was born in Poland (Maor 192). He began his study

of astronomy at the University of Cracow. In 1507, he returned to Poland and became

canon of the church of Frauenburg. Copernicus believed that the sun was located at the

universe’s center, and the planets revolved around the sun. His fourth proposition stated,

“The heavens are immense in comparison with the earth.” Copernicus was afraid to

publish his work, apparently fearing the reaction of the Catholic Church. In 1610, Galileo

Galilei discovered four moons of Jupiter. He discovered that Venus exhibited phases

similar to those of the moon. This served as evidence that Venus orbited the sun, not the

earth. Galileo stated, “The book of Nature is … written in mathematical characters” (qtd.

Batchelor 54

in Laubenbacher 101). Kepler stated his three laws of planetary motion. These laws

describe the motion of the planets around the sun. The Cosmological Principle states that

the universe is isotropic and homogeneous. This means that the basic laws of physics are

the same at all locations in the universe (Maor 218).

In 1755, Immanuel Kant, a philosopher, suggested that the universe is composed

of many galaxies. He identified Cepheid variables, which are stars that can be used to

determine a galaxy’s distance from the earth. Lucretius stated, “The universe is not

bounded in any direction. If it were, it would necessarily have a limit somewhere. But

clearly a thing cannot have a limit unless there is something outside to limit it … In all

dimensions alike, on this side or that, upward or downward through the universe, there is

no end” (qtd. in Maor 216). Based on Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, it

appears that the universe is finite but unbounded (Laubenbacher 16). Since the discovery

of subatomic particles, scientists have searched for the ultimate particle from which all

matter is created. The question of whether there really is an ultimate particle represents

an important unsolved scientific problem. People have often wondered if intelligent life

exists somewhere else in the universe. Scientists have used radio telescopes to search for

intelligent messages from other solar systems (Maor 229). A child once asked Einstein

how long the earth will exist. Einstein replied, “There has been an earth for a little more

than a billion years. As for the question of the end of it I advise: Wait and see” (qtd. in

Maor 182).

Batchelor 55

16. Infinity and Art.

Maurits Cornelis Escher was born in Leeuwarden, Holland in 1898. He began his

artistic career as a landscape painter. Escher painted many pictures of small Italian and

Spanish towns. Later in his career, his art depicted mathematical concepts such as

infinity, reflections, and inversions. M.C. Escher’s depictions of infinity fall into three

main categories: limits, endless cycles, and regular divisions of a plane. Escher’s pictures

were not always consistent with scientific laws. He stated, “I cannot help mocking our

unwavering certainties. It is, for example, great fun deliberately to confuse two and three

dimensions, the plane and space, or to poke fun at gravity” (qtd. in Maor 166). Escher did

not usually depict abstract images. His paintings depicted objects such as horses, people,

and ants. He stated, “The Moors were masters in the filling of a surface with congruent

figures … What a pity it was that Islam forbade the making of images. In their

tessellations they restricted themselves to figures with abstracted geometrical shapes … I

find this restriction all the more unacceptable because it is the recognizability of the

components of my own patterns that is the reason for my never-ceasing interest in this

domain” (qtd. in Maor 168). Escher’s pictures displayed a great deal of symmetry

(Laubenbacher 53). His patterns included examples of reflections, translations, and

rotations. His pictures represent at least 13 of the 17 symmetry groups of the plane.

Escher made the following statement about the relationship between mathematics and art:

“By keenly confronting the enigmas that surround us, and by considering and analyzing

the observations that I had made, I ended up in the domain of mathematics. Although I

am absolutely without training in the exact sciences, I often seem to have more in

common with mathematicians than with my fellow-artists” (qtd. in Maor 164).

Batchelor 56

Several other artists depicted infinity through their art. Max Bill created a

sculpture of a Möbius strip, which he called Endless Ribbon. He did not realize that the

Möbius strip had already been discovered. When he learned this, he stated, “Sometime

later I was informed that my creation, which I thought I had discovered or invented, was

only an artistic interpretation of the so-called Möbius strip, and theoretically identical to

it … I was shocked by the fact that I was not the first one to discover this object. I

therefore stopped all further research in this direction for a while” (qtd. in Maor 140).

One can use mirrors to produce infinitely repeating images. Sir David Brewster, a

Scottish physicist, invented the kaleidoscope in 1816. In a kaleidoscope, the tube contains

two mirrors, which are usually placed 60 degrees apart. If four mirrors are placed to form

a square, the images will tile the plane with squares. When artists fill a plane with a

repeating design, they can use three kinds of transformations: rotations, reflections, and

translations. The ornamental band is the simplest infinite pattern. It consists of infinite

repetitions of one figure along a one-dimensional strip. Group theory is a branch of

algebra that involves analyzing infinite patterns (Laubenbacher 254). Johann Sebastian

Bach’s music showed that the composer had a great deal of mathematical talent. His

music displayed a tremendous amount of symmetry. Joan Miró, a Spanish artist, depicted

an endless void in his work, Towards the Infinite. Leonardo da Vinci was an expert in the

art of perspective. An artist using this technique tries to depict what a viewer’s eye would

actually see when viewing a scene (Maor 109).

Projective geometry is the branch of geometry that focuses on the properties of

figures that do not change under a projection. A projection is the collection of light rays

that come from an object and converge at the viewer’s eye. The properties of parallel

Batchelor 57

lines change under a projection. In projective geometry, parallel lines are defined to meet

at the point at infinity. Projective geometry allows mathematicians to make the

generalization that any two lines in a plane meet at exactly one point. Every family of

parallel lines must have a unique point where all of the lines intersect. The line at infinity

consists of the collection of all points at infinity (Maor 109). The following principle is

an important part of the theory of projective geometry.

Principle of Duality. Every true statement regarding the mutual relationship among lines

and points will remain true if the words line and point are interchanged everywhere in

the statement (Maor 112).

Artists apply projective geometry when they depict visual scenes in their pictures.

Maurits C. Escher is an example of a great artist who understood the concepts of

projective geometry. While he had little formal mathematical training, he displayed an

excellent understanding of the properties of mathematics.

17. Paradoxes and Antinomies.

Several significant paradoxes and antinomies are related to the study of the

infinite. Russell’s Paradox is one such paradox. Bertrand Russell, a British

mathematician, first described this paradox in 1902 (Miller 1). Some sets belong to

themselves. For example, let N denote the set of all objects whose descriptions do not

include the last letter of the alphabet. Since the description of set N does not include the

letter z, the set N belongs to itself. Next, let P denote the collection of all sets that do not

contain themselves as elements. Consider the question of whether the set P belongs to

itself. Suppose that P belongs to itself. This contradicts that definition of the set P.

Suppose that P does not belong to itself. Then the set P must belong to itself, since P

Batchelor 58

contains every set that does not contain itself as an element. This is a contradiction. This

logical paradox is called Russell’s Paradox, and many mathematicians refer to it as the

Barber’s Paradox (Dauben 262).

Bernhard Bolzano practiced a philosophical approach to the study of

mathematics. He studied mathematics at the University of Prague. His most famous work

is a book called Paradoxes of the Infinite. He argued that the best way to approach the

infinite is to use a mathematical approach (Dauben 124). He stated that infinite sets are

not all equal in terms of their multiplicity. One infinite set can be a portion of another

infinite set. In other words, some infinite sets are larger than others. Consider the ray

ACDB , where AC, CD, and DB represent finite, positive lengths of line segments. The

ray with endpoint D in the direction of B has infinite length. The ray with endpoint C in

the direction of B also has infinite length, but it can be thought of as having a length that

is greater by the length of the segment CD . The line ACDB , which extends infinitely in

both directions, can be considered even larger, by the length of the ray with endpoint C in

the direction of A; this ray also has infinite length (Laubenbacher 72). There are several

indeterminate concepts, which do not have distinct values. The only way to evaluate

them is to use limits. The most well known indeterminate concepts are ∞/∞, 0/0, ∞*0, 00,

1∞, ∞

0, and ∞ – ∞ (Maor 9).

The paradox of the universal set is an important paradox related to the study of

infinity. Let U denote the set of all sets. Since U contains every set, one cannot enlarge it.

Cantor’s Theorem asserts that U < P[U] . Therefore, P[U] contains more elements than U.

This is a contradiction. This paradox served as evidence that mathematicians needed to

formalize the system of axioms of set theory (Dunham, Genius 281). Zeno was a

Batchelor 59

philosopher who discovered several famous paradoxes. The runner’s paradox is a

particularly noteworthy paradox. Suppose that a runner wishes to travel from one location

to another location. The runner must first travel half of the distance between the

locations. Then, she/he must run half of the distance that remains. This process repeats

itself infinitely, so the runner must take infinitely many steps in order to reach her/his

destination. Therefore, Zeno claimed that the runner would never travel the complete

distance to the destination. This represented a paradox, since one can demonstrate that a

runner can cover a finite distance in a finite amount of time. One can represent the

runner’s paradox using the infinite sum, 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 + (Maor 4). This

limit of this sum is 1 as the number of terms approaches infinity. The Gabriel’s Horn

Paradox is an example of a geometric paradox. The graph of the function y = 1/x is a

hyperbola. Consider the graph of this function for x 1. If one revolves this graph about

the x-axis, the result is a figure called a hyperboloid of revolution. This solid has an

infinite surface area. However, the volume of the solid is finite (Maor 85). Now suppose

that someone states, “I am lying.” The question of whether or not she/he is telling the

truth represents a logical paradox.

18. Unsolved Problems Regarding Infinity.

Goldbach’s Conjecture is an important unsolved problem in mathematics (Lam

1). Goldbach’s Conjecture states that one can express every even number greater than 2

as the sum of two prime numbers (Dunham, Genius 82). While mathematicians have

never succeeded in proving this conjecture, no one has disproved it. Mathematicians have

used modern computers to aid in their work with Goldbach’s Conjecture, but they have

still been unable to prove it (Lam 2). The question of the infinitude of twin primes is

Batchelor 60

another significant unsolved problem. Twin primes are consecutive prime numbers that

differ by exactly 2. For example, 11 and 13 represent a pair of twin primes.

Mathematicians know that there exist an infinite number of prime numbers, but no one

has proved that there are an infinite number of pairs of twin primes. The numbers

1,159,142,985 * 22304

1 represent a pair of 703-digit twin primes (Maor 23). Euclid

proved that every number with the form, 2n(1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 16 + + 2

n) is a perfect

number. Mathematicians are not certain whether there are any perfect numbers besides

those that are represented by Euclid’s formula. Euler showed that every even perfect

number must be of the form that Euclid specified. However, no one has proven that odd

perfect numbers must have this form or that such numbers do not exist (Dunham, Genius

82).

Mathematicians have not been able to prove whether there are any odd perfect

numbers. If there is an odd perfect number, it must contain at least eight different prime

factors. In addition, the smallest odd perfect number must exceed 10300

(Dunham, Master

15). While mathematicians doubt whether any odd perfect numbers exist, they have been

unable to prove that they cannot exist. J.J. Sylvester strongly doubted the existence of

odd perfect numbers. He stated, “… a prolonged meditation on the subject has satisfied

me that the existence of any one such – its escape, so to say, from the complex web of

conditions which hem it in on all sides – would be little short of a miracle” (qtd. in

Dunham, Master 16). The symbol γ is used to denote Euler’s constant, which has an

approximate value of 0.5772156649 (Savard 1). The Nth

partial sum of the harmonic

series always has a value between ln(N) and 1 + ln(N), where ln(N) denotes the natural

logarithm of N. Euler’s constant γ denotes the limit of the expression,

Batchelor 61

(1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/4 + + 1/N) – ln(N), as N approaches infinity (Savard 2).

Mathematicians have not determined whether γ is a rational number (Maor 28).

Batchelor 62

Afterword.

Infinity is a truly fascinating concept. The study of infinity has grown and evolved

since the early Greeks first studied it in a formal setting. Mathematicians have persevered

in the study of infinity despite objections from other mathematicians and the Catholic

Church. Euclid, Euler, Cantor, and Gauss made major contributions to the study of the

infinite. The concepts of cardinal numbers and one-to-one correspondence have been

important tools in the formal study of infinity. The study of infinite sets has led to some

interesting questions about topics such as amicable and perfect numbers and non-

Euclidean geometry. Several paradoxes or antinomies forced mathematicians to develop

more rigorous definitions and systems of axioms. Many unsolved problems remain, such

as Goldbach’s Conjecture, the infinitude of twin primes, and the search for an odd perfect

number (Lam 3). Mathematicians continue to make new discoveries about the infinite,

such as Andrew Wiles’s 1993 proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem (Laubenbacher 156).

As a student of mathematics, I have enjoyed this intellectual adventure. I feel that

I have learned a great deal about the nature of infinite sets. I particularly liked the parts

about set theory, logic and reasoning, and the unsolved problems. In addition, I have been

fascinated with the information about how infinity relates to art, astronomy, and religion.

I am an amateur astronomy enthusiast, and I enjoy studying the major theories of the

universe. M.C. Escher’s drawings of infinite patterns were fun to view. I am confident

that mathematicians will continue to make major discoveries related to infinity during the

coming years, and I look forward to hearing about these discoveries. I hope to complete

additional research regarding infinite sets in the future.

John H. Batchelor

Batchelor 63

Appendices.

I. Timeline of Major Events.

550 B.C. – Early Greeks first acknowledged the concept of infinity.

387 B.C. – Plato founded the Academy in Athens.

332 B.C. – Alexander the Great established the city of Alexandria in Egypt.

300 B.C. – Euclid went to Alexandria, intending to establish a school of mathematics.

1473 – Nicolaus Copernicus was born in Poland.

1507 – Copernicus returned to Poland and became canon of the church at Frauenburg.

1569 – Gerhardus Mercator published his map, which represents the earth using a

rectangular grid.

1600 – Giordano Bruno was killed after he insisted that the universe is infinite.

1610 – Galileo Galilei discovered four moons of Jupiter.

1631 – Pierre de Fermat received a degree in law.

1638 – Galileo discovered that the number of perfect squares equals the number of

natural numbers. Since not every natural number is a perfect square, this

appeared to represent a paradox.

1711 – Sir Christopher Wren completed St. Paul’s Cathedral.

1729 – Goldbach informed Euler of Fermat’s conjecture that every number of the form,

22n + 1, is prime.

1732 – Euler disproved Fermat’s conjecture by showing that 225 + 1 = (641)(6,700,417).

1736 – Euler proved Fermat’s Little Theorem.

1737 – Euler studied the sum of the reciprocals of the prime numbers. He proved that the

series diverges.

Batchelor 64

1747 – Euler stated, “Whether … there are any odd perfect numbers is a most difficult

question.”

1748 – Euler discovered the formula, eπi

+ 1 = 0.

1748 – Euler discovered the formula, e = 1 + 1/1 + 1/(1*2) +1/(1*2*3)+1/(1*2*3*4)+ .

1752 – Euler discovered that simple polyhedrons must satisfy the equation V-E+F=2,

where V = number of vertices, E = number of edges, and F = number of faces.

1755 – Immanuel Kant, a philosopher, suggested that the universe is composed of many

galaxies.

1772 – Euler wrote to Daniel Bernoulli and stated that he had proved that 231

–1 is prime.

1774 – Euler completed a paper called On a Table of Prime Numbers Up to a Million and

Beyond.

1775 – Euler studied series consisting of reciprocals of odd prime numbers, with positive

signs preceding 4k-1 primes and negative signs before 4k+1 primes. The series

converges to an approximate value of 0.3349816.

1777 – Carl Friedrich Gauss was born in Brunswick.

1796 – Gauss showed that a straightedge and compass could be used to construct a

17-sided regular polygon.

1799 – Gauss received doctoral degree from University of Helmstadt.

1801 – Gauss published his Disquisitiones Arithmeticae.

1807 – Gauss learned Sophie Germain’s true identity.

1816 – Sir David Brewster, a Scottish physicist, invented the kaleidoscope.

1831 – Gauss told Schumacher that he did not believe in the actual infinite.

Batchelor 65

1837 – Peter Gustav Lejeune-Dirichlet proved that every arithmetic progression with the

form, a, a + b, a + 2b, a + 3b, , a + kb, , must include an infinite number of

prime numbers, as long as a and b are relatively prime.

1844 – Joseph Liouville provided the following example of a transcendental number:

10-1!

+ 10-2!

+ 10-3!

+ 10-4!

+ = 0.110001000000000000000001000.

1845 – Georg Cantor was born in Russia.

1851 – Joseph Liouville proved a theorem stating that every interval of real numbers

must contain an infinite number of transcendental numbers.

1868 – Eugenio Beltrami proved that non-Euclidean geometry is just as logically valid as

Euclidean geometry.

1871 – Cantor began to consider exceptional sets.

1873 – Charles Hermite showed that e is a transcendental number.

1874 – Cantor showed that most real numbers are transcendental numbers.

1874 – Cantor showed that no interval of real numbers can be placed in a one-to-one

correspondence with the set of natural numbers.

1874 – Cantor proved the existence of infinite sets that have different and distinct

magnitudes.

1877 – Cantor discovered that a one-to-one correspondence exists between the square and

the interval. He exclaimed, “I see it, but I do not believe it!”

1878 – Cantor proved that one could restrict the analysis of continuity to the domain of

the real line.

1879 – Cantor published the first of a group of six papers about infinite linear sets of

points.

Batchelor 66

1879 – Paul du Bois-Reymond stated that he preferred the term pantachisch instead of

everywhere-dense.

1880 – Cantor published a short paper about transfinite symbols and derived sets.

1882 – F. Lindemann showed that π is a transcendental number.

1883 – Cantor published a paper about set theory developed to address the mathematical

and philosophical issues associated with transfinite set theory.

1884 – Cantor resumed his effort to prove the Continuum Hypothesis.

1884 – Cantor told Mittag-Leffler that the Continuum Hypothesis was a complete failure.

1885 – Gösta Mittag-Leffler wrote to Cantor, cautioning him against publishing his new

work.

1886 – Constantin Gutberlet stated that he feared that mathematical infinity could

represent a challenge to the absolute infinity associated with God’s existence.

1888 – Gutberlet founded the journal Philosophisches Jahrbuch der Görres-Gesellschaft.

1888 – J.J. Sylvester stated that he was skeptical about the existence of an odd perfect

number.

1888 – Cantor wrote to Jeiler and expressed confidence in the theory of transfinite

numbers.

1891 – Cantor wrote a paper entitled On an Elementary Question in the Theory of Sets.

1894 – Cantor told Charles Hermite, a French mathematician, that he was glad to have

had the chance to serve the Roman Catholic Church.

1896 – Jacques Hadamard and de la Vallée Poussin proved the Prime Number Theorem.

1896 – Cantor told Esser, “From me, Christian philosophy will be offered for the first

time the true theory of the infinite.”

Batchelor 67

1898 – Maurits Cornelis Escher was born in Leeuwarden, Holland.

1900 – David Hilbert emphasized the importance of Cantor’s Continuum Hypothesis at

the Second International Congress of Mathematicians in Paris.

1902 – Bertrand Russell criticized Euclid’s work.

1902 – Bertrand Russell first described Russell’s Paradox.

1910 – Bertrand Russell stated, “The solution of the difficulties which formerly

surrounded the mathematical infinite is probably the greatest achievement of

which our age has to boast.”

1916 – Albert Einstein published his theory of general relativity.

1919 – Einstein’s theory of general relativity passed an important test in which scientists

photographed a region of the sky before and after a total solar eclipse.

1963 – Paul Cohen showed that the Axiom of Choice is independent of the other set

theory axioms.

1963 – Kurt Gödel and Paul Cohen showed that the Continuum Hypothesis is

independent of the other axioms in the Zermelo-Fraenkel system.

1993 – Andrew Wiles proved Fermat’s Last Theorem.

1998 – Mathematicians discovered that the number 23021377

– 1 is a prime number.

Batchelor 68

II. Proof That 2 Is an Irrational Number.

Theorem. 2 is an irrational number.

Proof. The method of proof by contradiction will be used. Suppose that 2 is a rational

number. Then, one can express 2 as the quotient of two integers, denoted a and b:

2 = a/b.

Squaring both sides of the equation, we obtain the result, 2 = (a2)/(b

2). Multiplying both

sides by b2, we obtain the result, 2b

2 = a

2. This can be expressed as

a2 = 2b

2.

The variables a and b represent integers, as stated above. Therefore, a and b can be

decomposed into their prime factors in only one way. Now let a = c1c2c3cm, and

b = d1d2d3dn. Substituting into the equation, a2 = 2b

2, we obtain the result,

(c1c2c3cm)2 = 2(d1d2d3dn)

2.

This is equivalent to the following equation:

c1c1c2c2c3c3cmcm = 2d1d1d2d2d3d3dndn.

It is possible that the prime number 2 will occur among the prime numbers ci and di. This

will happen if a or b is even. Suppose that the number 2 occurs among these prime

numbers. In this case, the number 2 will occur an even number of times on the equation’s

left side. This is true because each of the prime numbers on the left side occurs twice.

The number 2 will appear an odd number of times on the equation’s right side. This is

true because the number 2 already occurs once on the right side, in addition to the

numbers represented by the di variables. Suppose that the number 2 does not occur

among the prime numbers ci or di. Then, the number 2 will not occur on the equation’s

left side, and it will appear one time on the equation’s right side. In all cases, the prime

Batchelor 69

number 2 occurs an even number of times on the equation’s left side and an odd number

of times on the equation’s right side. However, the prime number 2 must appear the same

number of times on both sides of the equation, due to the unique decomposition into

prime numbers. This is a contradiction. The initial assumption that 2 is rational is false.

Therefore, 2 is an irrational number. This completes the proof (Maor 236-237).

Batchelor 70

Works Cited

Cohen, Paul. Set Theory and the Continuum Hypothesis. New York: W.A. Benjamin,

Inc., 1966. 65, 76, 85.

Dauben, Joseph. Georg Cantor: His Mathematics and Philosophy of the Infinite.

Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1979. 32, 34-35, 37, 39, 41, 45, 51, 55, 78-80,

84, 89, 93, 107, 122, 124, 130, 132, 136-139, 141-143, 146-147, 172-174, 253, 262,

269.

Dunham, William. Euler: The Master of Us All. Washington: The Mathematical

Association of America, 1999. 1-5, 7, 13, 15-16, 47, 61, 63, 65, 67, 70, 77.

Dunham, William. Journey through Genius: The Great Theorems of Mathematics. New

York: John Wiley and Sons, 1990. 24, 28-32, 35, 37-38, 51, 53, 56-57, 73, 77, 82, 91,

106, 159, 194, 229, 239-240, 242-243, 248-255, 259, 263, 268, 270, 273, 277,

280-283.

Euler, Leonhard. Elements of Algebra. Trans. Rev. John Hewlett. New York:

Springer-Verlag, 1972. 299, 465.

Golba, Paul. “Cantor, Georg (1845-1918).” 2000. Seton Hall University. 20 Jul. 2002.

<http://www.shu.edu/projects/reals/history/cantor.html>. 1-2.

Hall, Tord. Carl Friedrich Gauss: A Biography. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of

Technology Press, 1970. 45, 103, 108, 146.

Hartshorne, Robin. Geometry: Euclid and Beyond. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2000. 8,

249, 296, 338, 373.

Batchelor 71

Ingham, Albert. The Distribution of Prime Numbers. Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics

and Mathematical Physics. Number 30. New York: Stechert-Hafner Service Agency,

Inc., 1964. 10, 25.

Lam, Fat. “A Probability Approach to Goldbach’s Conjecture.” 2001. Gallaudet

University. 20 Jul. 2002. <http://depts.gallaudet.edu/mathcs/papers/goldbach.htm>.

1-3.

Laubenbacher, Reinhard, and David Pengelley. Mathematical Expeditions: Chronicles

by the Explorers. New York: Springer, 1999. 3, 13, 16, 24, 26, 52-55, 57-58, 62-64,

67, 71-72, 74-76, 84, 86, 99, 101, 141, 156, 159-160, 164, 173-174, 185, 216, 254.

Maor, Eli. To Infinity and Beyond: A Cultural History of the Infinite. Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 1991. 2-5, 8-9, 12, 16, 23, 26, 28-29, 31, 35, 44, 46, 51-53,

55, 57, 59-60, 63-65, 85, 88, 90, 98-99, 103-104, 109, 112, 119, 121, 123, 125,

130-131, 133, 140, 164, 166, 168, 179, 181-182, 185, 190, 192, 198, 200, 204,

221, 225, 229, 236-237, 253, 255, 258.

Miller, Justin. “Russell’s Paradox.” 2001. University of Arizona. 20 Jul. 2002.

<http://www.u.arizona.edu/~miller/finalreport/node4.html>. 1-2.

Moews, David. “Perfect, Amicable, and Sociable Numbers.” 2002. University of

Connecticut. 20 Jul. 2002. <http://xraysgi.ims.uconn.edu:8080/amicable.html>. 1-2, 4.

Savard, John. “Euler’s Constant.” 2002. Edmonton Community Network. 20 Jul. 2002.

<http://members.shaw.ca/quadibloc/math/eulint.htm>. 1-2.