The Britannica Guide to Algebra and Trigonometry

Britannica Educational Publishing, William Hosch

• Verlag: Britannica Educational Publishing
• Jahr: 2010
• ISBN:
  9781615302192
• Thema: Mathematics
• Thema: Algebra

Calculating and manipulating the unknown has been the enterprise of the field of algebra since its earliest inception in Babylon and ancient Egypt. Trigonometry draws on principles presented in algebra and uses angle measurements to elaborate on geometric calculations. Essential to further mathematical and scientific study, both algebra and trigonometry provide crucial tools in managing variables and understanding the relationships between them. This volume presents the fundamentals of these fascinating areas of mathematics while chronicling their respective histories.

CHAPTER 1
ALGEBRA

Algebra is the branch of mathematics in which arithmetical operations and formal manipulations are applied to abstract symbols, known as variables, rather than to specific numbers. Algebra is fundamental not only to all further mathematics and statistics but to the natural sciences, computer science, economics, and business. Along with writing, it is a cornerstone of modern scientific and technological civilization. Earlier civilizations—Babylonian, Greek, Indian, Chinese, and Islamic—all contributed in important ways to the development of algebra. It was left for Renaissance Europe, though, to develop an efficient system for representing all real numbers and a symbolism for representing unknowns, relations between them, and operations.

HISTORY OF ALGEBRA

---

The notion that there exists a distinct subdiscipline of mathematics that uses variables to stand for unspecified numbers, as well as the term algebra to denote this subdiscipline, resulted from a slow historical development. This chapter presents that history, tracing the evolution over time of the concept of the equation, number systems, symbols for conveying and manipulating mathematical statements, and the modern abstract structural view of algebra.

THE EMERGENCE OF FORMAL EQUATIONS

Perhaps the most basic notion in mathematics is the equation, a formal statement that two sides of a mathematical expression are equal—as in the simple equation x + 3 = 5—and that both sides of the equation can be simultaneously manipulated (by adding, dividing, taking roots, and so on to both sides) in order to “solve” the equation. Yet, as simple and natural as such a notion may appear today, its acceptance first required the development of numerous mathematical ideas, each of which took time to mature. In fact, it took until the late 16th century to consolidate the modern concept of an equation as a single mathematical entity.

Three main threads in the process leading to this consolidation deserve special attention:

1. Attempts to solve equations involving one or more unknown quantities. In describing the early history of algebra, the word equation is frequently used out of convenience to describe these operations, although early mathematicians would not have been aware of such a concept.

2. The evolution of the notion of exactly what qualifies as a legitimate number. Over time this notion expanded to include broader domains (rational numbers, irrational numbers, negative numbers, and complex numbers) that were flexible enough to support the abstract structure of symbolic algebra.

3. The gradual refinement of a symbolic language suitable for devising and conveying generalized algorithms, or step-by-step procedures for solving entire categories of mathematical problems.

These three threads are traced in this chapter, particularly as they developed in the ancient Middle East and Greece, the Islamic era, and the European Renaissance.

PROBLEM SOLVING IN EGYPT AND BABYLON

The earliest extant mathematical text from Egypt is the Rhind papyrus (c. 1650 BCE). It and other texts attest to the ability of the ancient Egyptians to solve linear equations in one unknown. A linear equation is a first-degree equation, or one in which all the variables are only to the first power. (In today’s notation, such an equation in one unknown would be 7x + 3x = 10.) Evidence from about 300 BCE indicates that the Egyptians also knew how to solve problems involving a system of two equations in two unknown quantities, including quadratic (second-degree, or squared unknowns) equations. For example, given that the perimeter of a rectangular plot of land is 100 units and its area is 600 square units, the ancient Egyptians could solve for the field’s length l and width w. (In modern notation, they could solve the pair of simultaneous equations 2w + 2l =100 and wl = 600.) However, throughout this period there was no use of symbols—problems were stated and solved verbally. The following problem is typical:

The Rhind papyrus, shown above, is an ancient Egyptian scroll bearing mathematical tables and problems. It reveals a great deal about Egyptian mathematics, such as the ancient Egyptians’ ability to solve linear equations. British Museum, London, UK/The Bridgeman Art Library/Getty Images

• Method of calculating a quantity,

• multiplied by 1½ added 4 it has come to 10.

• What is the quantity that says it?

• First, you calculate the difference of this 10 to this 4. Then, 6 results.

• Then, you divide 1 by 1½. Then, ⅔ results.

• Then, you calculate ⅔ of this 6. Then, 4 results.

• Behold, it is 4, the quantity that said it.

• What has been found by you is correct.

Note that except for ⅔, for which a special symbol existed, the Egyptians expressed all fractional quantities using only unit fractions, that is, fractions bearing the numerator 1. For example, ¾ would be written as ½ + ¼.

Babylonian mathematics dates from as early as 1800 BCE, as indicated by cuneiform texts preserved in clay tablets. Babylonian arithmetic was based on a well-elaborated, positional sexagesimal system—that is, a system of base 60, as opposed to the modern decimal system, which is based on units of 10. The Babylonians, however, made no consistent use of zero. A great deal of their mathematics consisted of tables, such as for multiplication, reciprocals, squares (but not cubes), and square and cube roots.

In addition to tables, many Babylonian tablets contained problems that asked for the solution of some unknown number. Such problems explained a procedure to be followed for solving a specific problem, rather than proposing a general algorithm for solving similar problems. The starting point for a problem could be relations involving specific numbers and the unknown, or its square, or systems of such relations. The number sought could be the square root of a given number, the weight of a stone, or the length of the side of a triangle. Many of the questions were phrased in terms of concrete situations—such as partitioning a field among three pairs of brothers under certain constraints. Still, their artificial character made it clear that they were constructed for didactical purposes.

GREECE AND THE LIMITS OF GEOMETRIC EXPRESSION

The Pythagoreans and Euclid

A major milestone of Greek mathematics was the discovery by the Pythagoreans around 430 BCE that not all lengths are commensurable, that is, measurable by a common unit. This surprising fact became clear while investigating what appeared to be the most elementary ratio between geometric magnitudes, namely, the ratio between the side and the diagonal of a square. The Pythagoreans knew that for a unit square (that is, a square whose sides have a length of 1), the length of the diagonal must be

—owing to the Pythagorean theorem, which states that the square on the diagonal of a triangle must equal the sum of the squares on the other two sides (a² + b² = c²). The ratio between the two magnitudes thus deduced, 1 and

, had the confounding property of not corresponding to the ratio of any two whole, or counting, numbers (1, 2, 3,…). This discovery of incommensurable quantities contradicted the basic metaphysics of Pythagoreanism, which asserted that all of reality was based on the whole numbers.

Attempts to deal with incommensurables eventually led to the creation of an innovative concept of proportion by Eudoxus of Cnidus (c. 400–350 BCE), which Euclid preserved in his Elements (c. 300 BCE). The theory of proportions remained an important component of mathematics well into the 17th century, by allowing the comparison of ratios of pairs of magnitudes of the same kind. Greek proportions, however, were very different from modern equalities, and no concept of equation could be based on it. For instance, a proportion could establish that the ratio between two line segments, say A and B, is the same as the ratio between two areas, say R and S. The Greeks would state this in strictly verbal fashion, since symbolic expressions, such as the much later A:B::R:S (read, A is to B as R is to S), did not appear in Greek texts. The theory of proportions enabled significant mathematical results, yet it could not lead to the kind of results derived with modern equations. Thus, from A:B::R:S the Greeks could deduce that (in modern terms) A + B:A − B::R + S:R − S, but they could not deduce in the same way that A:R::B:S. In fact, it did not even make sense to the Greeks to speak of a ratio between a line and an area since only like, or homogeneous, magnitudes were comparable. Their fundamental demand for homogeneity was strictly preserved in all Western mathematics until the 17th century.

When some of the Greek geometric constructions, such as those that appear in Euclid’s Elements, are suitably translated into modern algebraic language, they establish algebraic identities, solve quadratic equations, and produce related results. However, not only were symbols of this kind never used in classical Greek works, but such a translation would be completely alien to their spirit. Indeed, the Greeks not only lacked an abstract language for performing general symbolic manipulations, but they even lacked the concept of an equation to support such an algebraic interpretation of their geometric constructions.

For the classical Greeks, especially as shown in Books VII–XI of the Elements, a number was a collection of units, and hence they were limited to the counting numbers. Negative numbers were obviously out of this picture, and zero could not even start to be considered. In fact, even the status of 1 was ambiguous in certain texts, since it did not really constitute a collection as stipulated by Euclid. Such a numerical limitation, coupled with the strong geometric orientation of Greek mathematics, slowed the development and full acceptance of more elaborate and flexible ideas of number in the West.

Diophantus

A somewhat different, and idiosyncratic, orientation to solving mathematical problems can be found in the work of a later Greek, Diophantus of Alexandria (fl. c. 250 CE), who developed original methods for solving problems that, in retrospect, may be seen as linear or quadratic equations. Yet even Diophantus, in line with the basic Greek conception of mathematics, considered only positive rational solutions; he called a problem “absurd” whose only solutions were negative numbers. Diophantus solved specific problems using ad hoc methods convenient for the problem at hand, but he did not provide general solutions. The problems that he solved sometimes had more than one (and in some cases even infinitely many) solutions, yet he always stopped after finding the first one. In problems involving quadratic equations, he never suggested that such equations might have two solutions.

On the other hand, Diophantus was the first to introduce some kind of systematic symbolism for polynomial equations. A polynomial equation is composed of a sum of terms, in which each term is the product of some constant and a nonnegative power of the variable or variables. Because of their great generality, polynomial equations can express a large proportion of the mathematical relationships that occur in nature—for example, problems involving area, volume, mixture, and motion. In modern notation, polynomial equations in one variable take the form

where the a_i are known as coefficients and the highest power of n is known as the degree of the equation (for example, 2 for a quadractic, 3 for a cubic, 4 for a quartic, 5 for a quintic, and so on). Diophantus’s symbolism was a kind of shorthand, though, rather than a set of freely ...