What is the status of the three crises in the history of mathematics?What examples led to the modern...
Is there an application which does HTTP PUT?
Which spells are in some way related to shadows or the Shadowfell?
Do Monks gain the 9th level Unarmored Movement benefit when wearing armor or using a shield?
Is it a good idea to copy a trader when investing?
And now you see it II (the B side)
Row vectors and column vectors (Mathematica vs Matlab)
resoldering copper waste pipe
How to handle DM constantly stealing everything from sleeping characters?
Are on’yomi words loanwords?
Can you turn a recording upside-down?
Has there been evidence of any other gods?
Gift for mentor after his thesis defense?
Using SUBSTRING and RTRIM Together
How is Arya still alive?
How likely are Coriolis-effect-based quirks to develop in starship crew members?
How can I test a shell script in a "safe environment" to avoid harm to my computer?
Can a planet still function with a damaged moon?
Was Mohammed the most popular first name for boys born in Berlin in 2018?
Why did they wait for Quill to arrive?
Are wands in any sort of book going to be too much like Harry Potter?
Why are thrust reversers not used to slow down to taxi speeds?
How did Captain Marvel know where to find these characters?
What is the status of the three crises in the history of mathematics?
Ugin's Conjurant vs. un-preventable damage
What is the status of the three crises in the history of mathematics?
What examples led to the modern definition of a topological space?Division of the circle and compass constructionsWhen did it become understood that irrational numbers have non-repeating decimal representations?Current ways of thinking in the History of MathematicsWhat is the shortest paper in the history of mathematics?Attitude towards mathematics throughout HistoryHistory of Foundation of MathematicsTimeline of mathematical foundation?Math development and under-appreciation of Maxwell's EquationsFoundational crises in non-Western historical mathematical communities
$begingroup$
I have seen the claim in some literature that there are three crises in the history of mathematics. The first is the discovery of $sqrt2$ being irrational in Greek time which shook the belief that every point on a line can be measured by a rational number at that time. The second is the infinitesimal used in the 17th century in Calculus by Newton and Leibniz. The third one is Russell's paradox discovered at the turn of the 20th century which has shaken the foundation of mathematics.
However, after goolged it online (in English), I can not find much discussion or support of such claim. So I wonder if this is widely accepted in the history of mathematics, or simply a statement without much merit.
mathematics terminology
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have seen the claim in some literature that there are three crises in the history of mathematics. The first is the discovery of $sqrt2$ being irrational in Greek time which shook the belief that every point on a line can be measured by a rational number at that time. The second is the infinitesimal used in the 17th century in Calculus by Newton and Leibniz. The third one is Russell's paradox discovered at the turn of the 20th century which has shaken the foundation of mathematics.
However, after goolged it online (in English), I can not find much discussion or support of such claim. So I wonder if this is widely accepted in the history of mathematics, or simply a statement without much merit.
mathematics terminology
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Goedel's name would be a better candidate for a third crisis, but this is just my opinion; what's more, I do not think Russell's result had much importance in mathematics, it just showed the 'naivete' of early set theory .
$endgroup$
– sand1
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Russell's paradox has a significant impact on the future development of mathematics, i.e. the creation of axiomatic set theories. So it is not just a disproof of naive set theory earlier and definitively has an important impact in mathematics.
$endgroup$
– Math Wizard
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have seen the claim in some literature that there are three crises in the history of mathematics. The first is the discovery of $sqrt2$ being irrational in Greek time which shook the belief that every point on a line can be measured by a rational number at that time. The second is the infinitesimal used in the 17th century in Calculus by Newton and Leibniz. The third one is Russell's paradox discovered at the turn of the 20th century which has shaken the foundation of mathematics.
However, after goolged it online (in English), I can not find much discussion or support of such claim. So I wonder if this is widely accepted in the history of mathematics, or simply a statement without much merit.
mathematics terminology
$endgroup$
I have seen the claim in some literature that there are three crises in the history of mathematics. The first is the discovery of $sqrt2$ being irrational in Greek time which shook the belief that every point on a line can be measured by a rational number at that time. The second is the infinitesimal used in the 17th century in Calculus by Newton and Leibniz. The third one is Russell's paradox discovered at the turn of the 20th century which has shaken the foundation of mathematics.
However, after goolged it online (in English), I can not find much discussion or support of such claim. So I wonder if this is widely accepted in the history of mathematics, or simply a statement without much merit.
mathematics terminology
mathematics terminology
edited 4 hours ago
Conifold
35.6k154128
35.6k154128
asked 7 hours ago
Math WizardMath Wizard
33019
33019
1
$begingroup$
Goedel's name would be a better candidate for a third crisis, but this is just my opinion; what's more, I do not think Russell's result had much importance in mathematics, it just showed the 'naivete' of early set theory .
$endgroup$
– sand1
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Russell's paradox has a significant impact on the future development of mathematics, i.e. the creation of axiomatic set theories. So it is not just a disproof of naive set theory earlier and definitively has an important impact in mathematics.
$endgroup$
– Math Wizard
3 hours ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Goedel's name would be a better candidate for a third crisis, but this is just my opinion; what's more, I do not think Russell's result had much importance in mathematics, it just showed the 'naivete' of early set theory .
$endgroup$
– sand1
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Russell's paradox has a significant impact on the future development of mathematics, i.e. the creation of axiomatic set theories. So it is not just a disproof of naive set theory earlier and definitively has an important impact in mathematics.
$endgroup$
– Math Wizard
3 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Goedel's name would be a better candidate for a third crisis, but this is just my opinion; what's more, I do not think Russell's result had much importance in mathematics, it just showed the 'naivete' of early set theory .
$endgroup$
– sand1
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Goedel's name would be a better candidate for a third crisis, but this is just my opinion; what's more, I do not think Russell's result had much importance in mathematics, it just showed the 'naivete' of early set theory .
$endgroup$
– sand1
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Russell's paradox has a significant impact on the future development of mathematics, i.e. the creation of axiomatic set theories. So it is not just a disproof of naive set theory earlier and definitively has an important impact in mathematics.
$endgroup$
– Math Wizard
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Russell's paradox has a significant impact on the future development of mathematics, i.e. the creation of axiomatic set theories. So it is not just a disproof of naive set theory earlier and definitively has an important impact in mathematics.
$endgroup$
– Math Wizard
3 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
No, it is not widely accepted. The language of "crises" is rather obsolete and mostly reflects the attitudes of the early 20th century projected backwards. At that time, the contemporaries did indeed characterize the situation in mathematics (and physics) as a crisis. For example, Weyl's 1920 address was titled “The new foundational crisis in mathematics”, to which Hilbert saw fit to respond with what is now called the Hilbert program (see van Dalen's paper). But the language fits well with the language of (Kuhnian) revolutions, which are precipitated by "crises" (accumulations of anomalies), and provides a convenient shorthand for undergraduate texts to get through the history expediently. After all, the retellings of history in textbooks largely serve the practical purpose of bringing students up to speed on the current mathematics, and this is easier to do by translating all of mathematics into modern terminology, and marking the places where major curriculum pieces were introduced as "crises".
The first "crisis" is almost completely made up based on discredited accounts of the early Pythagorean history. The rational numbers or the real line are sheer modernizations with little relation to the ancient Greece, and even the story of ratios and incommensurables is a dramatized fable. On early Greek mathematics a good source is Fowler's Mathematics of Plato's Academy. Concerning the traditional story about the "discovery of irrationals" and the subsequent "crisis", a reviewer writes:
"It may be somewhat surprising, then, to discover that many, if not most, historians of ancient mathematics disbelieve some or all of this story. In The Mathematics of Plato's Academy, David Fowler gives a convincing account of the reasons for rejecting the standard story, and offers a very interesting alternative reconstruction of the history of early Greek mathematics... One of the important themes in Fowler's book is that one must carefully assess the available sources on early Greek mathematics. He demonstrates that most of the elements of the "standard story" either come from very late Greek sources (500 years or more after the time of Plato) or are reconstructions by modern historians who are really reflecting nineteenth and twentieth century concerns about foundational issues... The resulting picture is quite different from the traditional one. In particular, incommensurability is seen not as a foundational crisis but rather as an interesting discovery that led to significant mathematics."
The second "crisis" is usually associated not with the creation of calculus but with its subsequent problems, such as the inconsistencies with infinitesimals. It was a pretty slow moving "crisis" though, and the kinematic (late Newtonian) conception of calculus, within which Cauchy worked, and most of algebraic analysis of 18th century, were not seen as having some cardinal problems at the time. Only injecting later foundational attitudes and concerns about rigor lets one detect them. Another potential crisis, with a better claim to the name (in the Kuhnian sense at least), were the struggles with the notion of function that followed the discovery of Fourier series, see the introductory chapters to Bressoud's Radical Approach to Real Analysis, who names his opening chapter Crisis in Mathematics: Fourier's Series.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
These notions were popular in the middle of 20th century, in the aftermath of the third crisis. More precisely they were called the "crises of foundations of mathematics". Of course the first two were essentially the reconstructions of historians of mathematics.
Mathematics was conceived as a rigorous method of obtaining true statements by proofs. The starting point was a set of premises which were considered self-evident without any doubt. This basic believe was seriously shaken several times in the course of history,
and the principal such episodes are called "crises of foundations". You can read about this in the middle 20th century histories of mathematics.
About the "first crisis" we can only speculate. The earliest complete mathematical writings which we have originate at the time after the crisis.
The second one is well documented. It is related to invention of Calculus which it was difficult to justify to the same level of rigor which was considered standard since the Greeks. It took about 200 years to obtain full clarity about foundations of calculus.
The third crisis was triggered by Cantor's discoveries, then the discovery of paradoxes, attempts to create new rigorous foundations, and spectacular failure of these attempts. In some sense this third crisis continues, since it was never resolved. But my impression is that most mathematicians just lost interest to these questions, so it is not perceived as a crisis anymore.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "587"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhsm.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9575%2fwhat-is-the-status-of-the-three-crises-in-the-history-of-mathematics%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
No, it is not widely accepted. The language of "crises" is rather obsolete and mostly reflects the attitudes of the early 20th century projected backwards. At that time, the contemporaries did indeed characterize the situation in mathematics (and physics) as a crisis. For example, Weyl's 1920 address was titled “The new foundational crisis in mathematics”, to which Hilbert saw fit to respond with what is now called the Hilbert program (see van Dalen's paper). But the language fits well with the language of (Kuhnian) revolutions, which are precipitated by "crises" (accumulations of anomalies), and provides a convenient shorthand for undergraduate texts to get through the history expediently. After all, the retellings of history in textbooks largely serve the practical purpose of bringing students up to speed on the current mathematics, and this is easier to do by translating all of mathematics into modern terminology, and marking the places where major curriculum pieces were introduced as "crises".
The first "crisis" is almost completely made up based on discredited accounts of the early Pythagorean history. The rational numbers or the real line are sheer modernizations with little relation to the ancient Greece, and even the story of ratios and incommensurables is a dramatized fable. On early Greek mathematics a good source is Fowler's Mathematics of Plato's Academy. Concerning the traditional story about the "discovery of irrationals" and the subsequent "crisis", a reviewer writes:
"It may be somewhat surprising, then, to discover that many, if not most, historians of ancient mathematics disbelieve some or all of this story. In The Mathematics of Plato's Academy, David Fowler gives a convincing account of the reasons for rejecting the standard story, and offers a very interesting alternative reconstruction of the history of early Greek mathematics... One of the important themes in Fowler's book is that one must carefully assess the available sources on early Greek mathematics. He demonstrates that most of the elements of the "standard story" either come from very late Greek sources (500 years or more after the time of Plato) or are reconstructions by modern historians who are really reflecting nineteenth and twentieth century concerns about foundational issues... The resulting picture is quite different from the traditional one. In particular, incommensurability is seen not as a foundational crisis but rather as an interesting discovery that led to significant mathematics."
The second "crisis" is usually associated not with the creation of calculus but with its subsequent problems, such as the inconsistencies with infinitesimals. It was a pretty slow moving "crisis" though, and the kinematic (late Newtonian) conception of calculus, within which Cauchy worked, and most of algebraic analysis of 18th century, were not seen as having some cardinal problems at the time. Only injecting later foundational attitudes and concerns about rigor lets one detect them. Another potential crisis, with a better claim to the name (in the Kuhnian sense at least), were the struggles with the notion of function that followed the discovery of Fourier series, see the introductory chapters to Bressoud's Radical Approach to Real Analysis, who names his opening chapter Crisis in Mathematics: Fourier's Series.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No, it is not widely accepted. The language of "crises" is rather obsolete and mostly reflects the attitudes of the early 20th century projected backwards. At that time, the contemporaries did indeed characterize the situation in mathematics (and physics) as a crisis. For example, Weyl's 1920 address was titled “The new foundational crisis in mathematics”, to which Hilbert saw fit to respond with what is now called the Hilbert program (see van Dalen's paper). But the language fits well with the language of (Kuhnian) revolutions, which are precipitated by "crises" (accumulations of anomalies), and provides a convenient shorthand for undergraduate texts to get through the history expediently. After all, the retellings of history in textbooks largely serve the practical purpose of bringing students up to speed on the current mathematics, and this is easier to do by translating all of mathematics into modern terminology, and marking the places where major curriculum pieces were introduced as "crises".
The first "crisis" is almost completely made up based on discredited accounts of the early Pythagorean history. The rational numbers or the real line are sheer modernizations with little relation to the ancient Greece, and even the story of ratios and incommensurables is a dramatized fable. On early Greek mathematics a good source is Fowler's Mathematics of Plato's Academy. Concerning the traditional story about the "discovery of irrationals" and the subsequent "crisis", a reviewer writes:
"It may be somewhat surprising, then, to discover that many, if not most, historians of ancient mathematics disbelieve some or all of this story. In The Mathematics of Plato's Academy, David Fowler gives a convincing account of the reasons for rejecting the standard story, and offers a very interesting alternative reconstruction of the history of early Greek mathematics... One of the important themes in Fowler's book is that one must carefully assess the available sources on early Greek mathematics. He demonstrates that most of the elements of the "standard story" either come from very late Greek sources (500 years or more after the time of Plato) or are reconstructions by modern historians who are really reflecting nineteenth and twentieth century concerns about foundational issues... The resulting picture is quite different from the traditional one. In particular, incommensurability is seen not as a foundational crisis but rather as an interesting discovery that led to significant mathematics."
The second "crisis" is usually associated not with the creation of calculus but with its subsequent problems, such as the inconsistencies with infinitesimals. It was a pretty slow moving "crisis" though, and the kinematic (late Newtonian) conception of calculus, within which Cauchy worked, and most of algebraic analysis of 18th century, were not seen as having some cardinal problems at the time. Only injecting later foundational attitudes and concerns about rigor lets one detect them. Another potential crisis, with a better claim to the name (in the Kuhnian sense at least), were the struggles with the notion of function that followed the discovery of Fourier series, see the introductory chapters to Bressoud's Radical Approach to Real Analysis, who names his opening chapter Crisis in Mathematics: Fourier's Series.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No, it is not widely accepted. The language of "crises" is rather obsolete and mostly reflects the attitudes of the early 20th century projected backwards. At that time, the contemporaries did indeed characterize the situation in mathematics (and physics) as a crisis. For example, Weyl's 1920 address was titled “The new foundational crisis in mathematics”, to which Hilbert saw fit to respond with what is now called the Hilbert program (see van Dalen's paper). But the language fits well with the language of (Kuhnian) revolutions, which are precipitated by "crises" (accumulations of anomalies), and provides a convenient shorthand for undergraduate texts to get through the history expediently. After all, the retellings of history in textbooks largely serve the practical purpose of bringing students up to speed on the current mathematics, and this is easier to do by translating all of mathematics into modern terminology, and marking the places where major curriculum pieces were introduced as "crises".
The first "crisis" is almost completely made up based on discredited accounts of the early Pythagorean history. The rational numbers or the real line are sheer modernizations with little relation to the ancient Greece, and even the story of ratios and incommensurables is a dramatized fable. On early Greek mathematics a good source is Fowler's Mathematics of Plato's Academy. Concerning the traditional story about the "discovery of irrationals" and the subsequent "crisis", a reviewer writes:
"It may be somewhat surprising, then, to discover that many, if not most, historians of ancient mathematics disbelieve some or all of this story. In The Mathematics of Plato's Academy, David Fowler gives a convincing account of the reasons for rejecting the standard story, and offers a very interesting alternative reconstruction of the history of early Greek mathematics... One of the important themes in Fowler's book is that one must carefully assess the available sources on early Greek mathematics. He demonstrates that most of the elements of the "standard story" either come from very late Greek sources (500 years or more after the time of Plato) or are reconstructions by modern historians who are really reflecting nineteenth and twentieth century concerns about foundational issues... The resulting picture is quite different from the traditional one. In particular, incommensurability is seen not as a foundational crisis but rather as an interesting discovery that led to significant mathematics."
The second "crisis" is usually associated not with the creation of calculus but with its subsequent problems, such as the inconsistencies with infinitesimals. It was a pretty slow moving "crisis" though, and the kinematic (late Newtonian) conception of calculus, within which Cauchy worked, and most of algebraic analysis of 18th century, were not seen as having some cardinal problems at the time. Only injecting later foundational attitudes and concerns about rigor lets one detect them. Another potential crisis, with a better claim to the name (in the Kuhnian sense at least), were the struggles with the notion of function that followed the discovery of Fourier series, see the introductory chapters to Bressoud's Radical Approach to Real Analysis, who names his opening chapter Crisis in Mathematics: Fourier's Series.
$endgroup$
No, it is not widely accepted. The language of "crises" is rather obsolete and mostly reflects the attitudes of the early 20th century projected backwards. At that time, the contemporaries did indeed characterize the situation in mathematics (and physics) as a crisis. For example, Weyl's 1920 address was titled “The new foundational crisis in mathematics”, to which Hilbert saw fit to respond with what is now called the Hilbert program (see van Dalen's paper). But the language fits well with the language of (Kuhnian) revolutions, which are precipitated by "crises" (accumulations of anomalies), and provides a convenient shorthand for undergraduate texts to get through the history expediently. After all, the retellings of history in textbooks largely serve the practical purpose of bringing students up to speed on the current mathematics, and this is easier to do by translating all of mathematics into modern terminology, and marking the places where major curriculum pieces were introduced as "crises".
The first "crisis" is almost completely made up based on discredited accounts of the early Pythagorean history. The rational numbers or the real line are sheer modernizations with little relation to the ancient Greece, and even the story of ratios and incommensurables is a dramatized fable. On early Greek mathematics a good source is Fowler's Mathematics of Plato's Academy. Concerning the traditional story about the "discovery of irrationals" and the subsequent "crisis", a reviewer writes:
"It may be somewhat surprising, then, to discover that many, if not most, historians of ancient mathematics disbelieve some or all of this story. In The Mathematics of Plato's Academy, David Fowler gives a convincing account of the reasons for rejecting the standard story, and offers a very interesting alternative reconstruction of the history of early Greek mathematics... One of the important themes in Fowler's book is that one must carefully assess the available sources on early Greek mathematics. He demonstrates that most of the elements of the "standard story" either come from very late Greek sources (500 years or more after the time of Plato) or are reconstructions by modern historians who are really reflecting nineteenth and twentieth century concerns about foundational issues... The resulting picture is quite different from the traditional one. In particular, incommensurability is seen not as a foundational crisis but rather as an interesting discovery that led to significant mathematics."
The second "crisis" is usually associated not with the creation of calculus but with its subsequent problems, such as the inconsistencies with infinitesimals. It was a pretty slow moving "crisis" though, and the kinematic (late Newtonian) conception of calculus, within which Cauchy worked, and most of algebraic analysis of 18th century, were not seen as having some cardinal problems at the time. Only injecting later foundational attitudes and concerns about rigor lets one detect them. Another potential crisis, with a better claim to the name (in the Kuhnian sense at least), were the struggles with the notion of function that followed the discovery of Fourier series, see the introductory chapters to Bressoud's Radical Approach to Real Analysis, who names his opening chapter Crisis in Mathematics: Fourier's Series.
edited 2 hours ago
answered 4 hours ago
ConifoldConifold
35.6k154128
35.6k154128
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
These notions were popular in the middle of 20th century, in the aftermath of the third crisis. More precisely they were called the "crises of foundations of mathematics". Of course the first two were essentially the reconstructions of historians of mathematics.
Mathematics was conceived as a rigorous method of obtaining true statements by proofs. The starting point was a set of premises which were considered self-evident without any doubt. This basic believe was seriously shaken several times in the course of history,
and the principal such episodes are called "crises of foundations". You can read about this in the middle 20th century histories of mathematics.
About the "first crisis" we can only speculate. The earliest complete mathematical writings which we have originate at the time after the crisis.
The second one is well documented. It is related to invention of Calculus which it was difficult to justify to the same level of rigor which was considered standard since the Greeks. It took about 200 years to obtain full clarity about foundations of calculus.
The third crisis was triggered by Cantor's discoveries, then the discovery of paradoxes, attempts to create new rigorous foundations, and spectacular failure of these attempts. In some sense this third crisis continues, since it was never resolved. But my impression is that most mathematicians just lost interest to these questions, so it is not perceived as a crisis anymore.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
These notions were popular in the middle of 20th century, in the aftermath of the third crisis. More precisely they were called the "crises of foundations of mathematics". Of course the first two were essentially the reconstructions of historians of mathematics.
Mathematics was conceived as a rigorous method of obtaining true statements by proofs. The starting point was a set of premises which were considered self-evident without any doubt. This basic believe was seriously shaken several times in the course of history,
and the principal such episodes are called "crises of foundations". You can read about this in the middle 20th century histories of mathematics.
About the "first crisis" we can only speculate. The earliest complete mathematical writings which we have originate at the time after the crisis.
The second one is well documented. It is related to invention of Calculus which it was difficult to justify to the same level of rigor which was considered standard since the Greeks. It took about 200 years to obtain full clarity about foundations of calculus.
The third crisis was triggered by Cantor's discoveries, then the discovery of paradoxes, attempts to create new rigorous foundations, and spectacular failure of these attempts. In some sense this third crisis continues, since it was never resolved. But my impression is that most mathematicians just lost interest to these questions, so it is not perceived as a crisis anymore.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
These notions were popular in the middle of 20th century, in the aftermath of the third crisis. More precisely they were called the "crises of foundations of mathematics". Of course the first two were essentially the reconstructions of historians of mathematics.
Mathematics was conceived as a rigorous method of obtaining true statements by proofs. The starting point was a set of premises which were considered self-evident without any doubt. This basic believe was seriously shaken several times in the course of history,
and the principal such episodes are called "crises of foundations". You can read about this in the middle 20th century histories of mathematics.
About the "first crisis" we can only speculate. The earliest complete mathematical writings which we have originate at the time after the crisis.
The second one is well documented. It is related to invention of Calculus which it was difficult to justify to the same level of rigor which was considered standard since the Greeks. It took about 200 years to obtain full clarity about foundations of calculus.
The third crisis was triggered by Cantor's discoveries, then the discovery of paradoxes, attempts to create new rigorous foundations, and spectacular failure of these attempts. In some sense this third crisis continues, since it was never resolved. But my impression is that most mathematicians just lost interest to these questions, so it is not perceived as a crisis anymore.
$endgroup$
These notions were popular in the middle of 20th century, in the aftermath of the third crisis. More precisely they were called the "crises of foundations of mathematics". Of course the first two were essentially the reconstructions of historians of mathematics.
Mathematics was conceived as a rigorous method of obtaining true statements by proofs. The starting point was a set of premises which were considered self-evident without any doubt. This basic believe was seriously shaken several times in the course of history,
and the principal such episodes are called "crises of foundations". You can read about this in the middle 20th century histories of mathematics.
About the "first crisis" we can only speculate. The earliest complete mathematical writings which we have originate at the time after the crisis.
The second one is well documented. It is related to invention of Calculus which it was difficult to justify to the same level of rigor which was considered standard since the Greeks. It took about 200 years to obtain full clarity about foundations of calculus.
The third crisis was triggered by Cantor's discoveries, then the discovery of paradoxes, attempts to create new rigorous foundations, and spectacular failure of these attempts. In some sense this third crisis continues, since it was never resolved. But my impression is that most mathematicians just lost interest to these questions, so it is not perceived as a crisis anymore.
edited 14 mins ago
answered 2 hours ago
Alexandre EremenkoAlexandre Eremenko
26.4k13996
26.4k13996
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to History of Science and Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhsm.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9575%2fwhat-is-the-status-of-the-three-crises-in-the-history-of-mathematics%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
Goedel's name would be a better candidate for a third crisis, but this is just my opinion; what's more, I do not think Russell's result had much importance in mathematics, it just showed the 'naivete' of early set theory .
$endgroup$
– sand1
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Russell's paradox has a significant impact on the future development of mathematics, i.e. the creation of axiomatic set theories. So it is not just a disproof of naive set theory earlier and definitively has an important impact in mathematics.
$endgroup$
– Math Wizard
3 hours ago