Slashdot Mirror


The Equation That Couldn't Be Solved

Joe Kauzlarich writes "There's an ever-growing number of fun niche books seeping onto the mathematics bookshelves, that, while not essential, are almost always guaranteed to leave the reader with a fuller taste of the subject at hand and an appetite to learn more. Mario Livio's The Equation That Couldn't Be Solved is a modest semi-classic of pop-math literature, focusing on the central concepts of group theory, the subject that turned mathematics on its head a century and a half ago and has ever since been one of the delights of studying higher mathematics." Read on for the rest of Joe's review. The Equation That Couldn't Be Solved: How Mathematical Genius Discovered the Language of Symmetry author Mario Livio pages 335 publisher Simon & Schuster rating 8/10 reviewer Joe Kauzlarich ISBN 0-7432-5820-7 summary Popular math/science

If you've studied group theory, you've probably heard it called 'the language of symmetry' or referred to by some such vague, colorful non-description, while your professor and textbook direct you to just memorize the handful of basic axioms, definitions, and theorems that reveal little to the unknowing eye in the way of having much to do with symmetry. Livio concentrates on the more colorful aspects of symmetry, spending little time with black and white textbook theory. For this reason, the book makes ideal extra-curricular entertainment for those enrolled in a first-semester course on abstract algebra.

It seems that Mario Livio's technique in writing books is to choose an ostensibly simple topic and explore it from a broad array of angles. In his second and most popular work, The Golden Ratio, he chose to write about the number Phi. The book reads like the front page of Slashdot, skipping quickly from topic to topic, though sticking to the general theme, insuring that the reader must never get bored. The treatment he once gave to Phi, he now gives to symmetry. Livio explores the concept of symmetry as it manifests itself in biology, art, physics and (especially, of course) mathematics. Then he broaches the most important topic of the book, group theory, and ventures upon the two stunning tales of its conception, as the book's two central figures independently discover that a certain equation cannot be solved by means of regular algebra (which, at the time, referred to the sort of formulaic manipulation done by today's undergrad algebra and calculus students; now, the word 'algebra,' in professional circles, includes group theory and much more).

At last, less-experienced readers will find a warm entry-way into one of the most fascinating and advanced branches of mathematics, one which has, through time, permeated most other branches. Experienced readers will revisit a familiar topic in its historical and mathematical-cultural context, as well as gain an 'intuitive' picture of group theoretical symmetry, an aspect often omitted from first semester advanced algebra courses. All readers can be comforted that mathematical notation is hardly anywhere to be found in the book. Experts need not fear wasting money to relearn what they already know and beginners can pick up the math through its brief mostly-English-language descriptions and should feel more comfortable diving into a course on the subject.

What is this Equation That Couldn't Be Solved? The equation in question is the quintic equation-- a polynomial of degree five (i.e. ax^5+bx^4+...+ex+f=0). You've probably studied the quadratic equation-- ax^2+bx+c=0-- as well as the quadratic formula, used to solve this equation-- x= (b(+/-)sqrt(b^2-4ac))/2a. The quintic equation cannot be solved by means of a formula and it took hundreds of years and two very young men to discover this. And as happens in so many famous instances throughout the history of science, the answer to a seemingly innocent little problem becomes the key to a revolution in thought.

A 22-year-old Norwegian named Niels Henrick Abel (1802-1829) and a 20-year-old Frenchman named Evariste Galois (1811-1832), discovered the impossibility of solving the quintic almost simultaneously in the 1820's. Both died within years of their discovery and both went unnoticed and uncelebrated until after their death. The tragedies that preceded their deaths-- Abel died essentially out of poverty; Galois, poor and already half-mad, in a pistol duel-- have served as a valuable lesson to the mathematical community ever since: spot genius early and foster it. Who knows what would have become of these men had they lived through the prime of their talents, just as the great Gauss and his contemporaries were developing the foundations for what would become Modern mathematics? It was Abel and, particularly, Galois, who defined the language of symmetry. Both saw The Equation in a light that had never been seen before.

Mario Livio is a historian as much as he is a scientist and the detail and color he gives to the lives of these tragic figures is unforgettable. Not only was his research thorough, but he even visited the regions he describes, and his results on the mysteries surrounding the death of Galois offer conclusiveness and definitiveness that seem hardly to have been matched in this particular line of research. Additionally, Livio digs up fresh mathematical anecdotes throughout the book, being careful not to repeat those stories or 'factoids' that are repeated ad nauseum across the genre.

Group theory has become an essential requisite of such diverse areas of scientific research as was unimaginable at the time of its inception. The fundamental particles of nature are arranged in groups, making the subject a cornerstone of particle physics and all physical 'theories of everything.' Group theory is the simplest sort of 'mathematical abstraction' (actually, it is a step past set theory) in that numbers and equations play no part in its basic definitions. Once you learn it well, then rings and fields follow. Then comes the fascinating study of topology, and then there is little that can stop you from learning anything you want mathematically (okay, that's a stretch). Cryptography is a modern applied field which requires a good working knowledge of group theory. I'm sure there are many other examples of applied group theory if you can't be convinced of the beauty of the subject in and for itself. Physics enthusiasts will enjoy the later chapter on group theory in modern particle physics, which is meant to show how integral the subject is to understanding and communicating the very laws of our universe.

While this is surely a bias on my part, I wasn't impressed with the amount of actual math described in the book. The very basics of group theory, as I mentioned, are elaborated upon-- the definition of a group, permutation groups, symmetry groups-- but Livio makes few attempts to make clear what group theorists study (mathematically-speaking) beyond these simple sorts of ideas. To his credit, he does explain Galois's proof quite clearly, considering the amount of time a student spends getting to it in textbooks. The book, as I've said, is foremost a look at symmetry, secondarily historical, and lastly, a math text. It is light reading, but-- take my word for it-- extremely entertaining and worth the few bucks. If you aren't much of a math geek, this book provides a great chance for you to get a glimpse at abstract algebra, which, IMHO, is one of the most fascinating branches of mathematics and, oddly, seems normally to be kept well-hidden from the eyes of non-math or non-physics majors."

You can purchase The Equation That Couldn't Be Solved from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

57 of 299 comments (clear)

  1. As Barbie says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Math is hard!

    1. Re:As Barbie says by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 3, Funny

      The actual quote was "English is easy. Math are hard."

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  2. The real geek equation...solved! by dada21 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Shower^2 + Shave + BrushTeethx32 + Get(Own(Apartment)) + not(sqr(Clothing)) = Women

    1. Re:The real geek equation...solved! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wait, all I have to do is get my own apartment and not wear square clothing?

      Since right now:
      Shower=0
      Shave=0
      BrushTeeth=0

      which resolves to:
      0^2 + 0 + 0x32 = 0

    2. Re:The real geek equation...solved! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ah, but as every young mathematician knows, women are evil -

      Women takes time and money.

      Women = time x money

      Time IS money

      Women = money x money = money ^ 2

      Money is the root of all evil

      money = sqrt(evil)
      => money^2 = evil

      since women = money^2

      women = evil

  3. favorite math quote by flynt · · Score: 5, Funny

    To paraphrase my favorite math quote (which I believe a physicist said): There are only two kinds of math books, those you can't read past the first page, and those you can't read past the first sentence.

    1. Re:favorite math quote by vossman77 · · Score: 4, Informative
      see reply to previous quote
      "There are only two kinds of math books: those you can't read past the first page, and those you can't read past the first sentence."

      CN Yang, Nobel Prize in Physics, 1957
    2. Re:favorite math quote by DGtlRift · · Score: 2, Funny

      My favorite math quote..

      "There are 10 types of people in this world - those who understand binary and those that don't."

      --
      How about a spell checker for slashdot, or even more impressive, a spell checker for strings in C-Code? Use lint! -DG
    3. Re:favorite math quote by tawhaki · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, it's actually:

      "There are only 10 types of people: those who understand octal, those who don't, and six other types of morons." :)

  4. Galois by Otter · · Score: 5, Informative
    The tragedies that preceded their deaths-- Abel died essentially out of poverty; Galois, poor and already half-mad, in a pistol duel-- have served as a valuable lesson to the mathematical community ever since: spot genius early and foster it.

    Galois, IIRC, was the one who stayed up all night before the duel, frantically writing down every half-formed mathematical insight for posterity. Which probably didn't help his shooting. He was only 20, I think.

    1. Re:Galois by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It was common that those who would participate in a pistol duel to stay up all night--writing a will, writing down their knowledge for posterity, praying, etc. Without having researched the issue, I can say that his opponent was likely up all night, as well.

    2. Re:Galois by msuarezalvarez · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yet it was quite uncommon that the result of their writing down helped shape Mathematics for a couple of centuries...

    3. Re:Galois by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 3, Funny

      He was also a political activist, which lends a wonderful double meaning to "the quintic equation cannot be solved by radicals".

      As Tom Lehrer said, "It's people like that who make you realize how little you've accomplished".

    4. Re:Galois by ozbird · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Guns don't kill people; maths kills people."

  5. Re:Solve x = x+1 over the reals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    you know you could just use x++

  6. (-(p/4))^1/4BR((((-5/p)^5/4)q)/4) by digitaldc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "...write down the roots of the quintic in terms of square roots, cube roots, and the Bring radical, which is therefore an algebraic solution in terms of algebraic functions of a single variable..."
    see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quintic_equation

    It's really that simple.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:(-(p/4))^1/4BR((((-5/p)^5/4)q)/4) by miskatonic+alumnus · · Score: 4, Informative

      How is this Bring Radical an algebraic function? It's defined as an analytic extension of an infinite series.

    2. Re:(-(p/4))^1/4BR((((-5/p)^5/4)q)/4) by zootm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Computational complexity scares the living daylights out of everyone.

  7. Curious and interesting numbers by Skiron · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you like books about maths (as we say here in the UK - mathematics is PLURAL), check out 'The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Numbers' by David Wells - ISBN 0-14-008029-5.

    1. Re:Curious and interesting numbers by TheoMurpse · · Score: 4, Informative

      mathematics is PLURAL

      No, "mathematics" is a singular noun that just happens to end in 's' in the same vein as "his", "pus" and "psoriasis."

      "Math" is the American abbreviation for the singular noun. "Maths" is the UK abbreviation for the singular noun.

  8. Cool! by dorkygeek · · Score: 4, Funny
    In his second and most popular work, The Golden Ratio, he chose to write about the number Phi. The book reads like the front page of Slashdot, skipping quickly from topic to topic, though sticking to the general theme, insuring that the reader must never get bored.

    Cool, the first book with dupes already integrated!!

    --
    Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
  9. How is that called? by n0other · · Score: 2, Funny

    Um, how about this? : (a + b)^5 = a^5 + 5(a^4)b + 10(a^3)(b^2) + 10(a^2)(b^3) + 5a(b^4) + b^5.

    1. Re:How is that called? by Hiro+Antagonist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, no. Sure, *some* fifth-order polynomials are factorable to a set of reduced-order polynominals, but not all. What's being said here is that you can't take an arbitrary fifth-order polynomial, in the form ax^5 + bx^4 + cx^3 + dx^2 + ex + f, and have a formula to provide a solution. So there can be no 'quintic formula' along the same lines as the 'quadratic' formula, making polynomials of fifth-order or higher much harder to solve.

      --

      --
      I Hit the Karma Cap, and All I Got Was This Lousy .sig.
  10. It's been solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I typed in the ISBN into Google. Google told me 0 - 7432 - 5820 - 7 = -13259 Simple.

  11. if you want to learn a bit about group theory by flynt · · Score: 2, Informative

    There are countless (obviously not really) books on group theory at all different levels. If you're not a math major and want to learn a bit about group theory (and rings, too) from a book that makes it interesting, historical, and gives motivation for the theory, check out Galian's "Contemporary Abstract Algebra". This book clearly isn't meant to prepare you for graduate level algebra, but that's not what many of us are going for of course. It introduces the theory with LOTS of examples, and even relates most of the theory to ways you can use it in practice to solve all sorts of different problems in "real life". Check it out!

    1. Re:if you want to learn a bit about group theory by jfengel · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, you got it partly right: there are an infinite number of books on group theory, but they're countably infinite, because each is of finite length, so you can assign an integer value to each (say, the ASCII coding of the book). And they're a subset of the countably infinite set of all books.

      Of course, only some of them have actually been written and sold, and that's a small and finite number. The books on group theory which have yet to be written are all out there, but it's left as an exercise to the writer.

      (Eh, it was a good joke when I started writing it.)

    2. Re:if you want to learn a bit about group theory by jfengel · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, anecdotally I can tell you that when my group theory prof was talking, one got the very strong impression that he was never going to shut up. Which leads me to think that there's an infinite number of things to say about group theory. Or at the very least, you can say the same things over and over again.

      (Just kidding; he was actually a fine lecturer.)

  12. Worth the Few Bucks by fossa · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Worth the few bucks", or maybe a trip to the library?

  13. Group Theory Joke by keithmo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Q: What's purple and commutes?

    A: An Abelian grape.

    1. Re:Group Theory Joke by Kid+Brother+of+St.+A · · Score: 3, Funny

      Q: What's purple, commutes, and is worshipped by a small cult of followers?

      A: A finitely venerated abelian grape.

  14. Math is all about the dupes by everphilski · · Score: 2

    I mean, come on, how many times have you seen "x"

    or "cos()" "sin()"

    -everphilski-

    1. Re:Math is all about the dupes by dorkygeek · · Score: 2
      That's the very reason I always fell asleep during math lectures. It's always the same, day in and day out. It's always about x and y.

      --
      Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
  15. Quadratic Equation by sameerdesai · · Score: 4, Informative

    FTFR: You've probably studied the quadratic equation-- ax^2+bx+c=0-- as well as the quadratic formula, used to solve this equation-- x= (b(+/-)sqrt(b^2-4ac))/2a

    The roots of the equation are x = (-b(+/-)sqrt(b^2-4ac))/2a

    1. Re:Quadratic Equation by farker+haiku · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure, just because you actually read what the poster wrote, you get the easy karma points.

      --
      Your sig(k) has been stolen. There is a puff of smoke!
    2. Re:Quadratic Equation by servognome · · Score: 5, Funny

      x = (-b(+/-)sqrt(b^2-4ac))/2a

      Is it me or is 1337 sp3ak getting even harder to understand :)

      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
  16. Pop Math? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yeah, right. Pop Math. My friends I are always discussing popular equations around the water cooler.

    I love it when I can throw in a funny "pop math" reference.

    1. Re:Pop Math? by ILLEGAL+Alien · · Score: 2, Funny

      The only way to bring math into the pop culture and call it pop-math would be to thinker up a formula for getting girls... ...but unfortunately f^3+b^2+r=0 where f=flowers b=begging r=ring ...still equals ZERO.

  17. Mod down, same kaleidojewel spam as always by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Informative? Please... don't be fooled by AC's "Fermat's Last Theorem is teh cool too!" statement. It's the same Amazon-referral-whoring post (see the redirect) that he sticks in every book review. Pathetic.

  18. Basic definitions without equality? by nightlylemma · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Group theory is the simplest sort of 'mathematical abstraction' (actually, it is a step past set theory) in that numbers and equations play no part in its basic definitions.

    I thought, and Algebra by Isaacs confirms, that a group is a set G with an associative binary operation * such that there exists e in G with properties:
    1. For each x in G, x*e=e*x=x.
    2. For each x in G, there is a y in G such that x*y=y*x=e.
    Can anyone give the definition that doesn't use equations? I didn't think so.
    1. Re:Basic definitions without equality? by Secret+Rabbit · · Score: 2, Informative

      A group is a set of elements under a binary operation (that is associative) such that:

      1) there is an element call the identity such that:
                - it is commutative with all elements of the group
                - under the binary operation, the identity with a non-identity element results in that same non-identity element

      2) for every non-identity element there is another non-identity element that under the binary operation results in the identity that commutes with said non-identity element.

      3) for any two elements in the group, under the binary operation of the group, the result is in the group.

      I think that given this word definition of a group, no-one will argue that the equation form is not superior.

  19. Re:Buwahahaha! by JustOK · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yah, wonder how many dupe topics/chapters there are.

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
  20. Re:Hmmm. by IntelliTubbie · · Score: 2, Funny

    What happens if you ferment a bunch of Abelian grapes in a Klein bottle?

    I suppose you'd get very disoriented.

    Cheers,
    IT

    --

    Power corrupts. PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.

  21. Sometimes s. by everphilski · · Score: 2

    (Perhaps you slept through Laplace transforms?)

    -everphilski-

  22. Re:Slashdot review rating equation solved by SMS_Design · · Score: 3, Funny

    Good answer, but you lose points. You forgot to simplify the fraction. 4/5.

  23. Well-hidden? by slavemowgli · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "kept well-hidden"? Sorry, but that at least is utter rubish. No part of mathematics is kept well-hidden by anyone really; it's just that

    1. the general public isn't really interested in mathematics (unlike physics, for example; most non-mathematicians I've met seem to have an instinctive averse reaction when you even say "mathematics")

    2. mathematics, in general, cannot be dumbed down simplified for laypeople the same way that other natural sciences can. Someone can have a general idea of what a black hole is even when they don't understand the physical theories behind it, but how do you explain to a layperson what a Hilbert space is?

    Coupled together, these things mean that the general public isn't really aware of what mathematicians even study or why it's important to them, but it's not the fault of mathematics (or mathematicians).

    --
    quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    1. Re:Well-hidden? by Omestes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Since when was mathematics a natural science?

      It's like saying predicate logic is a natural science.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    2. Re:Well-hidden? by raydulany · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No. Not every mathematician will say this. For instance, this one thinks you don't know what you're talking about. First off, although it is correct that mathematics is formulated abstractly, the notion that you have of 'model' seems to be seriously misguided: in the natural numbers (N, a mathematical construct) there is no possibility that the numbers in N behave any differently than mathematics says they do, no matter how large they are (there's this thing called induction...if I have to say more, then I no longer think you don't know what you're talking about. I'll *know* you don't know what you're talking about). Second, Goedel's proof doesn't show that the 'models' (and again, I reiterate that you don't use the term correctly) break down, only that in any axiomatic system complex enough to formulate its own self-consistency there are statements which can neither be proved true nor untrue (hardly a 'break down', which I would consider something like finding an inconsistency). Third, mathematics doesn't build models and then test them: it formulates statements and then proves those statements true or untrue (or, as already mentioned, proves those statements can be proven neither true nor untrue under the current assumptions). There is no 'testing' in the sense of other natural sciences: no experiments; no analyzing data; no scientific method (although processes similar in nature to these go into the formulation of statements and their proofs).

        Finally, mathematics is a natural science principally because of its historic (and contemporary) association with physics and other more obviously natural sciences, although one could easily argue that much of modern mathematics could be placed just as easily in the same group as philosophy (e.g. one might find a course on logic in a philosophy department).

  24. A few clarifications... by Manchot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just so people don't get the wrong idea, it's not just quintic polynomials which can't be solved with one formula: it's all polynomials of degree five and higher. Also, "can't be solved" is something of a misnomer: there exist five solutions to a degree five polynomial, and they can be expressed either as infinite series or in terms of some non-standard functions. It's just that they can't be solved in terms of addition, multiplication, and exponentiation (i.e., using +, *, and radicals).

  25. Equation For Folding Paper in Half 12 times by capitalj · · Score: 5, Interesting

    http://pomonahistorical.org/12times.htm

    Britney Gallivan has solved the Paper Folding Problem. This well known challenge was to fold paper in half more than seven or eight times, using paper of any size or shape.

    The task was commonalty known to be impossible. Over the years the problem has been discussed by many people, including mathematicians and has been demonstrated to be impossible on TV.

  26. Re:Solve this... by podperson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    if you really think about it, functions like sin(x) and ln(x) are really not closed form either

    Think about it harder.

    You can express anything as an infinite series. E.g. 1 = 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + ..., so I can't integrate S 1 dx ?

  27. The answer is trivial by abb3w · · Score: 4, Funny
    What happens if you ferment a bunch of Abelian grapes in a Klein bottle?

    You'll make an Algebraic Topologist whine.

    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
  28. But could they solve.. by Unski · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ..the equations of love?

    "It is only through the mysterious equations of love that any logic can be found."

  29. Re:Solve this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Think about it harder.

    Think about it a little bit harder.

    Sin(x) and ln(x) are transcendental functions. Any function or value can be expressed in terms of an infinite series. Some functions and values can not be represented without an infinite series. Functions such as sin(x) and ln(x). These are not "closed form." They are functions that can only be expressed (generally) as infinite sums, which we gave given specific names to.

  30. Duel Staged; death by suicide more likely by Intelligent+Design · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's something that might deserve a closer look: The duel and the events leading to it are blurred by time and the phantasies of novelists and what's worse biographers. We can rule out or at least it is highly improbable that the duel was a plot of the royalists to murder him. Though this version is a favorite legend lingering in many biographies. Most probably it was Galois himself who incited this interpretation. He wanted himself to appear as a victim of the government, which should enrage the masses to revolt. He dropped remarks pointing in this direction: At a meeting of the Friends of the People and in his last letters. The most likely reason is: He was weary of life, because of his unhappy love affair, his fruitless efforts for gaining recognition for his mathematical work, his financial and work situation and he felt finished up a blind alley in politics as well. So his duel was like a staged suicide. It is still not clear who the other dueller a supposed political friend was. One thing is clear, though it kills a favorite legend: He didn't lay down his mathematical theory in the night befor the duel. He pointed out the cornerstones of his scientific life in a long letter to his friend Chevalier, so that everything might be properly evaluated and not be lost.

  31. Pretty graphs by trilliwig · · Score: 2, Informative

    Wolfram Research has some interesting explication on historical methods of solving the quintic: http://library.wolfram.com/examples/quintic/main.h tml

  32. Look ma, no equations! by Leadhyena · · Score: 2, Insightful
    A group is a category over one object with invertible morphisms. Pbbbbbbbbbt.

    Seriously though... every logical statement is technically an "equation". Even the definition of "definition" (if you allow me to quine for a bit) is a substitution of a long sequence of symbols with a smaller one, and substitutions are what equations are all about. I would argue with the submitter that Group Theory is not the simplest sort of abstraction (Category Theory is) but his point is still there: numbers and equations in their connotative or layman's sense are not involved.

  33. Re:Solve this... by raoul666 · · Score: 2, Funny

    You have to integrate by parts. I forget how to do that, mind you, but I remember it working.

    Slightly off-topic, while doing calculus in high school, me and a friend were trying to solve some optimization problem. We worked on it for quite a while, and when we'd done all we could, we collected like terms and gazed at our hard-earned solution: 6=4. We had a hell of a time with that one, I tell you.

    --
    When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl