Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
2006, Mathematics and Its Applications 581
…
11 pages
1 file
This is the János Bolyai Memorial Book, edited by András Prékopa and Emil Molnár. Only the first sample papers are presented here.
2020
The main goal of this work is to investigate the historical transition from Euclidean to non-Euclidean geometry, to understand what the motivation of such a transition was and to understand to the best of my abilities how it was achieved. This will be done by reviewing the relevant authors’ original work and the correspondence between some of them. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 01A55, 53A05, 53A35
UNITEXT for physics, 2020
At the end of this chapter, the big picture towards Relativity will emerge. Before discussing all the details and the proofs, we intend to sketch it now. The most known models for Non-Euclidean Geometry are the Poincaré disk model and the Poincaré half-plane model. Another related model, the exterior disk model, can be figured and presented. Two other models will be highlighted: the hemisphere model and the hyperboloid model. The first three models are connected among them by inversion. Two models have distances which can be described by a general principle of metrization; the distance between two points is d(A, B) = ln max P∈K g AB (P) min P∈K g AB (P) = ln max P∈K |P A| |P B| min P∈K |P A| |P B| , where the set K and the set J have to be specified. In the case of the exterior of the disk, it is a good exercise for the reader to check that a similar construction works. Therefore all three models are endowed with a distance constructed by this special procedure. The Poincaré Disk Model Let us consider the circle C(O, 1) having O(0, 0) as a center and r = 1 as a radius. The interior of C(O, 1), D n = intC(O, 1) = {(x, y) ∈ E 2 |x 2 + y 2 < 1} is the Poincaré disk and in the same time the "plane" of the Non-Euclidean Geometry.
Journal of Geometry, 2010
A. Cayley and F. Klein discovered in the nineteenth century that euclidean and non-euclidean geometries can be considered as mathematical structures living inside projective-metric spaces. They outlined this idea with respect to the real projective plane and established ("begründeten") in this way the hyperbolic and elliptic geometry. The generalization of this approach to projective spaces over arbitrary fields and of arbitrary dimensions requires two steps, the introduction of a metric in a pappian projective space and the definition of substructures as Cayley-Klein geometries. While the first step is taken in H. Struve and R. Struve (J Geom 81:155-167, 2004), the second step is made in this article. We show that the concept of a Cayley-Klein geometry leads to a unified description and classification of a wide range of non-euclidean geometries including the main geometries studied in the foundations of geometry by D.
2011
1. The two foundational options in Lobachevsky's non-Euclidean geometry. 2. The several programs on the foundations of Mathematics 3. The main conflicts generated by incommensurability phenomena 4. Searching FoM in spite of incommensurabilities 5. Conclusion: Back to Lobachevsky! ABSTRACT. The unsuccessful effort for circumscribing the founda- tions of Mathematics by the programs launched around the year 1900 is rationally re-constructed by means of the two basic options which emerged from Lobachevsky's work on non-Euclidean geome- try. It is proved that the two main programs, Hilbert's and Brouwer's, implicitly wanted to achieve just these options; which however imply unavoidable incommensurability phenomena, which barred their programs. As a conclusion, one century and half ago the birth of non-Euclidean geometries suggested much more than new axioms on parallel lines, rather the very foundations of Mathemat- ics.
New Elements of Euclidean Geometry, 2021
This book introduces a new basis for Euclidean geometry consisting of 29 definitions, 10 axioms and 45 corollaries with which it is possible to prove the strong form of Euclid's First Postulate, Euclid's Second Postulate, Hilbert's axioms I.5, II.1, II.2, II.3, II.4 and IV.6, Euclid's Postulate 4, the axioms of Posidonius-Geminus, of Proclus, of Cataldi, of Tacquet 11, of Khayyam, of Playfair, Euclid's Postulate 5, and the historical statements proposed in place of Euclid's Postulate 5. The book ends with a chapter that culminates in the proof of the Pythagorean theorem and its converse.
2015
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 2021
In this paper we extend the NeutroAlgebra & AntiAlgebra to the geometric space, by founding the NeutroGeometry & AntiGeometry. While the Non-Euclidean Geometries resulted from the total negation of only one specific axiom (Euclid's Fifth Postulate), the AntiGeometry results from the total negation of any axiom and even of more axioms from any geometric axiomatic system (Euclid's, Hilbert's, etc.), and the NeutroAxiom results from the partial negation of one or more axioms [and no total negation of no axiom] from any geometric axiomatic system. Therefore, the NeutroGeometry and AntiGeometry are respectively alternatives and generalizations of the Non-Euclidean Geometries. In the second part, we recall the evolution from Paradoxism to Neutrosophy, then to NeutroAlgebra & AntiAlgebra, afterwards to NeutroGeometry & AntiGeometry, and in general to NeutroStructure & AntiStructure that naturally arise in any field of knowledge. At the end, we present applications of many NeutroStructures in our real world.
UNITEXT for physics, 2020
We intend to construct these geometries using a slightly modified Hilbert's axioms system in the same way as it is done in [????]. An interesting thing is related to the fact that it exists a common part for Euclidean and Non-Euclidean Geometry, the so called Absolute Geometry. Roughly speaking, the Absolute Geometry consists in all theorems that can be thought and proved using the axiomatic system before introducing a parallelism axiom. In our vision, the most important theorem in Absolute Geometry is the Legendre one: "The sum of angles of a triangle is less than or equal two right angles." It allows us to prove that only two situations hold: "The sum of angles in each triangle is equal to two right angles." or, the other situation: "The sum of angles in each triangle is strictly less than two right angles" Choosing an appropriate parallelism axiom we discover the Euclidean world, corresponding to the first case, i.e. the sum of angles is equal to two right angles. The denial of the previous parallelism axiom leads us to the Non-Euclidean Geometry; here the sum of angles is strictly less than two right angles. We have used few figures to illustrate these concepts, because, the reader can remain with a false image about how lines look like. However, in Absolute Geometry the reader can think and draw images as in the Euclidean Geometry, because all the objects and all the theorems valid in Absolute Geometry are also valid in Euclidean Geometry. Here the lines are the ordinary straight lines of the plane. The images can be thought in a more complicated way if someone try to imagine them in a model for the Non-Euclidean
In this paper we extend the NeutroAlgebra & AntiAlgebra to the geometric spaces, by founding the NeutroGeometry & AntiGeometry. While the Non-Euclidean Geometries resulted from the total negation of only one specific axiom (Euclid's Fifth Postulate), the AntiGeometry results from the total negation of any axiom and even of more axioms from any geometric axiomatic system (Euclid's, Hilbert's, etc.), and the NeutroGeometry results from the partial negation of one or more axioms [and no total negation of no axiom] from any geometric axiomatic system. Generally, instead of a classical geometric Axiom, one may take any classical geometric Theorem and transform it by NeutroSophication or AntiSophication into a NeutroTheorem or AntiTheorem in order to construct a NeutroGeometry or AntiGeometry. Therefore, the NeutroGeometry and AntiGeometry are respectively alternatives and generalizations of the Non-Euclidean Geometries. In the second part, we recall the evolution from Paradoxism to Neutrosophy, then to NeutroAlgebra & AntiAlgebra, afterwards to NeutroGeometry & AntiGeometry, and in general to NeutroStructure & AntiStructure that naturally arise in any field of knowledge. At the end, we present applications of many NeutroStructures in our real world.
2020
This is the story of how efforts to solve a centuries-old problem originating with Euclid led a Russian mathematician to discover a new geometry. You will learn about Nikolai Lobachevsky's life in 19th century Russia and what led him to the discovery of new Geometry. In addition, we will delve into the principles of Non-Euclidean Geometry. This paper is oriented for general public and does not require any particular mathematical background except knowledge of high school geometry.
Integrated Photonics and Nanophotonics Research and Applications, 2008
Quality of Life (Banja Luka)-APEIRON, 2012
Beyond Bounderies. Connecting Visual Cultures in the Provinces of Ancient Rome. Edited by Alcock, Egri and Frakes , 2016
Revista Brasileira De Zoologia, 2002
Journal of Computational Physics, 2011
Comptes Rendus Mécanique, 2011
American Journal of Physics, 1985
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 2003
Techniques & culture, 2019
Journal of Social Work Practice, 2018
Proceedings of the XLVIII Brasilian Congress of Engineering Education, 2020
Przegląd Geograficzny, 2018
Innovation in Aging, 2019
Teoría y Crítica de la Psicología, 2019
European Heart Journal, 2017
Haunting ghosts of the past - about aDNA and navigating its misuse through a contemporary identity crisis, 2024