1 The abstract algebra and the unsolved problems of antiquity .

By George Mpantes mathematician

mpantes on scribd .

What is characteristic of pure mathematics is its irrelevance to immediate or potential application. Some pure mathematicians argue that there is a potential usefulness in any mathematical development and no one can foresee its actual future application. We shall see an example. With the elementary theory of fields of abstract algebra, understand we why can the

Greeks were unable to solve the famous three problems, that of the trisection of the angle, doubling the cube and squaring the circle, using only the compass and ruler. The conceptual and chronological distance between the geometry of Euclid and abstract algebra is huge, how they are connected? With the common algebraic structure of constructible numbers with ruler and compass, and that of the field. For example: what do they have in common, the set of polynomials with real coefficients, all of the free vectors, all matrices mxn m, n N, the set of real functions with a common domain, the set of complex numbers, etc. It's all vector spaces over the field of real numbers, so have a common axiomatic basis. All theorems we prove in spaces, apply to all of the above sets, if we define appropriately the operations. The geometry of the Greeks standardized by Euclid , was originally based on the concepts of point , straight line and circle, and for this reason, tools for the study of geometry was the ruler for the construction of lines and compass to construct circles . The ruler was not calibrated because that did not account for distances but scratched lines between two points. Later began

2 studying shapes that are not constructed with only ruler and compass , but the three unsolved problems mentioned above, raised in Euclidean ' genus ' of ' Elements'1. Why does in this genus we could bisect an angle with ruler and compass , but no trisect it? ? Or why we could construct a segment equivalent to 2 ( given ) and not to impossible? The answer will be given through the theory of the field extension. In abstract algebra, we need some concepts for the three problems : the concept of field, of field extension , of the degree of field extension , and of the algebraic number. The set of rationals Q is a field ( satisfies some axioms , has a Q ( 2) structure), if we add (attach ) the number 2 and all numbers with the operations of 2 with the rationals, we have the extension of Q, containing numbers of the form a + b 2 with a, b rationals . The degree of extension is denoted [Q ( 2): Q] is the degree of the irreducible polynomial over Q, with 2 as a root i.e. x 2 -2 (degree two, irreducible on Q). Algebraic number, is any number that is the root of a polynomial with coefficients in Q, ie the 2 is algebraic because it is the root of x 2 -2, o a root of x3 -2 , etc. Obviously the algebraic numbers are transcendental , ie the number e. as ? Its construction difficult or

extension of

rationals, any rational is algebraic .Every non- algebraic number is called

The numbers and geometry in Greeks. Greeks arithmetic and geometry were always together because they were considered two different ways of exploring the same number system , so seemed very natural the geometric constructions to perform arithmetic operations. Each number ought have a geometric construction. And as the known numbers were the rationals , the coexistence of arithmetic with the geometry was harmonious. After the shock of the revelation that 2 was not
1

The solution of Menechmos on the problem of doubling the cube using parabola and hyperbola, could not be drawn with a ruler and compass

3 rational , and the fact that he had a geometric existence but non arithmetic 2, strengthened the belief in the geometric construction of numbers. The numbers were contructible in geometry of rule and compass , and vice versa only numbers that would be presented in the geometrical construction of rule and compass could exist , meaning that we construct geometrically the number a mean that construct the segment length a. Within the framework of the three problems , our belief was that the numbers contained in them, clearly exist, so should therefore be a corresponding geometric construction . But all numbers are constructible 3 ? Geometric image construction . .The geometry of the rule and compass basic constructions defining constructible points and hence constructible numbers are 1. assuming any two points O ( 0,0) and A ( a, b ) ( with coordinates rational numbers , key points ) 2 . construction of a straight line through the two points or cycle from its center and radius , 3 . construction of a point of intersection of two straight lines , 4. construction of the two points of intersection circles and straight or cycles. So produced all constructible points in a problem since the shapes made by rule, and compass is straight lines and circles. Let's take an example of geometrical construction of a number through the above process of constructible points : Be constructed with ruler and compass the square root of any positive integer As we will construct a right triangle with hypotenuse (x +1 ) / 2 and vertical side (x -1 ) / 2 Let OA = (x-1) / 2 and OB = (x +1) / 2 M midpoint of OB, then PB = P B = x (the PB, PB are tangents to the large circle so the OPB rectangle at
2 3

x.

The 2 is the hypotenuse of a right triangle perpendicular sides 1. We always mean with the use of the rule and diabetes

4 P etc ...) Here the constructible number x, which corresponds to segment PB defined by a series of constructible points A, B, P, P which emerged with the above four possibilities provided by the rule, and compass. Similar constructions with ruler and compass we can remember many of the high school as: If the ends of a line segment are constructible then the midpoint is constructible (join with the ruler the intersections of two circles with centers of the two points and the radius length equal the length of the section) or If the three peaks parallelogram level are constructible then the fourth is constructible etc. Abstract algebra . Relations 2 and 3 reduce to rational operations. The intersection of a straight line and a cycle or two cycles, are reduced to the solution of quadratic equation , ie the square root extraction . So considering that the integers are easily constructible , it is known from high school constructions to show that A. Each rational is constructible . B. if a > 0 is constructible then and a similarly is constructible ( design radius of a circle (a +1 ) / 2 and the center ( (a +1 ) / 2,0 ) and from the point A (1.0 ) draw perpendicular to the x-axis that meets the circle at B. The segment AB is a). C. if a, b is constructible similarly are and a b , ab , a / b ( b 0) , ie the constructible numbers with compass and ruler are a field ( these are the conditions) , which contains the rationals , is an extension of rational since it contains the a. An example of constructible number is Theorem 1, if k is a constructible real number then k is the algebraic on Q , and the degree of extension Q [( k ) / Q] is a power of 2 . This theorem is a necessary condition for the existence of a constructible number k and applying it, we can show that there is no geometrical construction for the three problems of antiquity using only compass and ruler. .

Trisection of angle . The first solution was Hippias by using the squared curve. We show that there is no always geometric construction for trisection angle using the rule and diabetes. Knowing an angle is equivalent to know the cosine of the angle . So on to trisect the angle 3 have to construct the solution of the equation cos3 = 4cos3 3cos . ( 1 ) If the angle =200 so cos3 = 1/ 2, the equation (1 ) becomes 8x3 - 6x -1 = 0 and the polynomials is irreducible with a real root a = cos200 and degree of extension and [Q ( cos200 ): Q] = 3 therefore cos200 is not constructible , i.e. the angle 200 is not constructible . ( Theorem 1 ) . If the angle 3 = 900 ( 1 ) becomes 4x3 - 3x = 0 which is not irreducible , and also know that the 30 angle is constructible . Doubling cube . Solutions given by Hippocrates , Archytas Menechmou etc. If x is the edge of cube with twice the volume of the cube with edge 1 then x3 = 2.13 ie x= . To construct, the point ( , 0 ) must be is the root

constructible . But from the theorem 1 appears impossible since of the irreducible polynomial x3 -2 and thus [Q (

): Q] = 3. (theor. 1).

Squaring the circle The problem is the construction of a square with an area equal to the area of a circle 1. We investigate if the number is constructible . But from a classical result that was shown by the F.Lindemann in 1882, we know that the number (pi) is transcendental over Q, ie it doesnt satisfy some polynomial equation with rational coefficients ( not algebraic on Q, Theorem 1 ) . Hence the is transcendental too, so it is not constructible with ruler and compass . Therefore, we can not square the circle using only rule and compass. Books : Algebraic extensions of fields : Paul J. McCarthy Dover books Field and Galois theory :J.S.Milne (inernet)

6 Introduction to Galois theory:Adrew Baker (University of Glaskow) Web sites :Wikipedia, Wolfran Mathdord, Planet Mathword, Proofwiki George Mpantes mathematician www.mpantes .gr