Advertisement

Heuristics and Inferential Microstructures: The Path to Quaternions

  • Emiliano Ippoliti
Article
  • 11 Downloads

Abstract

I investigate the construction of the mathematical concept of quaternion from a methodological and heuristic viewpoint to examine what we can learn from it for the study of the advancement of mathematical knowledge. I will look, in particular, at the inferential microstructures that shape this construction, that is, the study of both the very first, ampliative inferential steps, and their tentative outcomes—i.e. small ‘structures’ such as provisional entities and relations. I discuss how this paradigmatic case study supports the recent approaches to problem-solving and philosophy of mathematics, and how it suggests refinements of them. In more detail, I argue that the inferential micro-structures enable us to shed more light on the informal, heuristic side of mathematical practice, and its inferential and rational procedures. I show how they enable the generation of a problem, the construction of its conditions of solvability, the search for a hypothesis to solve it, and how these processes are representation-sensitive. On this base, I argue that:
  1. 1.

    the recent development of the philosophy of mathematics was right in moving from Lakatos’ initial investigation of the formal side of a mathematical proof to the investigation of the semi-formal (or informal), heuristic side of the mathematical practice as a way of understanding mathematical knowledge and its advancement.

     
  2. 2.

    The investigation of mathematical practice and discovery can be improved by a finer-grained study of the inferential micro-structures that are built during mathematical problem-solving.

     

keywords

Heuristics Mathematics Representation Micro-structures Mathematical practice 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he/she has no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Argand, J. R. (1813). Essai sur une manière de représenter les quantités imaginaires, dans les constructions géométriques. Annales de Gergonne, IV, 133–147.Google Scholar
  2. Cellucci, C. (2013). Rethinking logic. Logic in relation to mathematics, evolution, and method. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clement, J. J. (2008). Creative model construction in scientists and students: The role of imagery, analogy, and mental simulation. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. De Morgan, A. (1844). On triple algebra. Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 8, 241–254.Google Scholar
  5. Dickson, E. (1919). On quaternions and their generalizations and the history of the eight square theorem. Annals of Mathematics, 20, 155–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gauss, F. K. (1832). Theoria residuorum biquadraticorum, Commentatio Secunda. Göttingen: Comment. Soc. regiae sci, Göttingen 7Google Scholar
  7. Grosholz, E. (2007). Representation and productive ambiguity in mathematics and the sciences. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Halberstam, H., & Ingram, R. E. (Eds.). (1967). The mathematical papers of Sir William Rowan Hamilton, vol. III, Algebra. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hamilton, W. R. (1844). Copy of a letter from Sir William R. Hamilton To John T. Graves, Esq. Philosophical Magazine, 25, 489–495.Google Scholar
  10. Hesse, M. (1966). Models and analogies in science. Notre Dame (Indiana): Notre Dame University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hurwitz, A. (1898). Ueber die Composition der quadratischen Formen von beliebig vielen Variabeln, Nachr. der koeniglichen Gesellschaft der Wiss, Gottingen, 309–316; (1932). Mathematische Werke, vol. II, Basel, 565–571.Google Scholar
  12. Ippoliti, E. (2016). Ways of advancing knowledge. A lesson from knot theory and topology. In F. Sterpetti, E. Ippoliti, & T. Nickles (Eds.), Models and inferences in science (pp. 141–172). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ippoliti, E. (2018a). Heuristic logic. A kernel. In D. Danks & E. Ippoliti (Eds.), Building theories. Basel: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Ippoliti, E. (2018b). A role for representation theorems. Philosophia Mathematica, 26(3), 396–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jaccard, J., & Jacoby, J. (2010). Theory construction and model-building. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  16. Kleiner, I. (2007). A history of abstract algebra. Boston: Birkhauser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and refutations: The logic of mathematical discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Leng, M. (2012). Creation and discovery in mathematics. In J. Polkinghorne (Ed.), Meaning in mathematics (pp. 61–70). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Magnani, L., Nersessian, N., & Thagard, P. (1998). Abduction and scientific discovery. Philosophica, 61(1), 51–76.Google Scholar
  20. Morier-Genoud, S., & Ovsienko, V. (2009). Well, papa, can you multiply triplets? Math Intelligencer, 31, 1.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00283-009-9062-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nickles, T. (1980). Can scientific constraints be violated rationally? In T. Nickles (Ed.), Scientific discovery, logic, and rationality (pp. 285–315). Boston: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nickles, T. (1981). What is a problem that we may solve it? Synthese, 47(1), 85–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Polya, G. (1954). Mathematics and plausible reasoning: Induction and analogy in mathematics (Vol. I). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Shelley, C. (2003). Multiple analogies in science and philosophy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Simon, H., Langley, P., Bradshaw, G., & Zytkow, J. (1987). Scientific discovery: Computational explorations of the creative processes. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  26. Ulazia, A. (2016). Multiple roles for analogies in the genesis of fluid mechanics: How Analogies can cooperate with other heuristic strategies. Foundations of Science, 21(4), 543–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Van Der Waerden, B. L. (1976). Hamilton’s discovery of quaternions. Mathematics Magazine, 49(5), 227–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Warren, J. (1828). A treatise on the geometrical representation of the square roots of negative quantities. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  29. Whittaker, E. T. (1944). The sequence of ideas in the discovery of quaternions. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section A: Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 50, 93–98.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sapienza University of RomeRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations