The surface of a marble table is spread out in front of me. I can get from any one point on this table to any other point by passing continuously from one point to a “neighbouring” one, and repeating this process a (large) number of times, or, in other words, by going from point to point without executing “jumps.” I am sure the reader will appreciate with sufficient clearness what I mean here by “neighbouring” and by “jumps” (if he is not too pedantic). We express this property of the surface by describing the latter as a continuum.
Let us now imagine that a large number of little rods of equal length have been made, their lengths being small compared with the dimensions of the marble slab1. When I say they are of equal length, I mean that one can be laid on any other without the ends overlapping2. We next lay four of these little rods on the marble slab so that they constitute a quadrilateral figure (a square), the diagonals of which are equally long. To ensure the equality of the diagonals, we make use of a little testing-rod. To this square we add similar ones, each of which has one rod in common with the first. We proceed in like manner with each of these squares until finally the whole marble slab is laid out with squares. The arrangement is such, that each side of a square belongs to two squares and each corner to four squares.
It is a veritable wonder that we can carry out this business without getting into the greatest difficulties. We only need to think of the following. If at any moment three squares meet at a corner, then two sides of the fourth square are already laid, and, as a consequence, the arrangement of the remaining two sides of the square is already completely determined3. But I am now no longer able to adjust the quadrilateral so that its diagonals may be equal. If they are equal of their own accord, then this is an especial favour of the marble slab and of the little rods, about which I can only be thankfully surprised. We must experience many such surprises if the construction is to be successful.
If everything has really gone smoothly4, then I say that the points of the marble slab constitute a Euclidean continuum with respect to the little rod, which has been used as a “distance” (line-interval). By choosing one corner of a square as “origin” I can characterise every other corner of a square with reference to this origin by means of two numbers. I only need state how many rods I must pass over when, starting from the origin, I proceed towards the “right” and then “upwards,” in order to arrive at the corner of the square under consideration. These two numbers are then the “Cartesian co-ordinates” of this corner with reference to the “Cartesian co-ordinate system” which is determined by the arrangement of little rods.
By making use of the following modification5 of this abstract experiment, we recognise that there must also be cases in which the experiment would be unsuccessful. We shall suppose that the rods “expand” by in amount proportional to the increase of temperature. We heat the central part of the marble slab, but not the periphery6, in which case two of our little rods can still be brought into coincidence at every position on the table. But our construction of squares must necessarily come into disorder7 during the heating, because the little rods on the central region of the table expand, whereas those on the outer part do not.
With reference to our little rods—defined as unit lengths—the marble slab is no longer a Euclidean continuum, and we are also no longer in the position of defining Cartesian co-ordinates directly with their aid, since the above construction can no longer be carried out. But since there are other things which are not influenced in a similar manner to the little rods (or perhaps not at all) by the temperature of the table, it is possible quite naturally to maintain the point of view that the marble slab is a “Euclidean continuum.” This can be done in a satisfactory manner by making a more subtle stipulation8 about the measurement or the comparison of lengths.
But if rods of every kind (i.e. of every material) were to behave in the same way as regards the influence of temperature when they are on the variably heated marble slab, and if we had no other means of detecting the effect of temperature than the geometrical behaviour of our rods in experiments analogous9 to the one described above, then our best plan would be to assign the distance one to two points on the slab, provided that the ends of one of our rods could be made to coincide with these two points; for how else should we define the distance without our proceeding10 being in the highest measure grossly arbitrary? The method of Cartesian coordinates11 must then be discarded, and replaced by another which does not assume the validity of Euclidean geometry for rigid12 bodies.1 The reader will notice that the situation depicted13 here corresponds to the one brought about by the general postulate14 of relativity (Section XXIII).
1 Mathematicians15 have been confronted with our problem in the following form. If we are given a surface (e.g. an ellipsoid) in Euclidean three-dimensional space, then there exists for this surface a two-dimensional geometry, just as much as for a plane surface. Gauss undertook the task of treating this two-dimensional geometry from first principles, without making use of the fact that the surface belongs to a Euclidean continuum of three dimensions. If we imagine constructions to be made with rigid rods in the surface (similar to that above with the marble slab), we should find that different laws hold for these from those resulting on the basis of Euclidean plane geometry. The surface is not a Euclidean continuum with respect to the rods, and we cannot define Cartesian co-ordinates in the surface. Gauss indicated the principles according to which we can treat the geometrical relationships in the surface, and thus pointed16 out the way to the method of Riemann of treating multi-dimensional, non-Euclidean continuum. Thus it is that mathematicians long ago solved the formal problems to which we are led by the general postulate of relativity.
点击收听单词发音
1 slab | |
n.平板,厚的切片;v.切成厚板,以平板盖上 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 overlapping | |
adj./n.交迭(的) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 determined | |
adj.坚定的;有决心的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 smoothly | |
adv.平滑地,顺利地,流利地,流畅地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 modification | |
n.修改,改进,缓和,减轻 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 periphery | |
n.(圆体的)外面;周围 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 disorder | |
n.紊乱,混乱;骚动,骚乱;疾病,失调 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 stipulation | |
n.契约,规定,条文;条款说明 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 analogous | |
adj.相似的;类似的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 proceeding | |
n.行动,进行,(pl.)会议录,学报 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 coordinates | |
n.相配之衣物;坐标( coordinate的名词复数 );(颜色协调的)配套服装;[复数]女套服;同等重要的人(或物)v.使协调,使调和( coordinate的第三人称单数 );协调;协同;成为同等 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 rigid | |
adj.严格的,死板的;刚硬的,僵硬的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 depicted | |
描绘,描画( depict的过去式和过去分词 ); 描述 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 postulate | |
n.假定,基本条件;vt.要求,假定 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 mathematicians | |
数学家( mathematician的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 pointed | |
adj.尖的,直截了当的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
欢迎访问英文小说网 |