Re: [HM] Siegel on abstraction, cites?


Subject: Re: [HM] Siegel on abstraction, cites?
From: Antreas P. Hatzipolakis (xpolakis@otenet.gr)
Date: Thu Feb 10 2000 - 17:13:54 EST


Siegel wrote to Mordell on 3 March 1964:

          Thank you for the copy of your review of Lang's book. When I
          first saw this book, about a year ago, I was disgusted with the
          way in which my own contributions to the subject had been
          disfigured and made unintelligible. My feeling is very well
          expressed when you mention Rip van Winkle!

          The whole style of the author contradicts the sense for
          simplicity and honesty which we admire in the works of the
          masters in number theory--Lagrange, Gauss, or on a smaller
          scale, Hardy, Landau. Just now Lang has published another book
          on algebraic numbers which, in my opinion, is still worse than
          the former one. I see a pig broken into a beautiful garden and
          rooting up all flowers and trees.

          Unfortunately there are many "fellow-travelers" who have
          already disgraced a large part of algebra and function theory;
          however, until now, number theory had not been touched. These
          people remind me of the impudent behaviour of the national
          socialists who sang: "Wir werden weiter marschieren, bis
          alles in Scherben zerfaellt!"

          I am afraid that mathematics will perish before the end of
          this century if the present trend for senseless
          abstraction--as I call it: theory of the empty set--cannot be
          blocked up. Let us hope that your review may be helpful...

             http://www.ams.org/notices/199503/lang.html

Antreas



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Feb 10 2000 - 17:51:30 EST