[HN Gopher] Chebyshev Polynomials in the 16th Century (2022)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Chebyshev Polynomials in the 16th Century (2022)
        
       Author : IdealeZahlen
       Score  : 99 points
       Date   : 2024-11-27 14:58 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arxiv.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arxiv.org)
        
       | bee_rider wrote:
       | I will always be amazed at these guys who did numerical
       | algorithms before computers were a type of machine.
       | 
       | Something that has always confused me about these Russians,
       | Chebyschev and Krylov, what use did they have for their iterative
       | methods and subspaces? I guess they weren't solving big sparse
       | linear systems on distributed computers in the year 1900.
        
         | random3 wrote:
         | Ballistics, celestial bodies, even a ton of competitions
         | between mathematicians. You can trace down analysis concepts to
         | Archimedes easily, but by Descartes (rolling tangent) and
         | eventually Newton / Leibniz who formalized calculus there was a
         | lot of stuff happening. E.g. Descartes was contemporary with
         | Galileo. So applied math and the theoretical part was under
         | natural philosophy that eventually became physics.
        
         | IdealeZahlen wrote:
         | "The History of Approximation Theory" by Karl-Georg Steffens is
         | a great reference for historical contexts.
         | 
         | For Chebyshev, who devoted his life to the construction of
         | various 'mechanisms' [1][2], his motivation was to determine
         | the parameters of mechanisms (that minimizes the maximal error
         | of the approximation on the whole interval).
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanism_(engineering)
         | 
         | [2] https://tcheb.ru/
        
           | vector_spaces wrote:
           | In particular he studied Watt's mechanism, which was an
           | integral component of steam engines powering the industrial
           | revolution in Western Europe. Its optimal configuration
           | wasn't really well understood at the time which led to
           | practical problems. Chebyshev traveled from Russia (which
           | wouldn't really enjoy an industrial revolution till much
           | later) to Western Europe and discussed with experts and
           | people who operated these engines. He brought back to Russia
           | with him notes and experimental data, and those informed the
           | development of what would later be known as minimax theory,
           | and Chebyshev polynomials which provide polynomial solutions
           | to minimax problems.
           | 
           | In the course of developing that theory he founded the modern
           | field of approximation theory, and the St. Petersburg school
           | of mathematics. I think his approach of using applied
           | problems and techniques to inform the development of pure
           | math deeply influenced the whole of Soviet and Slavic
           | mathematics in the century that followed
           | 
           | (and yes, the book by Karl-Georg Steffens is beautiful!)
           | 
           | Edit: To answer the grandparent's question, aside from things
           | directly invented by Chebyshev or his students, often things
           | are called "Chebyshev" when there's either a Chebyshev
           | polynomial or a minimax problem lurking in the background
        
         | dhosek wrote:
         | I was playing around with an idea that there might be some
         | insight into Fermat primes by looking at products of complex
         | solutions of polynomials of the form x^{2^n)+1=0, and Chebyshev
         | polynomials came up as I was looking at the exact values of
         | those roots.12 As I recall, looking at finding half angle sines
         | and cosines of increasing fractions, I ended up seeing
         | Chebyshev polynomials emerging from the results.
         | 
         | [?]
         | 
         | 1. I may have this confused with my similar investigations into
         | Mersenne primes and x^p-1=0.
         | 
         | 2. My hypothesis that I could find factors of a Fermat number
         | with _n_ > 5 by multiplying the roots together and setting _x_
         | = 2 failed on writing a program to actually check the result,
         | but looking back on my memories of doing this, I may have made
         | an error.
        
           | SideQuark wrote:
           | Chebyshev polynomials have as roots nth roots of unity, so of
           | course these are going to show up. It's one way to define
           | them.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chebyshev_nodes
           | 
           | The nth roots of unity are incredibly well studied, and some
           | of that stemmed in the 1700-1800s on trying to factor things.
           | The entire field of analytic numbers theory has taken these
           | ideas to incredible (think decades of study and research to
           | be state of the art) depths.
        
             | jacobolus wrote:
             | More explicitly: Chebyshev polynomials are what you get
             | when you take trigonometric polynomials for a periodic
             | interval or Laurent polynomials on the unit complex circle
             | and project onto a diameter of the circle.
        
         | gmiller123456 wrote:
         | I was reading a book from the early 1900's, and it referenced
         | using computers to calculate some complex algorithms. Threw me
         | for a loop, and I finally realized the author was talking about
         | people. Apparently it was a thing to send long computations to
         | a room/building full of people and get the answer back.
        
           | bee_rider wrote:
           | I wonder if the "programmers" could be much sloppier back
           | then. "Find the eigenvalues? Which ones? You know, the ones
           | we always want!"
        
             | HPsquared wrote:
             | Prompt engineers, basically.
        
           | SideQuark wrote:
           | The word "computer" to describe a person who does
           | computations dates back into the 1600s, and is exactly where
           | we got the current word.
           | 
           | Up to around 1940, the vast majority of the world's computers
           | were people, and there were legions of them across all areas
           | of government and industry.
           | 
           | There were around 250 total automated computers in 1955,
           | around 20,000 in 1965, so I doubt human computers were
           | outnumberd until the 1970s/1980s at best.
        
           | srean wrote:
           | > I finally realized the author was talking about people.
           | Apparently it was a thing to send long computations to a
           | room/building full of people and get the answer back.
           | 
           | s/people/women/g
           | 
           | https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/history-
           | human-...
        
             | gowld wrote:
             | s/women/people/g
             | 
             | No need to promote sex-based divisiveness.
             | 
             | From your own link:
             | 
             | "So the French mathematician Alexis-Claude Clairaut decided
             | to break the work up--by dividing the calculations among
             | several people. In 1757, he sat down with two friends, the
             | young astronomer Jerome-Joseph Lalande and Nicole-Reine
             | Lepaute, a clockmaker's wife with a penchant for numbers.
             | ... The age of human computers began."
             | 
             | "By the 19th century, scientists and governments were
             | beginning to collect reams of data that needed to be
             | processed, particularly in astronomy, navigation and
             | surveying. So they began breaking their calculations down
             | into tiny basic math problems and hiring gangs of people to
             | solve them. The work wasn't always hard, though it required
             | precision and an ability to work for long hours. Mostly,
             | the computers were young men."
             | 
             | "But by the late 19th century, some scientists realized
             | that hiring women could reduce the cost of computation. The
             | growth of education and middle-class prosperity had
             | produced a generation of young women trained in math. So
             | when the Harvard Observatory decided to process years of
             | astronomic data it had gathered using its telescope, it
             | assembled one all-female team of computers."
        
               | MonkeyClub wrote:
               | In this case, I read the substitution as increasing
               | visibility rather than divisiveness, but I get your
               | point: women are first-class people too.
        
               | srean wrote:
               | Right. I was conflicted about whether I should draw
               | attention to this or not. In the end I felt there exists
               | a lack of knowledge/appreciation of the contribution made
               | by women computers.
        
             | tliltocatl wrote:
             | My uneducated guess is that the notion of computers being
             | mostly female comes from the WWII era.
        
           | Kabootit wrote:
           | Are we talking about the book "Souls in the Great Machine" or
           | real history?!
        
             | gmiller123456 wrote:
             | It was a book on positional astronomy, I don't remember the
             | title.
        
           | adrian_b wrote:
           | The first job of my father, after finishing his university
           | studies, three quarters of century ago, when there were only
           | a handful of electronic computers in the entire world, was as
           | a "computer" at an astronomical observatory.
           | 
           | With the revenue secured by that job, he decided that he can
           | afford to marry my mother.
        
         | HPsquared wrote:
         | Anything that can't be solved analytically, I suppose. That's a
         | pretty huge range of problems!
        
           | bee_rider wrote:
           | For sure it is!
           | 
           | The odd thing with what I listed is that these methods
           | (nowadays) are really mostly useful for massive sparse
           | problems, which wouldn't really be practical without
           | computing machines.
           | 
           | I'm pretty sure the Chebyschev semi-iterative method for
           | solving linear systems is just named after his polynomials
           | (and you can use his polynomials by hand for other stuff),
           | but I really am at a loss as to what Krylov was up to.
        
         | Jun8 wrote:
         | Not in this case but sometimes mathematicians of old _did_ have
         | access to "computers", ie savants who can do large calculations
         | in their heads easily. Gauss used the services of such a
         | person: https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/15609/autistic-
         | assis...
        
           | bibanez wrote:
           | Very interesting anecdote!
        
       | dukeofdoom wrote:
       | Would love to watch a videos on historical math breakthroughs. In
       | the style of Indiana Jones, I mean just told as a big adventure.
       | I used to watch connections and loved it.
        
         | incognito124 wrote:
         | I second that. I bet such a documentary may even yield insights
         | how to make current scientific breakthroughs
        
         | panarchy wrote:
         | You might enjoy the book "The Language of Mathematics: Making
         | the Invisible Visible"
        
       | jansan wrote:
       | I first cam across the term "Chebyshev polynomials" when working
       | on length parametrization of Bezier curves. Although I still do
       | not know what they really are, I fell in love with the term,
       | because it sounds super smart and is easy to remember. Sometimes
       | when I want to impress non-science people I say "I have to go
       | back to work, those Chebyshev polynomials aren't gonna solve
       | themselves".
        
         | vector_spaces wrote:
         | There are lots of fun characterizations of them. The most
         | significant one is that they are the polynomials that minimize
         | the uniform norm on a given set -- classically, this set was
         | the closed interval [-1, 1] or sometimes [-2, 2]. This means
         | they are the polynomials that attain the smallest maximum
         | absolute value on the set or interval of interest. This minimax
         | property is essential for their utility and ubiquity throughout
         | pure and applied math
         | 
         | The minimax property is one of the ways you can generalize to
         | other kinds of sets, allowing you to talk about the Chebyshev
         | polynomial of, say, an arc or a Jordan curve or a union of
         | intervals, and many of the properties enjoyed by the classical
         | Chebyshev polynomials end up carrying over as well, but faaaaar
         | less is known about these generalizations. In many cases all
         | you can hope for are asymptotics, and you need much more in the
         | way of machinery and sophisticated tools to prove anything --
         | even to compute explicit formulas for the coefficients.
         | 
         | The classical case is nice though because they can be explored
         | fruitfully without very much background
        
       | alphanumeric0 wrote:
       | Ah cool to see this on HN! I'm taking a numerical calc class
       | right now and it's nice to get some historical context around
       | something you're studying. I'd recommend checking out some cool
       | graphs about Runge's phenomenon and Chebyshev polynomials.
        
       | throw_m239339 wrote:
       | I know that name because in Blender there is a Voronoi texture
       | named that way.
        
       | ykonstant wrote:
       | Kind of off topic, but look at how beautiful the ar5iv link is:
       | 
       | https://ar5iv.org/html/2203.10955
       | 
       | I am getting more and more excited about converting TeX sources
       | to HTML5 to be more accessible to students and researchers.
       | 
       | I do think PDF is still king for final results and of course
       | print, but the accessibility and searchability the web format
       | provides is fantastic.
        
         | JaDogg wrote:
         | Nice I did not know about this servie. looks cool. Replace x
         | with 5 and view the PDF rendered
        
           | namibj wrote:
           | It's not the PDF; it's directly from the TeX source.
        
         | venusenvy47 wrote:
         | I can't find that link on the ar5iv.org page for this paper.
         | Where did you find it? Under "Access Paper", if I click on TeX
         | it downloads a .tar file.
        
           | ykonstant wrote:
           | You edit the URL from arxiv to ar5iv. If it works, the paper
           | is available; if not, it is not. I don't know of any other
           | way to link!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-11-28 23:01 UTC)