Post #1670115

2026-02-28 08:58 UTC

But Maxwell wrote: ‘I always regarded mathematics as the method of obtaining the *best* shapes and dimensions of things; and this meant not only the most useful and economical, but chiefly the most harmonious and the most beautiful.’ This does not point to using beauty *in* mathematics: the mathematics was a means to a beautiful end. Beauty in mathematics is never mentioned in Maxwell’s ‘Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism’ (1873). Elegance is mentioned precisely once. And Maxwell did not use the concise modern notation, and did not group the four equations together. It was Oliver Heaviside (1850–1925) who put the equations into their modern form, which brought out their symmetry. As Heaviside’s contemporary George Francis FitzGerald (1851–1901) put it: ‘Every mathematician can appreciate the value and beauty of this.’ 2/3

Replies (1)

@ajcain@mathstodon.xyz 2026-02-28 08:59

References • A.J. Cain. ‘Form & Number: A History of Mathematical Beauty’. Lisbon, 2024. URL: https://archive.org/details/cain_formandnumber_ebook_large pp.882–3. • H. Poincaré. ‘Analysis and Physics’. In: ‘The Value of Science’. In: ‘The Value of Science: Essential Writings of Henri Poincaré’. Modern Library Science Series. Modern Library, 2001. ISBN: 978-0-307-82406-6. § II. • Maxwell, quot. in F. Galton. ‘English Men of Science: Their Nature and Nurture’. London: Macmillan & Co., 1874. URL: https://archive.org/details/cu31924031010535 p.155–6. • J.C. Maxwell. ‘A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism’. 3rd edition. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1892. URLs: https://archive.org/details/treatiseonelectr01maxw_0 https://archive.org/details/treatiseonelectr02maxw esp. vol. I, p. 281. • G.F. FitzGerald. ‘Heaviside's Electrical Papers’. In: ‘Scientific Writings’. Ed. by J. Larmor. Dublin: Hodges, Figgis & Co., 1902. URL: https://archive.org/details/scientificwriti00fitzgoog/page/292 3/3

Open ##1670116