BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Mikhail G. Katz

Mikhail G. Katz contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
math.DGmath.HOmath.LOmath.CAmath.MGmath.GTmath.APmath.RA

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
21works
0followers
8topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

21 published item(s)

preprint2023arXiv

Constructing nonstandard hulls and Loeb measures in internal set theories

Currently the two popular ways to practice Robinson's nonstandard analysis are the model-theoretic approach and the axiomatic/syntactic approach. It is sometimes claimed that the internal axiomatic approach is unable to handle constructions relying on external sets. We show that internal frameworks provide successful accounts of nonstandard hulls and Loeb measures. The basic fact this work relies on is that the ultrapower of the standard universe by a standard ultrafilter is naturally isomorphic to a subuniverse of the internal universe.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

A Pu-Bonnesen inequality

We prove an inequality of Bonnesen type for the real projective plane, generalizing Pu's systolic inequality for positively-curved metrics. The remainder term in the inequality, analogous to that in Bonnesen's inequality, is a function of R-r (suitably normalized), where R and r are respectively the circumradius and the inradius of the Weyl-Lewy Euclidean embedding of the orientable double cover. We exploit John ellipsoids of a convex body and Pogorelov's ridigity theorem.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Infinitesimal analysis without the Axiom of Choice

It is often claimed that analysis with infinitesimals requires more substantial use of the Axiom of Choice than traditional elementary analysis. The claim is based on the observation that the hyperreals entail the existence of nonprincipal ultrafilters over N, a strong version of the Axiom of Choice, while the real numbers can be constructed in ZF. The axiomatic approach to nonstandard methods refutes this objection. We formulate a theory SPOT in the st-$\in$-language which suffices to carry out infinitesimal arguments, and prove that SPOT is a conservative extension of ZF. Thus the methods of Calculus with infinitesimals are just as effective as those of traditional Calculus. The conclusion extends to large parts of ordinary mathematics and beyond. We also develop a stronger axiomatic system SCOT, conservative over ZF+ADC, which is suitable for handling such features as an infinitesimal approach to the Lebesgue measure. Proofs of the conservativity results combine and extend the methods of forcing developed by Enayat and Spector.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Sharp reverse isoperimetric inequalities in nonpositively curved cones

We prove a pair of sharp reverse isoperimetric inequalities for domains in nonpositively curved surfaces: (1) metric disks centered at the vertex of a Euclidean cone of angle at least $2π$ have minimal area among all nonpositively curved disks of the same perimeter and the same total curvature; (2) geodesic triangles in a Euclidean (resp. hyperbolic) cone of angle at least $2π$ have minimal area among all nonpositively curved geodesic triangles (resp. all geodesic triangles of curvature at most $-1$) with the same side lengths and angles.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Continuity between Cauchy and Bolzano: Issues of antecedents and priority

In a paper published in 1970, Grattan-Guinness argued that Cauchy, in his 1821 book Cours d'Analyse, may have plagiarized Bolzano's book Rein analytischer Beweis (RB), first published in 1817. That paper was subsequently discredited in several works, but some of its assumptions still prevail today. In particular, it is usually considered that Cauchy did not develop his notion of the continuity of a function before Bolzano developed his in RB, and that both notions are essentially the same. We argue that both assumptions are incorrect, and that it is implausible that Cauchy's initial insight into that notion, which eventually evolved to an approach using infinitesimals, could have been borrowed from Bolzano's work. Furthermore, we account for Bolzano's interest in that notion and focus on his discussion of a definition by Kästner (in Section 183 of his 1766 book), which the former seems to have misrepresented at least partially. Cauchy's treatment of continuity goes back at least to his 1817 course summaries, refuting a key component of Grattan-Guinness' plagiarism hypothesis (that Cauchy may have lifted continuity from RB after reading it in a Paris library in 1818). We explore antecedents of Cauchy and Bolzano continuity in the writings of Kästner and earlier authors.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Mathematical conquerors, Unguru polarity, and the task of history

We compare several approaches to the history of mathematics recently proposed by Blasjo, Fraser--Schroter, Fried, and others. We argue that tools from both mathematics and history are essential for a meaningful history of the discipline. In an extension of the Unguru-Weil controversy over the concept of geometric algebra, Michael Fried presents a case against both Andre Weil the "privileged observer" and Pierre de Fermat the "mathematical conqueror." We analyze Fried's version of Unguru's alleged polarity between a historian's and a mathematician's history. We identify some axioms of Friedian historiographic ideology, and propose a thought experiment to gauge its pertinence. Unguru and his disciples Corry, Fried, and Rowe have described Freudenthal, van der Waerden, and Weil as Platonists but provided no evidence; we provide evidence to the contrary. We analyze how the various historiographic approaches play themselves out in the study of the pioneers of mathematical analysis including Fermat, Leibniz, Euler, and Cauchy.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Metric completions, the Heine-Borel property, and approachability

We show that the metric universal cover of a plane with a puncture yields an example of a nonstandard hull properly containing the metric completion of a metric space. As mentioned by do Carmo, a nonextendible Riemannian manifold can be noncomplete, but in the broader category of metric spaces it becomes extendible. We give a short proof of a characterisation of the Heine-Borel property of the metric completion of a metric space M in terms of the absence of inapproachable finite points in *M.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Torus cannot collapse to a segment

In earlier work, we analyzed the impossibility of codimension-one collapse for surfaces of negative Euler characteristic under the condition of a lower bound for the Gaussian curvature. Here we show that, under similar conditions, the torus cannot collapse to a segment. Unlike the torus, the Klein bottle can collapse to a segment; we show that in such a situation, the loops in a short basis for homology must stay a uniform distance apart.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

19th century real analysis, forward and backward

19th century real analysis received a major impetus from Cauchy's work. Cauchy mentions variable quantities, limits, and infinitesimals, but the meaning he attached to these terms is not identical to their modern meaning. Some Cauchy historians work in a conceptual scheme dominated by an assumption of a teleological nature of the evolution of real analysis toward a preordained outcome. Thus, Gilain and Siegmund-Schultze assume that references to limite in Cauchy's work necessarily imply that Cauchy was working with an Archi-medean continuum, whereas infinitesimals were merely a convenient figure of speech, for which Cauchy had in mind a complete justification in terms of Archimedean limits. However, there is another formalisation of Cauchy's procedures exploiting his limite, more consistent with Cauchy's ubiquitous use of infinitesimals, in terms of the standard part principle of modern infinitesimal analysis. We challenge a misconception according to which Cauchy was allegedly forced to teach infinitesimals at the Ecole Polytechnique. We show that the debate there concerned mainly the issue of rigor, a separate one from infinitesimals. A critique of Cauchy's approach by his contemporary de Prony sheds light on the meaning of rigor to Cauchy and his contemporaries. An attentive reading of Cauchy's work challenges received views on Cauchy's role in the history of analysis, and indicates that he was a pioneer of infinitesimal techniques as much as a harbinger of the Epsilontik.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

A Burgessian critique of nominalistic tendencies in contemporary mathematics and its historiography

We analyze the developments in mathematical rigor from the viewpoint of a Burgessian critique of nominalistic reconstructions. We apply such a critique to the reconstruction of infinitesimal analysis accomplished through the efforts of Cantor, Dedekind, and Weierstrass; to the reconstruction of Cauchy's foundational work associated with the work of Boyer and Grabiner; and to Bishop's constructivist reconstruction of classical analysis. We examine the effects of a nominalist disposition on historiography, teaching, and research.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Leibniz's Infinitesimals: Their Fictionality, Their Modern Implementations, And Their Foes From Berkeley To Russell And Beyond

Many historians of the calculus deny significant continuity between infinitesimal calculus of the 17th century and 20th century developments such as Robinson's theory. Robinson's hyperreals, while providing a consistent theory of infinitesimals, require the resources of modern logic; thus many commentators are comfortable denying a historical continuity. A notable exception is Robinson himself, whose identification with the Leibnizian tradition inspired Lakatos, Laugwitz, and others to consider the history of the infinitesimal in a more favorable light. Inspite of his Leibnizian sympathies, Robinson regards Berkeley's criticisms of the infinitesimal calculus as aptly demonstrating the inconsistency of reasoning with historical infinitesimal magnitudes. We argue that Robinson, among others, overestimates the force of Berkeley's criticisms, by underestimating the mathematical and philosophical resources available to Leibniz. Leibniz's infinitesimals are fictions, not logical fictions, as Ishiguro proposed, but rather pure fictions, like imaginaries, which are not eliminable by some syncategorematic paraphrase. We argue that Leibniz's defense of infinitesimals is more firmly grounded than Berkeley's criticism thereof. We show, moreover, that Leibniz's system for differential calculus was free of logical fallacies. Our argument strengthens the conception of modern infinitesimals as a development of Leibniz's strategy of relating inassignable to assignable quantities by means of his transcendental law of homogeneity.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Flat currents modulo p in metric spaces and filling radius inequalities

We adapt the theory of currents in metric spaces, as developed by the first-mentioned author in collaboration with B. Kirchheim, to currents with coefficients in Z_p. Building on S. Wenger's work in the orientable case, we obtain isoperimetric inequalities mod(p) in Banach spaces and we apply these inequalities to provide a proof of Gromov's filling radius inequality (and therefore also the systolic inequality) which applies to nonorientable manifolds, as well. With this goal in mind, we use the Ekeland principle to provide quasi-minimizers of the mass mod(p) in the homology class, and use the isoperimetric inequality to give lower bounds on the growth of their mass in balls.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Relative systoles of relative-essential 2-complexes

We prove a systolic inequality for the phi-relative 1-systole of a phi-essential 2-complex, where phi is a homomorphism from the fundamental group of the complex, to a finitely presented group G. Indeed we show that universally for any phi-essential Riemannian 2-complex, and any G, the area of X is bounded below by 1/8 of sys(X,phi)^2. Combining our results with a method of Larry Guth, we obtain new quantitative results for certain 3-manifolds: in particular for Sigma the Poincare homology sphere, we have sys(Sigma)^3 < 24 vol(Sigma).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

When is .999... less than 1?

We examine alternative interpretations of the symbol described as nought, point, nine recurring. Is &#34;an infinite number of 9s&#34; merely a figure of speech? How are such alternative interpretations related to infinite cardinalities? How are they expressed in Lightstone&#39;s &#34;semicolon&#34; notation? Is it possible to choose a canonical alternative interpretation? Should unital evaluation of the symbol .999 . . . be inculcated in a pre-limit teaching environment? The problem of the unital evaluation is hereby examined from the pre-R, pre-lim viewpoint of the student.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Zooming in on infinitesimal 1-.9.. in a post-triumvirate era

The view of infinity as a metaphor, a basic premise of modern cognitive theory of embodied knowledge, suggests in particular that there may be alternative ways in which one could formalize mathematical ideas about infinity. We discuss the key ideas about infinitesimals via a proceptual analysis of the meaning of the ellipsis&#34;...&#34; in the real formula .999... = 1. Infinitesimal-enriched number systems accomodate quantities in the half-open interval [0,1) whose extended decimal expansion starts with an unlimited number of repeated digits 9. Do such quantities pose a challenge to the unital evaluation of the symbol &#34;.999...&#34;? We present some non-standard thoughts on the ambiguity of the ellipsis, in the context of the cognitive concept of generic limit of B. Cornu and D. Tall. We analyze the vigorous debates among mathematicians concerning the idea of infinitesimals.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access