黎曼《就职演讲》中的“压制论”
The suppression thesis in Riemann's Habilitationsvortrag
中文总结 AI 辅助
本文反驳“压制论”，认为黎曼1854年就职演讲缺乏分析内容，是因新思想尚无语言表达，而非为迁就非数学教授。
中文摘要 AI 辅助
1854年，黎曼向哥廷根大学哲学系提交了他的就职演讲《关于几何基础的假设》。该演讲不包含分析学发展内容，黎曼也从未解释过这一选择的原因。根据戴德金的说法，这一选择是为了让哲学系中非数学专业的教授能够理解演讲内容。这就是所谓的“压制论”。然而，早在1851年，也就是三年前，黎曼已向哲学系的同一些教授提交了他的就职论文《单复变函数一般理论基础》。该就职论文包含许多分析学发展内容，但在那次场合中，这些内容并未被压制。因此，非数学专业教授的存在与演讲中是否包含分析学发展内容并无关联。黎曼就职演讲中所包含的思想——流形、线元、曲率——在当时是如此新颖，以至于甚至没有恰当的语言来表达它们。因此，黎曼被迫采用了非技术性的阐述风格。这一对黎曼就职演讲中缺乏分析学发展内容的解释，比“压制论”更为可信。
英文摘要
In 1854 Riemann presented his Habilitationsvortrag {\it Über die Hypothesen welche der Geometrie zu Grunde liegen} to the Faculty of Philosophy of the University of Göttingen. The lecture does not contain analytical developments and Riemann never explained the reason for this choice. According to Dedekind this choice was done in order to make the lecture understandable to the non-mathematician professors of the Faculty. This is the suppression thesis. Nevertheless, in 1851, three years before, Riemann has presented his Inauguraldissertation {\it Grundlagen für eine allgemeine Theorie der Functionen einer veränderlichen complexen Grösse} to the same professors of the Faculty of Philosophy. The Inauguraldissertation contains many analytical developments but, on that occasion, they were not suppressed. Therefore, the presence of non-mathematician professors is unrelated with the presence or absence of analytical developments in the lectures. The ideas contained in Riemann's Habilitationsvortrag --manifold, line element, curvature-- were so new at the time that there was not even a proper language to express them. Therefore, Riemann was forced to adopt a non-technical expository style. This explanation for the absence of analytical developments in Riemann's Habilitationsvortrag is more credible than the suppression thesis.
