On Complex Numbers VII

“The remark which you make concerning roots that can not be extracted, and containing imaginary quantities which when added together give none the less a real quantity, is surprising and entirely new. One would never have believed that √(1 + √-3) + √(1 - √- 3) would make √6, and there is something hidden in this which is incomprehensible.” (Christaan Huygens, [letter to Gottfried W Leibniz] cca. 1670)

"But if now a simple, that is, a linear equation, is multiplied by a quadratic, a cubic equation will result, which will have  real roots if the quadratic is possible, or two imaginary roots and only one real one if the quadratic is impossible. […] How can it be, that a real quantity, a root of the proposed equation, is expressed by the intervention of an imaginary? For this is the remarkable thing, that, as calculation shows, such an imaginary quantity is only observed to enter those cubic equations that have no imaginary root, all their roots being real or possible, as has been shown by trisection of an angle, by Albert Girard and others. […] This difficulty has been too much for all writers on algebra up to the present, and they have all said they that in this case Cardano’s rules fail." (Gottfried W Leibniz, cca. 1675)

"For this evil I have found a remedy and obtained a method, by which without experimentation the roots of such binomials can be extracted, imaginaries being no hindrance, and not only in the case of cubics but also in higher equations. This invention rests upon a certain peculiarity which I will explain later. Now I will add certain rules derived from the consideration of irrationals (although no mention is made of irrationals), by which a rational root can easily be extracted from them." (Gottfried W Leibniz, cca. 1675)

“Infinities and infinitely small quantities could be taken as fictions, similar to imaginary roots, except that it would make our calculations wrong, these fictions being useful and based in reality.” (Gottfried W Leibniz, [letter to Johann Bernoulli] 1689)

“For it ought to be considered that both –b   and –c  , as they stand alone, are, in some Sense, as much impossible Quantities as √(-b)  and √(-c) ; since the Sign –, according to the established Rules of Notation, shews the Quantity, to which it is prefixed, is to be subtracted, but to subtract something from nothing is impossible, and the Notion or Supposition of a Quantity actually less than Nothing, absurd and shocking to the Imagination.” (Thomas Simpson, “A Treatise of Algebra”, 1745) 

“After exponential quantities the circular functions, sine and cosine, should be considered because they arise when imaginary quantities are involved in the exponential."  (Leonhard Euler, ”Introductio in analysin infinitorum”, 1748)

“Moreover, the whole method has the essential disadvantage that it occupies the mind with the distinction of a great number of cases that can be recognized only by inner intuition, and thus neutralizes an important part of that which algebra is supposed to accomplish, which is relieving the power of inner intuition. Finally, in such a treatment algebra loses a great part of the generality that it can obtain by the mutual connection of different problems, which becomes evident so easily when one uses isolated negative quantities. [...] Since imaginary quantities have to occur, science would certainly not win that much by avoiding negative quantities than it would lose in terms of clarity and generality.” (Johann P W Stein,  “Die Elemente der Algebra: Erster Cursus”, 1828) 

"Originally assuming the concept of the absolute integers, it extended its domain step by step; integers were supplemented by fractions, rational numbers by irrational numbers, positive numbers by negative numbers, and real numbers by imaginary numbers. This advance, however, occurred initially with a fearfully hesitant step. The first algebraists preferred to call negative roots of equations false roots, and it is precisely these where the problem to which they refer was always termed in such a way as to ensure that the nature of the quantity sought did not admit any opposite.” (Carl F Gauss, “Theoria residuorum biquadraticum. Commentatio secunda. [Selbstanzeige]”, Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen 23 (4), 1831)

“[T]he notion of a negative magnitude has become quite a familiar one […] But it is far otherwise with the notion which is really the fundamental one (and I cannot too strongly emphasize the assertion) underlying and pervading the whole of modern analysis and geometry, that of imaginary magnitude in analysis and of imaginary space (or space as a locus in quo of imaginary points and figures) in geometry: I use in each case the word imaginary as including real. This has not been, so far as I am aware, a subject of philosophical discussion or inquiry. […] considering the prominent position which the notion occupies-say even that the conclusion were that the notion belongs to mere technical mathematics, or has reference to nonentities in regard to which no science is possible, still it seems to me that (as a subject of philosophical discussion) the notion ought not to be thus ignored; it should at least be shown that there is a right to ignore it.” (Arthur Cayley, [address before the meeting of the British Association at Southport] 1870) 

“A satisfactory theory of the imaginary quantities of ordinary algebra, which is essentially a simple case of multiple algebra, with difficulty obtained recognition in the first third of this century. We must observe that this double algebra, as it has been called, was not sought for or invented; - it forced itself, unbidden, upon the attention of mathematicians, and with its rules already formed.
But the idea of double algebra, once received, although as it were unwillingly, must have suggested to many minds more or less distinctly the possibility of other multiple algebras, of higher orders, possessing interesting or useful properties.” (Josiah W Gibbs, “On multiple Algebra”, Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science Vol. 35, 1886)