On Curvature I

"In order to know the curvature of a curve, the determination of the radius of the osculating circle furnishes us the best measure, where for each point of the curve we find a circle whose curvature is precisely the same. However, when one looks for the curvature of a surface, the question is very equivocal and not at all susceptible to an absolute response, as in the case above. There are only spherical surfaces where one would be able to measure the curvature, assuming the curvature of the sphere is the curvature of its great circles, and whose radius could be considered the appropriate measure. But for other surfaces one doesn’t know even how to compare a surface with a sphere, as when one can always compare the curvature of a curve with that of a circle. The reason is evident, since at each point of a surface there are an infinite number of different curvatures. One has to only consider a cylinder, where along the directions parallel to the axis, there is no curvature, whereas in the directions perpendicular to the axis, which are circles, the curvatures are all the same, and all other oblique sections to the axis give a particular curvature. It’s the same for all other surfaces, where it can happen that in one direction the curvature is convex, and in another it is concave, as in those resembling a saddle." (Leonhard Euler, "Recherches sur la courbure des surfaces", 1767)

"Arc, amplitude, and curvature sustain a similar relation to each other as time, motion, and velocity, or as volume, mass, and density." (Carl Friedrich Gauss, 1827)

"In the extension of space-construction to the infinitely great, we must distinguish between unboundedness and infinite extent; the former belongs to the extent relations, the latter to the measure-relations. That space is an unbounded threefold manifoldness, is an assumption which is developed by every conception of the outer world; according to which every instant the region of real perception is completed and the possible positions of a sought object are constructed, and which by these applications is forever confirming itself. The unboundedness of space possesses in this way a greater empirical certainty than any external experience. But its infinite extent by no means follows from this; on the other hand if we assume independence of bodies from position, and therefore ascribe to space constant curvature, it must necessarily be finite provided this curvature has ever so small a positive value. If we prolong all the geodesies starting in a given surface-element, we should obtain an unbounded surface of constant curvature, i.e., a surface which in a flat manifoldness of three dimensions would take the form of a sphere, and consequently be finite." (Bernhard Riemann, "On the hypotheses which lie at the foundation of geometry", 1854)

"I hold: 1) that small portions of space are, in fact, of a nature analogous to little hills on a surface that is on the average fiat; namely, that the ordinary laws of geometry are not valid in them; 2) that this property of being curved or distorted is constantly being passed on from one portion of space to another after the manner of a wave; 3) that this variation of the curvature of space is what really happens in the phenomenon that we call the motion of matter, whether ponderable or ethereal; 4) that in the physical world nothing else takes place but this variation, subject (possibly) to the law of continuity." (William K Clifford, "On the Space Theory of Matter", [paper delivered before the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 1870) 

"Riemann has shewn that as there are different kinds of lines and surfaces, so there are different kinds of space of three dimensions; and that we can only find out by experience to which of these kinds the space in which we live belongs. In particular, the axioms of plane geometry are true within the limits of experiment on the surface of a sheet of paper, and yet we know that the sheet is really covered with a number of small ridges and furrows, upon which (the total curvature not being zero) these axioms are not true. Similarly, he says although the axioms of solid geometry are true within the limits of experiment for finite portions of our space, yet we have no reason to conclude that they are true for very small portions; and if any help can be got thereby for the explanation of physical phenomena, we may have reason to conclude that they are not true for very small portions of space." (William K Clifford, "On the Space Theory of Matter", [paper delivered before the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 1870) 

"We may conceive our space to have everywhere a nearly uniform curvature, but that slight variations of the curvature may occur from point to point, and themselves vary with the time. These variations of the curvature with the time may produce effects which we not unnaturally attribute to physical causes independent of the geometry of our space. We might even go so far as to assign to this variation of the curvature of space 'what really happens in that phenomenon which we term the motion of matter'." (William K Clifford, Richard C Rowe & Karl Pearson,"The Common Sense of the Exact Sciences", 1885)

"Mathematics accomplishes really nothing outside of the realm of magnitude; marvellous, however, is the skill with which it masters magnitude wherever it finds it. We recall at once the network of lines which it has spun about heavens and earth; the system of lines to which azimuth and altitude, declination and right ascension, longitude and latitude are referred; those abscissas and ordinates, tangents and normals, circles of curvature and evolutes; those trigonometric and logarithmic functions which have been prepared in advance and await application. A look at this apparatus is sufficient to show that mathematicians are not magicians, but that everything is accomplished by natural means; one is rather impressed by the multitude of skillful machines, numerous witnesses of a manifold and intensely active industry, admirably fitted for the acquisition of true and lasting treasures."(Johann F Herbart, 1890)

"[...]  the illustration of a space of constant positive measure of curvature by the familiar example of the sphere is somewhat misleading.  Owing to the fact that on the sphere the geodesic lines (great circles) issuing from any point all meet again in another definite point, antipodal, so to speak, to the original point, the existence of such an antipodal point has sometimes been regarded as a necessary consequence of the assumption of a constant positive curvature. The projective theory of non-Euclidean space shows immediately that the existence of an antipodal point, though compatible with the nature of an elliptic space, is not necessary, but that two geodesic lines in such a space may intersect in one point if at all." (Felix Klein, "The Most Recent Researches in Non-Euclidian Geometry", [lecture] 1893)