Today is Ada Lovelace Day (much info and other stuff at
findingada.com), an international celebration of the achievements of women in science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM). As I'm a fan of Ada Lovelace (particularly as told in
steampunk style!)(http://sydneypadua.com/2dgoggles/lovelace-the-origin-2/) I thought I'd like to join in the event and write about a woman in STEM that I personally have found inspiring.
Normally, if I was trying to write about an interesting, inspiring woman in STEM, I would probably have gone straight for Ada Lovelace. That seemed a bit 'on-the-nose' for Ada Lovelace Day though, so instead, I'm going to write about Sophie Germain.
I first read about Sophie in the book 'Fermat's Last Theorem' by
Simon Singh, in which the work she did towards the theorem is highlighted. I later was reminded of her through some lines in a play I was in, 'Proof', in which she was used as an example of how you just can't keep a good mathematician (a woman one at that!) down.
The basic details of Sophie Germain's life are fairly
well reported - she was part of a family pretty low down in the bourgeoisie stratum. They were, however, of sufficient standing that, come the French Revolution, Sophie was largely confined to the house in order to avoid the chaos that ruled the streets. She used this time to study the books on mathematics in her father's library, going well beyond what I might consider a 'casual interest', reportedly teaching herself Greek and Latin so that she might be able to read the works of Newton and Euler. If Sophie had made no further progress than this she would still be utterly remarkable, Newton's Principia Mathematica is not exactly an easy read, even in English.
Supposedly Sophie was drawn to mathematics by an
apocryphal story of how Archimedes was slain by a Roman soldier while distracted by a mathematical diagram, thinking that something that can cause someone to ignore a man with a sword must be pretty interesting! She went on to become immersed in mathematics, using lecture notes from the École Polytechnique which she was either allowed or begged, borrowed or stole from students. She herself was denied entry on the basis that she was, you know, a woman. Later, she assumed the identity of a male student and began sending her work to Lagrange, a faculty member. The story of her later meeting with Lagrange, his support of her and how she developed mathematics and earned the respect of (some of) her mathematical peers is
well documented.
Rather than repeat the facts of Sophie's life which are
well explored elsewhere, I'd like to write about why I find her interesting and inspiring.
Firstly, she's interesting because reading about her is like reading a who's who of mathematics. Looking around different sites about her brings up the names Lagrange, Gauss, Legendre, Navier, Poisson and Laplace. These names would be familiar to anyone with a career or extensive education spent in the mathematical and physical sciences and some of them would be likely candidates for this blog post if I were instead writing about inspiring men in STEM. I love the way that the theorems and mathematical devices that I've used in my work become part of a larger world of actual people when you start to see the links between someone like Gauss and someone like Sophie. These were living, breathing people with feelings, ideas and politics and that is all too rarely remembered.
Secondly, I find Sophie's life inspiring because she wasn't normal. The truth is that I would likely never have heard of Sophie if she had been a man, her accomplishments were in fields that I have never had much interest in. What has really brought Sophie to the attention of most people, including myself, is the story behind her work. The struggles that she went through to be able to be a 'mathematicienne', her subterfuge in pretending to be male in order to converse with Lagrange and Gauss and her battles against a hierarchy determined to ignore her.
It is quite possible that, had Sophie been a man, I would never have heard of her. However, the truth is that Sophie Germain is a difficult person to play 'what if' with. No doubt, if a man had produced the work she had, this would be just as important for people in those fields. However, for those of us outside of those fields, we probably would never have come across it. A young man would likely have been encouraged in their pursuit of mathematics, instead of denied candlelight and bedding to try and crush the love of the subject, as Sophie was. A man would have been able to attend the École Polytechnique, had tutors and opportunities to work alongside other mathematicians.
Had Sophie been given these opportunities, she would have been taught in much the same way that others were taught at the time and that is what makes the hypothetical 'male Sophie' so hard to imagine. One of the main criticisms of her work was that it lacked rigour. No doubt this rigour would have been taught to her had she been taught in the traditional fashion. At the same time, it is possible that this may have driven some of the fascination from her or robbed her of the originality that her work had (for example, the work that she eventually won the prize for).
Her work was important because of the insight that she had and I doubt that this would have been easily removed simply by a more traditional education. In fact, I expect that the truth is more likely that society has been denied the even greater work and insights that Sophie might have had if she had simply been encouraged to reach her full potential. Louis Bucciarelli and Nancy Dworsky, who were biographers of Germain's, wrote 'All the evidence argues that Sophie Germain had a mathematical brilliance that never reached fruition due to a lack of rigorous training available only to men.'
While Sophie Germain struggled to find recognition in a field of work which she was truly passionate about and then died at a young age from breast cancer, she was fortunate in other ways. Her father was wealthy enough that she was supported by him throughout her adult life. In fact, if it had not been for a somewhat privileged background, Sophie would never had access to the materials and opportunities that inspired her in the first place. While we can at least recognise today that society suffers when people are denied opportunities based on gender, we still have a long way to go before we can hope for anything approaching real equality. I hope that Ada Lovelace Day will inspire young girls and women to see the potential and enjoyment in the STEM subjects. At the same time, I hope that one day we will actually provide the resources and true opportunity for everybody who is inspired by people like Sophie Germain, male, female or trans, rich, poor or underprivileged.
Finally, while reading around for material for this blog, I found this amazing quote from a textbook that I struggle to believe even existed. At the time that Sophie Germain was working, women were not expected to be completely ignorant of mathematics. In fact, they were encouraged to know a little so that they could discuss the topic, should it come up in dinner conversation or wherever. To this end, Francesco Algarotti wrote 'Sir Isaac Newton's Philosophy Explain'd for the Use of Ladies'. This book attempted to explain the Principia through a romantic (naturally) relationship, describing the inverse square law of gravitational attraction thus - "I cannot help thinking ... that this proportion in the squares of the distances of places ... is observed even in love. Thus after eight days absence, love becomes 64 time less than it was the first day."
I wonder whether Sophie Germain found this interpretation any less bewildering than the Latin she read it in?
