And Nikolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky is his name!

[ElvisL1ves]

One of Tom Lehrer’s more abstruse satirical songs is Lobachevsky, about a mathematician, which was Lehrer’s own “true calling”. But only ol’ Nikolai got under Tom’s skin enough to make him write about it:

Plagiarize,
Let no one else’s work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes,
So don’t shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize -
Only be sure always to call it please ‘research’.

So what did Lobachevsky do? Was he really a notoriously-pathetic credit-stealer or did he actually contribute something original to mathematics?

[Celyn]

Heavens, you’re away ahead of me! You know, I love the song, but had never bothered to learn whether he was a real or a fictitious person.

Oh, I am not worthy to be in this site. Woeand gnashing of teeth. Now tht the question has been raised, though, “replying” lets me watch thiso thread for elucidation.

[hajario]

I plugged Labachevsky into Google. The very first hit was a biography of the man.

http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Lobachevsky.html

Haj

[hajario]

The Wikipedia entry refers directly to the song:

Nikolai Lobachevsky

In the 1950s, humorist, satirist (and mathematician) Tom Lehrer wrote a song, inspired by a Danny Kaye routine about Stanislavsky, in which he credited Lobachevsky with teaching him the secret of success as a mathematician: plagiarism (“But remember always to call it please, ‘research’.”) Lehrer has noted that he chose Lobachevsky mainly because his name was reminiscent of Stanislavsky’s, and not because Lobachevsky is particularly known for this misdemeanor.

Haj

[BrotherCadfael]

Lobachevsky was seminal in the field of non-Euclidian geometry, and is very well thought of. Lerher’s brilliant song used his name strictly for its euphony.

[Small_Clanger]

I am never forget the day. . . i was given my first original essay to write. It was on: AnalyticalAlgebraicTopologyOfLocallyEuclidianMetrisationOfInfiniteDifferentibleReimannianManifold (did I get that right :))

I have Tom Lehrer on record on a BBC radio progam stating that he only used the name for prosaic(?) reasons, and that it was a terrible slander on the poor man.

Anyone know what the Russian nonsence is that T.L. spouts as the ‘reviews’ from Pravda and Isvestia(sp?)

[Eva_Luna]

@Small Clanger

I
Anyone know what the Russian nonsence is that T.L. spouts as the ‘reviews’ from Pravda and Isvestia(sp?)

It’s pure nonsense syllables. Not Russian at all.

[Small_Clanger]

@Eva Luna

It’s pure nonsense syllables. Not Russian at all.

Aw, nuts

[Garfield226]

The songbook, “Too Many Songs by Tom Lehrer” says:

The author would like to state that although Nicolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky (1793-1856) was a genuine, and indeed eminent, mathematician, the peccadillos attributed to him herein are not substantiated by history. The format of this song was suggested by a Danny Kaye-Sylvia Fine routine entitled ‘Stanislavski,’ and the name of the protagonist was chosen for purely prosodic reasons.

The Russian bits are also footnoted with:

At each of these two junctures one should insert some phrase in Russian (if the audience does not speak Russian) or some Russian double-talk (if it does). The author’s own choices varied from performance to performance, ranging from the merely inappropriate to the distinctly obscene.

[Mathochist]

@BrotherCadfael

Lobachevsky was seminal in the field of non-Euclidian geometry, and is very well thought of. Lerher’s brilliant song used his name strictly for its euphony.

Lobachevsky was accused by no less than Gauss of “stealing” non-Euclidean geometry. Of course by now we recognize that he did work it out himself, but the accusation was there.

[Eva_Luna]

Bummer, Garfield! I guess I’m only referring to the recording I have, then…although I’d love to hear some of the others.

[Voyager]

And while we’re at it, how many women did he use for “part of hypotenuse?”
I know of Doris Day, and two others on different versions which I’ll have to listen to. I also can’t remember who they used for the Tomfoolery version.

I think I’m getting old and gray.

[ElvisL1ves]

Ingrid Bergman on the “Songs by Tom Lehrer” version.

Thanks, everyone - I’m disappointed to find that Lehrer slandered a fine man.

[raising shot glass of Stolichnaya] Na zdrovye, Nika!

[Kimstu]

Mathochist: Lobachevsky was accused by no less than Gauss of “stealing” non-Euclidean geometry. Of course by now we recognize that he did work it out himself, but the accusation was there.

Cite? The way I heard it, Gauss was not even aware of Lobachevsky’s work:

Neither Bolyai nor Gauss knew of Lobachevsky’s work, mainly because it was only published in Russian in the Kazan Messenger a local university publication. Lobachevsky’s attempt to reach a wider audience had failed when his paper was rejected by Ostrogradski.

Maybe you are thinking of Gauss’s remark to Bolyai that he (Gauss) had already figured out the results in non-Euclidean geometry that Bolyai found, but never published them. Some people think that Bolyai suspected Gauss of plagiarism on that account. But I never heard of an accusation by Gauss either against Bolyai or against Lobachevsky.

[Eva_Luna]

@Voyager

And while we’re at it, how many women did he use for “part of hypotenuse?”

Brigitte Bardot on whatever version my ex used on the mix tape he made me.

[Garfield226]

@Voyager

And while we’re at it, how many women did he use for “part of hypotenuse?”
I know of Doris Day, and two others on different versions which I’ll have to listen to. I also can’t remember who they used for the Tomfoolery version.

I think I’m getting old and gray.

The songbook uses Ingrid Bergman

@Eva Luna

Bummer, Garfield! I guess I’m only referring to the recording I have, then…although I’d love to hear some of the others.

Oh, I have no problem with believing that bit of interesting information was used for humorous effect in the songbook only. This is the same book which doesn’t include the actual music to this song, but says:

The specific accompaniment used by the author on his recording would require too many pages to write out and it therefore omitted. Prospective performers of the piece are advised to heed its basic precept and plagiarize the author’s version.

[Mathochist]

@Garfield226

The specific accompaniment used by the author on his recording would require too many pages to write out and it therefore omitted. Prospective performers of the piece are advised to heed its basic precept and plagiarize the author’s version.

i.e.: “I have a wonderful accompaniment to this piece, but the margins of this book are too small to contain it.”

[Mathochist]

@Kimstu

Maybe you are thinking of Gauss’s remark to Bolyai that he (Gauss) had already figured out the results in non-Euclidean geometry that Bolyai found, but never published them. Some people think that Bolyai suspected Gauss of plagiarism on that account. But I never heard of an accusation by Gauss either against Bolyai or against Lobachevsky.

The folklore goes that an accusation was levelled. Maybe this is an academic legend (opp. “urban”), but actually I don’t think it matters. I’m pretty sure Lehrer also heard the legend and I believe that he wrote the piece on that premise. AFAIK he’s still around, so it may well be possible to go straight to the source on this one.

[Kimstu]

Mathochist: * I’m pretty sure Lehrer also heard the legend and I believe that he wrote the piece on that premise. AFAIK he’s still around, so it may well be possible to go straight to the source on this one.*

As far as I could tell, Garfield did go straight to the source when he quoted Lehrer’s introduction to his Songbook:

The author would like to state that although Nicolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky (1793-1856) was a genuine, and indeed eminent, mathematician, the peccadillos attributed to him herein are not substantiated by history. The format of this song was suggested by a Danny Kaye-Sylvia Fine routine entitled ‘Stanislavski,’ and the name of the protagonist was chosen for purely prosodic reasons.

If the reason for picking Lobachevsky’s name was “purely prosodic”—i.e., because it fit the meter of the song—then it presumably wasn’t on account of the plagiarism urban legend.

[Mathochist]

That quote, though, only specifically says that the alleged misdeeds are untrue, as does the legend. My position is still not incompatible with that note.