Conversation with
Vladimir Igorevich Arnol'd
Vladimir Igorevich Arnol'd's fiftieth birthday was 12
June 1987. He became famous at age 19 when he
proved that each continuous function of three vari-
ables is representable as a superposition of continuous
functions of two variables, which finished the proof
(started by his supervisor, A. N. Kolmogorov) of the
most straightforward interpretation of Hilbert's Thir-
28 THE MATHEMATICAL 1NTELLIGENCER VOL. 9, NO. 4 9 1987 Springer-Verlag New York
Smilka Zdravkovska
teenth Problem (in the opposite direction of what was
believed to be true). Arnol'd graduated from the
Moscow State University Mechanics-Mathematics De-
partment in 1959. In 1961 he received his Candidate
degree (the equivalent of an American Ph.D.) for his
work on superpositions, which also earned him the
prize of the Moscow Mathematical Society for young
mathematicians.
Arnol'd is one of the founders of KAM theory (Kol-
mogorov-Arnol'd-Moser). According to this theory,
for example, given a small perturbation of a Hamilto-
nian system, most of the invariant tori do not vanish,
but just undergo a slight deformation. This theory has
found numerous applications outside mathematics:
e.g., in celestial mechanics and in the study of the be-
havior of the magnetic lines in plasma holding
systems. For his work on perturbation theory he re-
ceived his Doctorate of Science degree in 1963 and in
1965 shared with Kolmogorov the most prestigious So-
viet award, the Lenin Prize.
Arnol'd has found a new approach to the study of
the hydrodynamics of an ideal gas by considering the
Euler equations as the equations of the geodesics on
an infinite-dimensional Lie group of volume-pre-
serving diffeomorphisms. He proved that this group
has negative sectional curvature in many directions.
The negative curvature is responsible for the unpre-
dictability in practice of the flow.
He is the founder of the singularity and metamor-
phosis theory of caustics and wave fronts. The basis of
this theory is the connection Arnol'd discovered be-
tween these objects and the geometry of regular poly-
hedra and crystallographic symmetry groups. The
central result of this theory is his classification of the
critical points of a function.
The rapid progress in real algebraic geometry in the
last decade started with Arnol'd's 1971 paper devoted
to the placement of the ovals of a real algebraic curve.
This paper connected real algebraic geometry with
modern topology.
The higher-dimensional generalization discovered
by Arnol'd of Poincar6's last theorem reverberated in
symplectic geometry and variational calculus.
Vladimir Igorevich is the author of many books, no-
tably two textbooks on ordinary differential equations
and on mathematical methods in classical mechanics.
A large part of his creativity consists of his interaction
with students. For about 20 years he has been the
vice-president of the Moscow Mathematical Society.
He is an associate member of the Academy of Sciences
of the USSR (1984), a collaborator of the Steklov Math-
ematical Institute, professor at Moscow State Univer-
sity since 1965, and a member of the editorial board of
many mathematical journals. In 1982 he received, to-
gether with L. Nirenberg, the first International Cra-
foord Prize a w a r d e d by the Swedish A c a d e m y of
Sciences [see the article "Plugging Nobel Gap" in Na-
ture (Vol. 288, 6 November 1980, p. 7) about the prize,
and one in Priroda (No. 10, 1982, pp. 107-108) about
Arnol'd's winning it]. He has been an invited plenary
speaker at two International Congresses of Mathema-
ticians. He is an honorary doctor of the University of
Paris (1974), and a foreign member of the U.S. Na-
tional Academy of Sciences (1983), the French Aca-
d6mie des Sciences (1984), and the American Acad-
emy of Arts and Sciences (1987).
Finally, he is famous for his almost daily marathon
hiking, biking, swimming, or skiing trips. Vladimir Igorevich Arnol'd
The following are excerpts from an April 1987 con-
versation with him. We spoke in Russian; the transla-
tion is mine.
Q: What was Kolmogorov like as a supervisor? work on." The application to the theory of heartbeats
was published by L. Glass 25 years later, while I had
A: In his autobiography, A. Einstein says: "It is to concentrate my efforts on the celestial-mechanical
nothing short of a miracle that the modern methods of
applications of the same theory.
instruction have not yet entirely strangled the holy cu-
riosity of inquiry: for this delicate little plant, aside Q: You spend a lot of time working with your stu-
from stimulation, stands mainly in need of freedom."
dents. Does that help your research?
It seems that Andre/Nikolaevich Kolmogorov was fol-
lowing this advice. He never explained anything, just A: I am very lucky as far as my students are con-
posed problems, and didn't chew them over. He gave cerned. Among them are many remarkable mathema-
the student complete independence and never forced ticians, and I am proud of their accomplishments.
one to do anything, always waiting to hear from the S o m e - - A . N. Varchenko, A. G. KhovanskiL N. N.
student something remarkable. He stood out from the Nekhoroshev, A. G. Kushnirenko, A. B. Givental',
other professors I met by his complete respect for the V. A. Vasil'ev, O. V. Lyashko, O. P. Shcherbak--are
personality of the student. I remember only one case independent scientists with w h o m it is a pleasure to
w h e n he interfered with my work: in 1959, he asked interact. I w o u l d include among my students also
me to omit from the paper on self-maps of the circle some very well k n o w n mathematicians w h o have
the section on applications to heartbeats, adding: worked a great deal with me: Yu. S. Iliashenko, A. M.
"That is not one of the classical problems one ought to Gabrielov, S. M. Gusein-Zade, D. N. Bernstein, A. I.

THE MATHEMATICAL INTELLIGENCER VOL. 9, NO. 4, 1987 29

Neishtadt, who started with other supervisors, and
the algebraic geometer A. N. Tyurin, w h o studied
with me when he was a high-school student (by the
way, I also taught the well-known number theorists
G. Arkhipov and S. M. Voronin while they were high-
school students).
I also have high respect for the work of the present
generation of my students: V. I. Bakhtin, M. E. Ka-
zaryan, B. Z. Shapiro, V. L. Ginzburg, Yu. V. Che-
kanov, B. A. Khesin, I. A. BogoevskiL G. S. Petrov-
Tan'kin, V. V. Goryunov, and V. M. Zakalyukin.
I am usually interested in many more problems than
I am in a position to solve, and my students help me a
lot by sparing me that work.
Q: What do you read in mathematics?
A: It is almost impossible for me to read contempo-
rary mathematicians who, instead of saying "Petya
washed his hands," write simply: "There is a tl < 0
such that the image of t 1 under the natural mapping
tl ~-~ Petya(tl) belongs to the set of dirty hands, and a
t 2, t 1 < t2 ~ 0, such that the image of t2 under the
above-mentioned mapping belongs to the comple-
ment of the set defined in the preceding sentence."
The papers written by, say, Milnor and Smale are
simply the exceptions that confirm the rule.
The majority of the papers that I have studied have
been explained to me by either my students or my
friends. I understand better the mathematicians of the
last century, especially PoincarG but I find those of the
seventeenth century to be the most clear and basically
more modern. By the way, the 200-year interval from
H u y g e n s and Newton to Riemann and Poincar6 seems
to me to be a mathematical desert filled only with cal-
culations.
I would like to mention that in Newton's Principia I
recently found a theorem on the topology of Abelian
integrals that seems to have been unnoticed by mathe-
maticians, because Newton was about 200 years ahead
of his time, and freely used the ideas of analytic con-
tinuation and what is today called monodromy. We
say that an oval is algebraically squarable if the area of
the piece cut out from it by a straight line is an alge-
braic function of the line. Newton's theorem claims
that there are no C| algebraically squarable ovals. But
there are algebraically squarable ovals that are C"
everywhere except at one point where they are C" (for
an arbitrarily large n).
This year marks the 300th anniversary of the Prin-
cipia, so I will state another problem mentioned there,
this one variational, on the solid of revolution with
least resistance under motion along its axis in a very
rarified medium. Here Newton was 300 years ahead of
his time: the extremum is not smooth, but has a break,
and N e w t o n knew about it. As V. M. Tikhomirov has
informed me, this break appears in Newton's picture,
30 THE MATHEMATICAL INTELLIGENCER VOL. 9, NO. 4, 1987
but is absent from the picture in some later editions of
the Principia, because until now, when the problem
has become topical in connection with astronautics,
the mathematicians did not understand Newton.
Q: Some mathematicians have an algebraic way of
thinking, some a geometric, some a physical. Which
one do you consider yours to be?
A: The first problem that I remember was arithmet-
ical: Two old w o m e n started walking simultaneously
The 2 0 0 - y e a r i n t e r v a l f r o m H u y g e n s and
Newton to Riemann and Poincard seems to
me to be a m a t h e m a t i c a l desert f i l l e d only
w i t h calculations.
toward each other from two different towns; they met
at noon, and each arrived in the opposite town, one at
4 P.M., the other at 9 P.M. Find out when they started.
Algebra was not studied then, and the solution (based
on similarity theory, which can be considered to be
physical) m a d e a v e r y strong i m p r e s s i o n on me,
leaving a feeling of discovery that has appeared each
time I was able to find a connection between things
that at first glance seemed far apart, such as the bridge
from the theory of real algebraic curves to the arith-
metic of quadratic forms, via the topology of four-di-
mensional manifolds.
Nevertheless, I usually think geometrically,
drawing pictures rather than writing d o w n formulae.
Q: Which areas of research in mathematics do you
consider most promising?
A: A remarkable property of mathematics, which
one cannot help but admire, is the unreasonable effec-
tiveness of the most abstract, and at first glance com-
pletely useless, of its branches, provided that they are
beautiful. I like very much the explanation of that un-
reasonable effectiveness given by S. Weinberg in the
October 1986 Notices of the AMS (p. 728): "It is because
some mathematicians have sold their soul to the Devil
in return for advance information about what sort of
mathematics will be of scientific importance." It seems
to me, however, that the greater part of the contempo-
rary mathematical production does not satisfy the aes-
thetic requirements, on the one hand, and will never
be of any use, on the other. Perhaps that was always
the case and is an indispensable condition for the
emergence of the necessary part of mathematics.
In a more serious vein, a large group of Soviet
mathematicians have tried to express their views on
mathematics in the multivolume opus Contemporary
Problems in Mathematics: Fundamental Directions (twelve
volumes have appeared since 1985). I like a lot the
volumes Algebra I (by I. R. Shafarevich) and Topology I
(by S. P. N o v i k o v and D. B. Fuks). I took part in
writing the volumes Dynamical Systems I (together with
D. V. Anosov and Yu. S. II'yashenko), the surveys on
symplectic geometry (with A. B. Givental') and on bi-
furcation theory (with II'yashenko, V. S. Afraimovich,
and L. P. Shil'nikov), on catastrophe theory, etc.
These publications are translated by Springer.

Q: It seems that one of the differences between the

mathematical life in the West and in the Soviet Union
is that y o u have a concentration of mathematicians
here in a couple of centers. What are the advantages
and disadvantages of that situation?
A: The concentration of the majority of active math-
ematicians in Moscow and Leningrad replaces for us
the possibility for constant contact between mathema-
ticians w h o are geographically separated. For ex-
ample, I was fortunate to study with the following
mathematicians who were simultaneously working at
the same university: A. N. Kolmogorov, I. G. Pe-
trovskiL N. N. Bogolyubov, L. A. Lyusternik, L. K.
P o n t r y a g i n , P. S. N o v i k o v , A. A. Markov, I. M.
Gel'fand, I. R. Shafarevich, V. A. Rokhlin, A. O.
Gel'fond, A. Ya. Khinchin, P. S. Aleksandrov, E. B.
Dynkin, A. G. Vitushkin, G. E. Shilov, and M. M.
Postnikov, as well as with the physicists M. A. Leon-
tovich, L. A. Artsimovich, I. E. Tamm, L. D. Landau,
E. M. Lifshits, and I. M. Lifshits. At the same time,
the following were fellow students with me and par-
ticipated in the same seminars: V. M. Alekseev,
Ya. G. Sinai, D. V. Anosov, Yu. I. Manin, S. P. No-
vikov, A. A. Kirillov, D. B. Fuks, G. N. Tyurina, E. B.
Vinberg, and V. P. Palamodov; V. P. Maslov and
L. D. Faddeev were a few years older.
The concentration of the majority of active
mathematicians in Moscow and Leningrad
replaces for us the possibility for constant
contact between mathematicians who are
geographically separated.
The disadvantage of such a concentration is the dif-
ficult position of young mathematicians, who all try to
work in Moscow or Leningrad, where it is harder and
harder to find a job.
Q: Recently (in D e c e m b e r 1986) the Politburo
adopted a resolution on increasing the role of mathe-
matics in the Soviet Union. H o w do you think that will
affect the situation of mathematics here?
A: The simultaneous emergence of a large group of
strong mathematicians in Moscow in the beginning of
Vladimir Igorevich Arnol'd
the 1960s is closely related to the sharp changes in the
conditions for the development of mathematics after
1953. One can hope that the present restructuring I will
have analogous favorable results, though they will not
come immediately.
Q: Tell us about your recent transfer from the uni-
versity to the Steklov Mathematics Institute as primary
institution.
A: I had to leave the university because of the dete-
rioration of the conditions in the Mathematics Depart-
ment after the 1973 death of Petrovski/, who had been
a rector since 1953 and who did a great deal for the
development of mathematics in Moscow, followed al-
m o s t i m m e d i a t e l y b y the a c c i d e n t a l d e a t h in a
c l i m b i n g e x p e d i t i o n of t h e n e x t r e c t o r , R. V.
Khokhlov. It is difficult to predict the consequences of
the systematic decrease in competency of specialists
(about which even M. S. Gorbachev has talked) on the
development of mathematics and the country as a
whole.
Q: Is it true that you are involved in priority dis-
putes?
A: I have never led priority disputes, neither with
Soviet nor with Western mathematicians. The dis-
agreements with Western mathematicians, which
seem to give rise to this question, did not concern the
1 Perestrm~ca ( " r e s t r u c t u r i n g " ) is o n e of t h e c a t c h w o r d s in the Soviet
U n i o n today, a l o n g w i t h sokrashchenie ("reduction"), a n d glasnost.

THE MATHEMATICALINTELLIGENCERVOL. 9, NO. 4, 1987 31

 fact of to whom such and such a result belonged, but journals, and w h e n I do, I find it distressing. Clearly,
whether one should refer to Russian works where the false solutions of classical problems often receive quite
result was first published, if later an analogous result positive reviews (from which it is obvious that the re-
was published in the West. The usual reference in the viewer doesn't even suspect the sensational nature of
West seems to be, "This result belongs to N (see [x]). the result). A review of Principia would probably read
Later, [y] appeared," where [y] is a reference to a 1979 thus: "The author considers some properties of conic
English translation of a 1977 Russian paper, submitted sections. The astronomical motivation for the author's
in 1975, containing the proof of the result, and [x] is constructions is indicated. There are many pictures
the preprint of the Western author where the result is which complicate the u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the book.
only announced in 1980. The difference in dates some- There is no index, and the numeration of the proposi-
times reaches ten years. tions is extremely unfortunate. The solution to a varia-
All Russian mathematicians are continuously faced tional problem is announced, but the reviewer has
with this situation, but the majority deem it to be an been unable to reconstruct the proof. The author ex-
unavoidable consequence of the lack of personal con- presses his doubts concerning the truth of the well-
tacts. I, myself, cannot complain about the shortage of known Descartes theory. The final conclusion (on the
references to my work, and never have. But I insisted
that Western mathematicians ought to refer properly
to papers of my teachers (in particular, Kolmogorov, I p r a c t i c a l l y n e v e r g l a n c e a t r e v i e w i n g
Bogolyubov, and A. A. Andronov) as well as stu- journals, a n d w h e n I do, I f i n d it distressing.
dents.
Let's take from the shelf a random issue of Inven-
existence of God) seems to the reviewer to be without
tiones and count the number of references to Russian
proper foundation." If a Russian paper is being re-
papers. Among 156 references in eight papers (Vol.
viewed, then, in addition, the t h e o r e m "From A
86, Fasc. 2, 1986), only two papers belong to Soviet
follows B" will be translated as "A follows from B." In
mathematicians, and even these (works by Beilinson)
my youth such reviews offended me, but now I un-
were published in French. The statistics of the Index of
derstand that an average reviewer automatically omits
Citations (Garfield) give an even worse result: a ratio of
all that is essentially new and unusual, and that re-
700 to 1. That seems to me to be reminiscent of a boy-
views that are adequate to the essence of the work are
cott. For comparison, let's take from the shelf a copy
usually those either of Epigoni--serial works the areas
of Funktsional'ny~ Analiz i ego Prilozheniya (Vol. 21, No.
of which are k n o w n to all, the understanding of such a
1, 1987): among 62 references in five large papers, 22
paper is much easier for a r e v i e w e r - - o r of the papers
are in Russian, 40 are in foreign languages. I think that
of the reviewer's friends. I use Mathematical Reviews
is more like the real ratio.
usually only for the author index, in order to find the
In some cases, when I see published in the West
publications of an author I'm interested in.
repetition of Russian works, I inform the author about
it. In the majority of cases it turns out that the author
Q: I know you enjoy skiing, hiking, biking, swim-
didn't know consciously about the Russian work, and
ming. Is that recreation?
A: When I cannot prove something, I put on my
In s o m e cases, w h e n I see p u b l i s h e d in the skis and ski 40 or 60 kilometers (usually in bathing
W e s t repetition o f R u s s i a n w o r k s , I inform trunks). During that time, the difficulty usually re-
the author about it. solves itself, and I return with a ready solution, or in
any case I k n o w what to do next. The verification
often reveals a mistake in the solution obtained by
the Russian references do appear. Even so, I think that such a method, but that is now the next obstacle, and
it is too easy and safe not to refer to parallel Russian it, in turn, is surmounted by the same method.
papers. For recreation, among other things, I like listening
Inaccuracies of this kind have a ruinous effect on the to Vivaldi, Mozart, and Bach's Brandenburg concerti.
fate of talented y o u n g people in the Soviet Union, Acknowledgment
while foreign mathematicians find it easier to attribute
results to incompetent rivals than to a colleague. I would like to thank Tatyana Belokrinitskaya, Askol'd
KhovanskiL and Aleksandr Varchenko for their help.
Q: Do you ever consult reviewing journals?
Smilka Zdravkovska Vladimir IgorevichArnol'd
A: C h e b y s h e v has r e c o m m e n d e d not to follow Mathematical Reviews, Box 8604 SteklovInstitute of Mathematics
what others work on in order not to harm one's own University of Michigan Moscow 117966 USSR
originality. I practically never glance at reviewing Ann Arbor, MI 48107 USA

32 THE MATHEMATICAL INTELLIGENCER VOL. 9, NO. 4, 1987