ISSN 1019-3316, Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2007, Vol. 77, No. 4, pp. 410–416.
© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2007.
Original Russian Text © V.V. Kozlov, S.S. Demidov, 2007, published in Vestnik Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk, 2007, Vol. 77, No. 8, pp. 724–731.
Profiles
DOI: 10.1134/S1019331607040156
A Devoted Service to Science
On the 150th Anniversary of the Birth of Academician A.M. Lyapunov
Aleksandr Mikhailovich Lyapunov.
A century and a half ago, on May 25 OS (June 6),
1857, in Yaroslavl, in the family of the director of the
Demidov Vocational School, a boy was born, who later
became one of the most prominent Russian mathemati-
cians and mechanical engineers. The boy’s father,
Mikhail Vasil’evich Lyapunov (1820–1868), a student
and then an associate at Kazan University, was an
astronomer and a student and colleague of
N.I. Lobachevsky and belonged to an old aristocratic
family related to the families of the Sechenovs
(R.M. Sechenov, the brother of the famous physiologist
I.M. Sechenov, was married to Lyapunov’s sister) and
the Krylovs (Lyapunov’s niece was the mother of
A.N. Krylov, a famous mathematician and shipbuilder).
M.V. Lyapunov was a man of high culture and had
many interests. A.M. Lyapunov’s mother, Soph’ya Ale-
ksandrovna (née Shipilova), was an educated woman of
remarkable moral virtues. She loved music and was
superb at playing the piano.
410
The Lyapunovs paid much attention to the upbring-
ing of their children. A.M. Lyapunov’s two brothers
placed themselves on record in Russian culture:
S.M. Lyapunov (1859–1924) became a famous com-
poser, pianist, and conductor, and B.M. Lyapunov
(1862–1943), a well-known philologist, famous for his
works in the comparative grammar of the Slavic lan-
guages and the history of the proto-Slavic and Slavic
languages. After their father’s early death, the responsi-
bility for the children fell wholly upon S.A. Lyapunova,
while the Sechenovs exerted a marked influence on
shaping their upbringing. The boys used to spend the
summers at R.M. Sechenov’s estate in the village of
Teplyi Stan, Kurmysh uezd of Simbirsk province.
I.M. Sechenov, who also often visited this estate, used
to arrange lectures on physiology for the mansion’s
inhabitants with experiments on frogs supplied from
nearby ponds by the young Krylov. According to
V.A. Steklov, “A.M. Lyapunov, who spent his teens
among the most elucidated representatives of the then
society still influenced by N.A. Dobrolyubov and
N.G. Chernyshevsky, personified the best type of the
idealists of the 1860s” [1, pp. 31–32]. His firm belief in
progress and in the great future of science, as well as his
absolute rejection of religion, so typical of “those of the
Sixties,” was formed in his childhood and youth. More-
over, it was in Teplyi Stan where Lyapunov, still a child,
played with his cousin N.R. Sechenova, who later
became his wife.
A lot has been written about Lyapunov’s life; hence,
let us refer the reader to the voluminous literature (see,
for example, [2, 3]) and focus only on the events that
seem to us the most important, including, of course, his
scientific achievements.
The years of learning and the beginning of cre-
ative activity. Upon finishing the Nizhni Novgorod
gymnasium, Lyapunov entered the Faculty of Physics
and Mathematics at St. Petersburg University, which at
that time flourished with a galaxy of scientists, such as
P.L. Chebyshev, A.N. Beketov, A.M. Butlerov,
I.M. Sechenov, D.I. Mendeleev, and A.S. Famintsyn. At
that time, the St. Petersburg mathematical school, or, as
it is sometimes called, Chebyshev’s school, was matur-
ing, which became crucial for Lyapunov’s future. Its
fame, won owing to works by Chebyshev and his bril-
liant students A.N. Korkin, Yu.V. Sokhotskii, and
 A DEVOTED SERVICE TO SCIENCE
E.I. Zolotarev, had already spread beyond the borders
of the Russian Empire. Two years prior to Lyapunov,
A.A. Markov, another remarkable representative of the
St. Petersburg mathematical school, had entered the
Faculty of Physics and Mathematics.
In 1880, Lyapunov graduated from the university
with a candidate’s degree in mathematics and a Gold
Medal for a paper about the equilibrium of floating bod-
ies, which had been prepared under Professor
D.K. Bobylev’s supervision. It was Bobylev who rec-
ommended keeping Lyapunov at the faculty for a post-
graduate course, or, in the then formulation, “to be pre-
pared for professorship.” The young scientist was to
select the subject for his master’s dissertation.
Lyapunov developed as a scientist under the influ-
ence of Chebyshev, whose ideas and recommendations
affected his further activity. In his introductory lecture
“On the Form of Celestial Bodies” to the course that he
read at Novorossiisk University, Lyapunov described
this as follows [4, p. 314]:
In 1882, while searching for a suitable subject of
my master’s dissertation, I often spoke with Che-
byshev about different mathematical problems,
and Chebyshev used to repeat that there would
be no use for a young scientist to deal with sim-
ple, even if new, problems solvable through well-
known methods and that every young scientist,
already skilled in solving mathematical prob-
lems, should test his abilities on a serious prob-
lem, implying certain theoretical difficulties. He
suggested to me the following question: “It is
known that at a certain angular rotational veloc-
ity, ellipsoidal equilibrium forms cease to serve
as forms of the equilibrium of a rotating liquid.
Do they transform to any new forms of equilib-
rium, which, under a small increase in angular
velocity, differ little from ellipsoids?” He added:
“If you manage to solve this problem, your work
will be noticed at once ….” Later I learned that
Chebyshev had also offered this question to other
mathematicians, such as Zolotarev, a young sci-
entist at that time, whose brilliant lectures I had
attended at the university, and S. Kovalevskaya.
I do not know whether Zolotarev and Kova-
levskaya tried to solve this problem. I became
interested in this problem, all the more so that
Chebyshev had not given any directions for its
solution, and I began to work at once.
In this lecture on the form of celestial bodies,
Lyapunov formulated the essence of the question posed
by Chebyshev [4, p. 303]:
According to the known hypothesis, any such
body was initially in the liquid state, and it
obtained its current form prior to solidification,
first having acquired, through some internal fric-
tion, its unchangeable form. Under this assump-
tion, the figure of a celestial body is one of those
that a liquid rotating mass, whose particles are
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
411
mutually attracted according to the Newtonian
law, may take, or, at any rate, it must differ insig-
nificantly from this figure of equilibrium for a
rotating liquid. Therefore, under the above con-
ditions, questions on the forms of equilibrium for
a rotating liquid (rotational velocity being
assumed as constant) acquire significance.
It was established long ago (by I. Newton and
C. Maclaurin) that ellipsoids of revolution might serve
as the forms of equilibrium for a rotating liquid.
J. d’Alembert showed that there are two ellipsoids flat-
tened at the poles for every rotation for which the veloc-
ity does not exceed a certain value. C.G. Jacobi discov-
ered that the figures of a rotating body can also be tri-
axial ellipsoids if there are definite ratios between the
axes. Continuing these studies, J. Liouville established
that three figures of equilibrium—two Maclaurin ellip-
soids and one Jacobi ellipsoid—correspond to an angu-
lar velocity of less than ω1 (obviously, at the zero rota-
tional velocity, the equilibrium figure will be a sphere);
under an increase in this velocity up to ω1, the Jacobi
ellipsoid transforms into one of the Maclaurin ellip-
soids; under high rotational velocities, there are two
Maclaurin ellipsoids that merge into one when rota-
tional velocity reaches a certain value of ω = ω0. What
will happen if the rotational velocity exceeds this limit?
Will (Chebyshev’s question!) “any new forms of equi-
librium, which differ insignificantly from ellipsoids
under a small increase in angular velocity” appear?
In studying this problem, Lyapunov managed to
solve it only in the first approximation. Since he consid-
ered it impossible to draw conclusions on the first
approximation (Lyapunov here already showed his
characteristic feature—not to accept first approxima-
tions as satisfactory while solving problems of mechan-
ics), he tried to find an exact mathematical solution.
However, as he recalled later, “with the miserable math-
ematical resources that I had at that time, only two
years after the university, I faced insurmountable diffi-
culties” [4, pp. 342, 343]. He put aside this problem and
took up another one—the problem of the stability of
ellipsoids of revolution—important for finding natural
equilibrium forms. Those who had studied this problem
before (Liouville, B. Riemann, and others) reduced
their studies to particular cases or used inexact meth-
ods. Lyapunov suggested an exact statement of this
problem by giving a mathematical definition of a stable
form of equilibrium for a rotating liquid. As a result, the
problem was reduced to the question about the exist-
ence of the minimum of a certain mathematical expres-
sion. The criterion that he eventually obtained made it
possible to study the question of the stability of the
Maclaurin and Jacobi ellipsoids. As for the problem
posed by Chebyshev, Lyapunov only barely touched it
in one of his dissertation theses: “For any integer n
exceeding 2, it is possible to find at least one among the
Jacobi ellipsoids and E ⎛ ------------⎞ among the Maclaurin
n+2
⎝ 2 ⎠
Vol. 77 No. 4 2007
412 KOZLOV, DEMIDOV

ellipsoids, to which certain n-order algebraic surfaces

are infinitely close, for which it is possible to satisfy the
condition of equilibrium in the first approximation.”
However, unlike H. Poincaré, Lyapunov did not find it
possible to conclude from this that these new forms
existed and left this question open.
In January 1885, he defended his master’s disserta-
tion in applied mathematics at St. Petersburg Univer-
sity. In the spring of the same year, Lyapunov was
accepted as a privatdozent at St. Petersburg University.
However, he did not start working there at that time: a
vacancy opened at the Department of Mechanics at
Kharkov University after the departure of V.G. Imsh-
enetskii, who had been elected to the Academy of Sci-
ences. In August 1885, Lyapunov moved to Kharkov
and soon began lecturing at the university. In the same
academic year, his marital status changed: in January
1886, he married Sechenova.
Lyapunov worked in Kharkov until the spring of
1902, when, after being elected an ordinary academi-
cian in applied mathematics (he had become a corre-
sponding member in 1900), he moved to the capital.
The Kharkov period was filled with teaching (Steklov,
our prominent mathematician, was among his stu-
Lyapunov in the year of his admittance to the Nizhni
dents), public duties (from 1891 through 1898, he was Novgorod gymnasium.
a vice president and from 1898 through 1902, president
of the Kharkov Mathematical Society, which he led into
one of the most significant mathematical societies in General Equations of the Theory of the Figure of Plan-
Europe), and with his intensive creative activity. In ets” (1904), “On One Problem Posed by Chebyshev”
1888, he published his first work on the theory of the (1905), “On the Equilibrium Figures of a Homogenous
stability of the motion of mechanical systems with a Rotating Liquid That Differ Insignificantly from Ellip-
finite number of degrees of freedom and in 1892 soidal Ones” (1906–1914), and, finally, his posthumous
defended his doctoral dissertation “The General Prob- “On Certain Equilibrium Figures of an Inhomogeneous
lem of the Stability of Motion” [5] at Moscow Univer- Rotating Liquid” (1925–1927). In these works, he con-
sity, which became one of the most remarkable currently developed a number of problems of mathe-
achievements in the mathematics of the 20th century. In matical analysis: the theory of the Riemann–Stieltjes
1893, he received ordinary professorship. integral, the theory of nonlinear integral equations, the
Figures of equilibrium for a rotating liquid. The theory of spherical functions, etc. Lyapunov had to
problem posed by Chebyshev, which had determined enter into the circle of problems developed by Poincaré
the subject of Lyapunov’s master’s dissertation, once more.
remained in Lyapunov’s focus for many years. In 1885 At a certain angular velocity, certain figures, which
the great French mathematician Poincaré came to the Poincaré defined as pear-shaped, separate from the
same figures of equilibrium. On the basis of the first ellipsoid. On the basis of second approximations,
approximation results and certain analogies, Poincaré Poincaré made an assumption that these figures were
stated the possibility of the obtained equilibrium fig- stable. Poincaré’s results drew the attention of the Brit-
ures. The scientists began their correspondence [6]. ish astronomer G. Darwin (C. Darwin’s son) and drove
Lyapunov did not consider the first approximation him to a new cosmogonic hypothesis, in which the
results as finite, while Poincaré, who believed that above pear-shaped bodies played a significant role.
mechanical methods did not necessitate the strictness Darwin’s own complex computations convinced him
required for mathematical considerations, regarded that Poincaré’s conclusion about the stability of pear-
them as sufficient. Poincaré’s work, published two shaped bodies was true. In 1905, upon completing not
years later, did not satisfy Lyapunov. an approximate but an exact analysis of the problem,
Then a long interval came when Lyapunov was not Lyapunov spoke against Poincaré’s and Darwin’s con-
engaged in these problems, which ended only after he clusions. He showed that, for pear-shaped forms, a cer-
had moved to St. Petersburg in 1902. During the last tain mathematical expression the minimum of which
16 years of his life, he never stopped his studies in this ensures the stability of the form under study has no
area: “Studies in the Theory of the Figure of Celestial such minimum. However, Lyapunov did not present all
Bodies” (1903), “On the Clairault Equation and More the necessary computations at that time, presenting

HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Vol. 77 No. 4 2007

 A DEVOTED SERVICE TO SCIENCE 413

them only in his work of 1912. Nobody dared to check

these computations at that time. On February 25, 1916,
introducing Lyapunov for during his election as a cor-
responding member of the French Academy of Sci-
ences (the election took place in the spring of 1916),
E. Picard, comparing Poincaré’s and Darwin’s opinions
to that of Lyapunov, “whose method was indisputably
more strict than the method of his predecessors,” noted:
“Since the final result could be obtained only by way of
difficult numerical computations, it would be proper to
have these calculations made anew by others” (cited in
[7, p. 386]). In 1917, J. Jeans found the error in Dar-
win’s calculations.
Potential theory and probability theory. The pro-
fessorial duties during the Kharkov period of
Lyapunov’s life (mainly, within the first two years)
required much energy. This makes the range of his sci-
entific activities of that time look even more amazing.
Although Lyapunov devoted a considerable portion of
his off-hours to the theory of stability, the subject of his
future doctoral dissertation, he managed to find time to
contemplate the problems touched in his master’s dis-
sertation, as well as other subjects, in particular, the Lyapunov in 1876.
problems of the theories of potential and probability.
In Kharkov, he wrote remarkable works on potential
theory, later compiled in a collection of works [8]. Stek- layer in the Neumann method may be repre-
lov wrote (cited in [8, pp. 21, 22]): sented as the potential of a simple layer.
Beginning from 1895, a vivid interest arose In 1902, Lyapunov initiated a new study (News
among the members of the Kharkov Mathemati- of the Kharkov Mathematical Society 7 (1902)—
cal Society in the issues of mathematical phys- V.K. and S.D.) and indicated new properties of
ics, in the development of which Lyapunov the double-layer potential, which made it possi-
actively participated, and his contributions to this ble to get rid of the above limitation and solve
field, as to everything that he undertook, were of Dirichlet’s problem in the most general way.
great importance. In his famous memoirs “On Some Questions
All the previous studies into the fundamental Related to Dirichlet’s Problem” (Journal de
problems of mathematical physics (the electro- math., 1898), Lyapunov gave a number of other
static problem, the Dirichlet problem, and the important theorems related to the double- and
fundamental problem of hydrodynamics) were simple-layer potentials and indicated, apropos,
based on certain properties of the so-called dou- the necessary and sufficient conditions for the
ble-layer potential, which, as Lyapunov noted, function that solves the Dirichlet problem within
sometimes were inadequate even in the simplest a given area to have normal derivatives on the
examples. surface that limits this area.
I mean the question about the existence of the so- The surfaces for which the conditions he indicated
called normal derivatives from the double-layer are satisfied are now called Lyapunov surfaces.
potential. Lyapunov’s lectures on probability theory at
This circumstance made dubious all methods of Kharkov University motivated him to take up the cen-
solving the above problems, which have become tral limit theorem of probability theory—the subject he
classical after Lyapunov’s studies. He was the had been interested in back in his student years when he
first to indicate the general conditions relative to heard Chebyshev’s lectures in the academic year of
both the tension of the layer and the surface of its 1879–1880. His contemplations on this subject resulted
distribution, under which normal derivatives in two memoirs written during 1900: “On One Theo-
actually exist (in 1897, in Comptes rendus and rem of Probability Theory” and “A New Form of the
Journal de mathématiques). Theorem of the Limit of Probability.” The method of
Using these results, I proved later (in 1899 in momenta, used by Markov to prove this theorem in
Comptes rendus and in 1900 in Journal de Tou- 1898 (see [9, pp. 225–227]), seemed to Lyapunov very
louse) that Neumann’s principle is actually complex and complicated, and he chose a different
applicable to all the surfaces satisfying one—the method of characteristic functions. Using this
Lyapunov’s conditions if the tension of the initial method, Lyapunov managed to indicate exactly the

HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Vol. 77 No. 4 2007

414 KOZLOV, DEMIDOV
conditions necessary to perform the central limit theo-
rem and to evaluate the quickness of the convergence of
the distribution of a normal sum of random values to the
standard law. Lyapunov’s result became another step
towards the development of probability theory as a
purely mathematical discipline.
Lyapunov’s famous paper on Kovalevskaya’s case
of the integrability of an equation system for a solid
body’s motion around a fixed point (1894–1895) also
belongs to the Kharkov period of Lyapunov’s creative
activity.
The theory of the stability of systems with a finite
number of degrees of freedom. When we speak about
Lyapunov today, we, first of all, remember his most
famous achievement—the theory of stability, one of the
brightest achievements in the mathematics of the late
19th–early 20th centuries. The main areas in which the
theory of stability had been studied since the 18th cen-
tury were the study of small fluctuations around the
equilibrium position and perturbation theory in celes-
tial mechanics. Although the definition of the stability
of equilibrium or motion remained unspecified, sub-
stantial progress had been achieved by the 1880s in the
understanding of the phenomenon and the methods of
studying it [10].
The mathematical statement of the problem (which
we could not present here in a minimally strict manner
without special symbols) led to studying the behavior
of the solutions of a system of ordinary differential
equations. If such a system is integrable, the solution of
the stated problem is not difficult. However, as is
known, this opportunity is very rare. Therefore, the fol-
lowing way was used: this system was linearized and
the initial problem was replaced by the linearized one;
i.e., the solution was reduced to the first approximation.
It is evident that to solve the problem of stability for
such a system is a much simpler task, and this is how
the problem of stability had been treated by previous
authors, such as W. Thomson and P. Tait in the first vol-
ume of A Treatise on Nature Philosophy (1867) or
N.E. Zhukovskii in his work “On the Stability of
Motion” (1882). However, it remained fully unclear to
what extent the obtained conclusions were applicable to
the initial problem. Using “second approximations”
(S.D. Poisson, E. Routh, and others) did not improve
the situation: the problem of stability remained solvable
for a different, simplified, problem.
By the 1880s, the problem of developing methods to
study stability, which were not limited to approximate
considerations of the question, had become very topi-
cal. One example of a strict approach to the stability
problem had been given back in 1846 by P.G. Dirichlet,
who suggested a strict proof of Lagrange’s theorem
about the stability of an isolated equilibrium position of
a conservative system, which corresponded to the
potential energy maximum. In Kharkov, young
Lyapunov began to solve it and chose it as the subject
of his doctoral dissertation. His efforts resulted in a
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
series of works, opening with the article “On Constant
Spiral Motions of a Solid Body in a Liquid” (1888) and
finishing with the article “On One Series Met in the
Theory of Linear Differential Equations of the Second
Order with Periodic Coefficients” (1902). The obtained
results formed the content of his doctoral dissertation
“The General Problem of Motion Stability” [5]. In the
introduction, Lyapunov stated his main goal in the fol-
lowing way: “to indicate the cases for which the first
approximation actually solves the problem of stability
and to offer some methods that would make it possible
to solve it at least in some of the cases when it is impos-
sible to judge about stability by the first approximation”
[11, vol. 2, pp. 8, 9].
Lyapunov reduced the problem about the stability of
motion for systems with a finite number of degrees of
freedom to study of the stability of an unperturbed
(zero) solution. According to Lyapunov, such a solution
is called stable if, for an arbitrarily small ε > 0, such a
δ > 0 can be found that all perturbed solutions will be
less than modulo ε, as soon as initial perturbations are
less than modulo δ.
To study the question about the stability of motion,
Lyapunov developed two methods known in the litera-
ture as the first and second Lyapunov methods. Under
the first method, Lyapunov himself meant “the totality
of all methods of studying stability … which are
reduced to a direct study of perturbed motion and,
therefore, are based on a search for general and partic-
ular solutions of differential equations” [11, vol. 2,
p. 25].
All the constructions related to Lyapunov’s first
method are connected with integrating linearized sys-
tems, whereas the studies based on his second method
(this is where the principal difference between the two
methods lies!) are qualitative. The second method
reduced the study of a system’s stability to finding a
function that was later called a Lyapunov function.
Although Lyapunov constructed such functions while
studying different particular cases of the motion of sys-
tems, he did not offer any general method of their con-
struction. The respective problems were actively stud-
ied already during the 20th century, when problems of
stability became very important in engineering sci-
ences. Russian scientists have played an outstanding
role in this activity (see, e.g., [10]).
The second—qualitative—method admits a simple
geometric interpretation, revealing its conceptual con-
nection with Poincaré’s method of topographic systems
(although Lyapunov avoided using the geometric vehi-
cle). Hence, Lyapunov’s second method may be defined
as second in importance to Poincaré’s important
advancement in the qualitative theory of differential
equations, the later successes of which were connected
with the names of J. Hadamard, I. Bendixson,
G. Birkhoff, and others (see [12]). Soviet scientists
made a significant contribution to these studies.
Vol. 77 No. 4 2007
 A DEVOTED SERVICE TO SCIENCE
The brothers Lyapunov (left to right): composer S.M. Lyapunov, philologist B.M. Lyapunov, and mathematician A.M. Lyapunov.
In 1954, when working with Lyapunov’s archives,
V.I. Smirnov found a manuscript of an unknown work
prepared no later than in 1893. It contained a study of
one of, in Lyapunov’s terms, “special” (for the solution
of which the first approximation proved insufficient)
cases of the stability of unperturbed motion, described
by the so-called regular systems of differential equa-
tions. Lyapunov’s analytical potential had been so great
that by the year when this work was published—
1963—the results contained in it were still unknown.
The St. Petersburg period: The end of life. In
Steklov’s words [1, pp. 31, 32],
[Lyapunov] devoted all his unique potential to
his selfless service to science and lived by it
alone; science was the only reason for him to
live, and he used to say that life meant nothing to
him without science.
From the very start of his scholarly career, he
worked day by day until 4 or 5 a.m. and some-
times came to deliver lectures (at Kharkov Uni-
versity) after a sleepless night. He denied himself
every relaxation, and if he was seen occasionally
(once or twice a year) at the theater or a concert,
these cases were exclusive, such as rare concerts
of his brother S.M. Lyapunov, a famous com-
poser.
Lyapunov’s move to St. Petersburg in 1901 opened
an opportunity for him to devote himself entirely to
research. He focused on the problem of the figure of
equilibrium for a rotating liquid—the problem over
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
415
which, as mentioned above, he started to think as soon
as he had graduated from the university. In 1908,
Lyapunov participated in the International Mathemati-
cal Congress in Rome, and in 1909 he started to work
over the publication of the complete works by L. Euler
as the editor of two volumes. His academic achieve-
ments won international recognition. In 1908,
Lyapunov was elected a foreign member of the Italian
Accademia dei Lincei in Rome, and in 1916, as already
mentioned, a corresponding member of the French
Academy of Sciences.
The end of his life was tragic. A severe disease of his
wife (the flare-up of tuberculosis) forced Lyapunov to
move to Odessa in late June of 1917. The general polit-
ical situation in the country was getting worse every
day. The war was going on. In October, another revolu-
tion broke out. The Civil War began, tearing the country
into belligerent regions. Normal communication with
Petrograd and the Academy of Sciences was cut. Finan-
cial difficulties came. The habitual world was collaps-
ing. The only remaining support was lectures at
Novorossiisk University, where Lyapunov read a course
on the figures of equilibrium for a rotating liquid mass and
their stability. When his wife died on October 31, 1918, he
could not find strength to live further. On the same day
he shot himself from his revolver and died on Novem-
ber 3. He was buried in the same grave with his wife, by
his will.
Lyapunov’s death coincided with very harsh times
suffered by the nation and the Academy. In spite of this,
Vol. 77 No. 4 2007
416 KOZLOV, DEMIDOV
the Academy performed all memorial honors due to its
outstanding deceased member. The Vice President,
Academician Steklov, published in the journal Herald
of the Academy of Sciences a remarkable article about
his teacher, which we have cited more than once [1].
In March 1919, the Chebyshev and Lyapunov Math-
ematical Room was established at the Academy,
where it was planned to keep manuscripts by these
remarkable mathematicians. Under Steklov’s leader-
ship, A.A. Fridman and Smirnov prepared for publica-
tion the original of Lyapunov’s last work “On Certain
Equilibrium Figures of an Inhomogeneous Rotating
Liquid,” which was published in 1925–1927. In 1924,
at the International Congress of Mathematicians in Tor-
onto, Steklov delivered a speech dedicated to the mem-
ory of his outstanding teacher.
In the subsequent years, the flow of studies continu-
ing and developing the great master’s ideas was grow-
ing. However, this was later. On the last day of October
1918, when he put his finished memoir into his desk
and took the revolver, all around him looked com-
pletely hopeless.
V.V. Kozlov,
Academician
and
S.S. Demidov,
Dr. Sci. (Phys.–Math.)
REFERENCES
1. V. A. Steklov, “Aleksandr Mikhailovich Lyapunov,” in
A. M. Lyapunov, Works on Potential Theory (Gostekh-
teorizdat, Moscow, 1949), pp. 9–32 [in Russian].
HERALD OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
2. B. M. Lyapunov, A Brief Survey of the Life and Activity
of A.M. Lyapunov, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Otd. Fiz.-Mat.
Nauk, No. 1 (1930).
3. A. L. Tsykalo, Aleksandr Mikhailovich Lyapunov
(Nauka, Moscow, 1988) [in Russian].
4. A. M. Lyapunov, Selected Works, Ed. by V. I. Smirnov
(Akad. Nauk SSSR, Leningrad, 1948) [in Russian].
5. A. M. Lyapunov, The General Problem of Motion Stabil-
ity (Kharkov, 1892) [in Russian].
6. V. I. Smirnov and A. P. Yushkevich, “A.M. Lyapunov’s
Correspondence with H. Poincaré and P. Duhem,”
Ist.-Mat. Issled., No. 29, 265–284 (1985).
7. A. P. Yushkevich, A History of Mathematics in Russia
before 1917 (Nauka, Moscow, 1968) [in Russian].
8. A. M. Lyapunov, Works on Potential Theory, Ed. by
N. I. Akhiezer and G. I. Drinfel’d (Gostekhteorizdat,
Moscow, 1949) [in Russian].
9. B. V. Gnedenko and O. B. Sheinin, “Probability Theory,”
in Mathematics of the 19th Century: Mathematical
Logic, Algebra, Theory of Numbers, and Probability
Theory, Ed. by A. N. Kolmogorov and A. P. Yushkevich
(Nauka, Moscow, 1978) [in Russian].
10. I. B. Pogrebysskii, “Stability Theory,” in A History of
Mechanics from the End of the 18th Century to the Mid-
dle of the 20th Century, Ed. by A. T. Grigor’yan and
I. B. Pogrebysskii (Nauka, Moscow, 1972) [in Russian].
11. A. M. Lyapunov, Collected Works, 5 Vols. (Akad. Nauk
SSSR, Moscow, 1955–1965), Vols. 1–4 [in Russian].
12. S. S. Demidov, (with collaboration of S. S. Petrova and
N. I. Simonov), “Ordinary Differential Equations,” in
Mathematics of the 19th Century: The Chebyshev Line of
Research in the Theory of Functions, Ordinary Differen-
tial Equations, Variational Calculus, and The Theory of
Finite Differences, Ed. by A. N. Kolmogorov and
A. P. Yushkevich (Nauka, Moscow, 1987) [in Russian].
Vol. 77 No. 4 2007