DOCSLIB.ORG

“Best-Selling” Textbook Author Commonly Known As the Father Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
“Best-Selling” Textbook Author Commonly Known As the Father Of The World’s “Best-Selling” Textbook Author Commonly known as the father of geometry, the world’s “best-selling” textbook author was a Greek mathematician by the name of Euclid of Alexandria. Rivaled only by the Holy Bible in number of published editions, Euclid’s publication, called the Elements, has withstood the challenge s of time and mathema tica l scrutiny to still be considered by some as the greatest textbook ever written. [1] Condensed into 13 individual volumes, Elements is comprised of in depth reasoning as well as proofs and axioms on geometry, number theory and geometric algebra. [1][3] In the same way that Elements highlights Euclid’s lasting importance to the mathematical world this paper goes on to assert further that Euclid was and still is an inspiratio n for the advancement of all things science. Not much informa tio n exists today concerning Euclid’ s childhood, his studies or even his actual existence. Modern day understandings of Euclid’s life place him in Alexandria, Egypt as a teacher during the rule Ptolemy I (323-283 BC) in the Hellenistic Era where he most likely, “built up a vigorous school of mathematics . .,”. [2] In addition, Euclid’s education is commonly attributed to the teachings of the Platonists due to the fact many of the assertions and works of other Platonists, such as Eudoxus of Cnidus and Philip of Opus, are echoed throughout the entirety of Euclid’ s Elements.[2] For this same reason some argue that Euclid, meaning good or glory, may actually be the representation of multiple mathematicians that collaborated on the creation of Elements.[2] Euclid’s works do not stop at Elements, however, as he is attributed to additional texts such as one that pertains to the conic aspects of eyesight.[5] Regardless of whether or not Euclid was an individual or a combination of scientific minds, the mathematical landslide created by the publication of Elements and his other works is a truly undeniable scientific gem. Quinn 1 Papyrus displaying some of Euclid’s Elements dating from around 100 AD [7] Euclid’s Elements traces its roots over a span of 2000 years and is seen as one of the most pivotal pieces of text to have influenced modern mathematics for much of Western world. [3] Having been in print since 1482 Elements has evolved over a range of 2000 editions and, as mentioned before, is the most published book by number second only to the Holy Bible. [3] Interestingly enough, Euclid was once quoted as saying, “The laws of nature are but the mathematical thoughts of God,” and, in saying so, Euclid proclaims that not only are the inner- workings of nature governed by fundamental mathematical rules but these rules are the direct connection between understanding Earth as intended by the universal creator. Furthermore, Elements attempts to, and succeeds at, systematically categorizing various branches of basic geometry and archaic mathematics into a simple manual that could be used to teach those willing to learn. [3] In general, the first four books of Elements pertain to plane geometry, the fifth through the tenth books pertain to ratios and proportions and the eleventh through the thirteenth books pertain to spatial geometry. [3] Quinn 2 We know that the majority of what Euclid included in Elements was not new information for his era and one can identify the original sources given some historical context: “Book ten deals with… the work of Theaetetus,” and “Euclid proves these theorems using the ‘method of exhaustion’ as invented by Eudoxus,”. [3] It seems that Elements was not meant to be an original piece as much as it was meant to be a compilation of previous and improved upon works that helped organize centuries worth of mathematical theories and axioms. For the first time the world had a manuscript that guided the user from axiom to proposition under logical assumptions derived from the work of other great mathematicians before Euclid. The deductive way of thinking established in Elements gave way to what was known as geometry for the next 2000 years and was not challenged until the concept of non-Euclidean geometries emerged in the 19th century. [6] Euclid’s fifth postulate, known as the parallel postulate, in essence states that, “through a point not on a line, there is no more than one line parallel to the line.” [6] This postulate alone had mathematicians questioning whether or not this postulate was just that or, “a theorem which could be derived from the first four of Euclid’s postulates”. [8] It was proven later that this postulate is the equivalent of other mathematical concepts such as the equidistance postulate and the Pythagorean Theorem. Furthermore, Euclidean geometry is the branch of geometry in which the fifth postulate holds true where as other branches of geometry, such as elliptic and hyperbolic geometries, are considered non-Euclidean and replace the fifth postulate with one that satisfies their given needs. Non-Euclidean geometries still satisfy Euclid’s first four postulates but tend to modify axioms to keep the system consistent. [8] Euclid’s simplification of deductive mathematics, embodied in the text of Elements, was and still is seen as being partly if not Quinn 3 entirely responsible for motivating many centuries worth of scientific breakthroughs and conclusions. The man now known as the father of geometry may not have been a man at all. Some assume Euclid as the name of a brain trust organized by the great mathematicians of the Hellenistic Age. Regardless of the physical nature of the famed Euclid Elements has made one of the most significant impacts on the scientific community since its creation 2000 years ago. Elements was the first logically coherent mathematical book of its kind and, over its course of a thousand plus editions, remains as a precedent in the scientific community. Starting with the expositio n of Elements, Euclid set forth an intuitive branch of reasoning that still shapes the way the world operates today. References _______________________________________ 1 Joyce, D. E. "Euclid's Elements, The Text." Euclid's Elements, The Text. Clark University, 1998. Web. 10 Sept. 2016. 2 O'Connor, J. J., and E. Robertson F. "Euclid of Alexandria." Euclid Biography. University of St. Andrews, Scotland, Jan. 1999. Web. 10 Sept. 2016. 3 Weisstein, Eric W. "Elements." From MathWorld--A Wolfram Web Resource. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Elements.html Quinn 4 4 Khan, Salman. "Euclid as the Father of Geometry." Khan Academy. Khan Academy, Web. 10 Sept. 2016. 5Artmann, Benno (1999). Euclid: The Creation of Mathematics. New York: Springer. ISBN 0- 387-98423-2. 6 Roberts, Donna. "Euclidean and Non-Euclidean Geometry." Euclidean and Non-Euclidea n Geometry. Regents Exam Prep Center, n.d. Web. 10 Sept. 2016. 7 Norton, John D. "Euclidean Geometry The First Great Science." Euclidean Geometry The First Great Science. University of Pittsburgh, 28 Dec. 2006. Web. 10 Sept. 2016. 8 Szudzik, Matthew and Weisstein, Eric W. "Parallel Postulate." From MathWorld--A Wolfram Web Resource. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ParallelPostulate.html Quinn 5 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Roles of Solon in Plato's Dialogues
    The Roles of Solon in Plato’s Dialogues Dissertation Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Samuel Ortencio Flores, M.A. Graduate Program in Greek and Latin The Ohio State University 2013 Dissertation Committee: Bruce Heiden, Advisor Anthony Kaldellis Richard Fletcher Greg Anderson Copyrighy by Samuel Ortencio Flores 2013 Abstract This dissertation is a study of Plato’s use and adaptation of an earlier model and tradition of wisdom based on the thought and legacy of the sixth-century archon, legislator, and poet Solon. Solon is cited and/or quoted thirty-four times in Plato’s dialogues, and alluded to many more times. My study shows that these references and allusions have deeper meaning when contextualized within the reception of Solon in the classical period. For Plato, Solon is a rhetorically powerful figure in advancing the relatively new practice of philosophy in Athens. While Solon himself did not adequately establish justice in the city, his legacy provided a model upon which Platonic philosophy could improve. Chapter One surveys the passing references to Solon in the dialogues as an introduction to my chapters on the dialogues in which Solon is a very prominent figure, Timaeus- Critias, Republic, and Laws. Chapter Two examines Critias’ use of his ancestor Solon to establish his own philosophic credentials. Chapter Three suggests that Socrates re- appropriates the aims and themes of Solon’s political poetry for Socratic philosophy. Chapter Four suggests that Solon provides a legislative model which Plato reconstructs in the Laws for the philosopher to supplant the role of legislator in Greek thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Proclus on the Elements and the Celestial Bodies
    PROCLUS ON THE ELEMENTS AND THE CELESTIAL BODIES PHYSICAL TH UGHT IN LATE NEOPLAT NISM Lucas Siorvanes A Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the Dept. of History and Philosophy of Science, Science Faculty, University College London. Deuember 1986 - 2 - ABSTRACT Until recently, the period of Late Antiquity had been largely regarded as a sterile age of irrationality and of decline in science. This pioneering work, supported by first-hand study of primary sources, argues that this opinion is profoundly mistaken. It focuses in particular on Proclus, the head of the Platonic School at Athens in the 5th c. AD, and the chief spokesman for the ideas of the dominant school of thought of that time, Neoplatonism. Part I, divided into two Sections, is an introductory guide to Proclus' philosophical and cosmological system, its general principles and its graded ordering of the states of existence. Part II concentrates on his physical theories on the Elements and the celestial bodies, in Sections A and B respectively, with chapters (or sub-sections) on topics including the structure, properties and motion of the Elements; light; space and matter; the composition and motion of the celestial bodies; and the order of planets. The picture that emerges from the study is that much of the Aristotelian physics, so prevalent in Classical Antiquity, was rejected. The concepts which were developed instead included the geometrization of matter, the four-Element composition of the universe, that of self-generated, free motion in space for the heavenly bodies, and that of immanent force or power.
    [Show full text]
  • Plato As "Architectof Science"
    Plato as "Architectof Science" LEONID ZHMUD ABSTRACT The figureof the cordialhost of the Academy,who invitedthe mostgifted math- ematiciansand cultivatedpure research, whose keen intellectwas able if not to solve the particularproblem then at least to show the methodfor its solution: this figureis quite familiarto studentsof Greekscience. But was the Academy as such a centerof scientificresearch, and did Plato really set for mathemati- cians and astronomersthe problemsthey shouldstudy and methodsthey should use? Oursources tell aboutPlato's friendship or at leastacquaintance with many brilliantmathematicians of his day (Theodorus,Archytas, Theaetetus), but they were neverhis pupils,rather vice versa- he learnedmuch from them and actively used this knowledgein developinghis philosophy.There is no reliableevidence that Eudoxus,Menaechmus, Dinostratus, Theudius, and others, whom many scholarsunite into the groupof so-called"Academic mathematicians," ever were his pupilsor close associates.Our analysis of therelevant passages (Eratosthenes' Platonicus, Sosigenes ap. Simplicius, Proclus' Catalogue of geometers, and Philodemus'History of the Academy,etc.) shows thatthe very tendencyof por- trayingPlato as the architectof sciencegoes back to the earlyAcademy and is bornout of interpretationsof his dialogues. I Plato's relationship to the exact sciences used to be one of the traditional problems in the history of ancient Greek science and philosophy.' From the nineteenth century on it was examined in various aspects, the most significant of which were the historical, philosophical and methodological. In the last century and at the beginning of this century attention was paid peredominantly, although not exclusively, to the first of these aspects, especially to the questions how great Plato's contribution to specific math- ematical research really was, and how reliable our sources are in ascrib- ing to him particular scientific discoveries.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-48303-2 — the Moon in the Greek and Roman Imagination Karen Ní Mheallaigh Index More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-48303-2 — The Moon in the Greek and Roman Imagination Karen ní Mheallaigh Index More Information Index Achilles’ shield. See Homer Callimachus, – Aëtius, – celestial bowls, – Aglaonice, – Cicero, Somnium Scipionis, –, , See Alcmaeon of Croton, , – selēnoskopia (or ‘view from Moon’) Alcman Cleomedes, , Partheneia (Maiden Songs), – cognitive estrangement. See selēnoskopia (view from Alexander of Abonouteichos, – Moon) amphiphōntes, Colin Webster, , – analogical drift, Corinna, – Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, , –, –, cup of Helios, – Cyrano de Bergerac, , n Anaximander of Miletus, – Anaximenes of Miletus, – Demetrius Triclinius, n, , – Ancient Greek calendar, See also parapēgmata Democritus of Abdera, –, Antiphanes of Berge, – Diogenes of Apollonia, antiphraxis, – dioptra. See Lucian, True Stories Antonius Diogenes, The incredible things beyond Thule earthshine, – and scholarly hoax, – Earthy Moon Theory (EMT), –, –, and the Arctic, – See Plutarch, De facie and the Moon, – problems/challenges, , – narrative complexity, – eclipse Apollo Noumēnios, lunar eclipse, – Apuleius mechanism of eclipse, – lunam despumari, – solar eclipse, , – Aristarchus of Samos, , Empedocles of Acragas, –, , – Aristotle Empedotimus, fire creatures on the Moon, – Endymiones, , – on nature of Moon, Ennius’ dream, – theory of elements, Epimenides of Crete, – Astraeus, Eratosthenes of Cyrene, astral travel. See soul projection Hermes. See selēnoskopia (or ‘view from astronomical observation, , See mountains Moon’) astronomy
    [Show full text]
  • May Plato's Academy Be Considered As the First Academic Institution?
    Center for Open Access in Science ▪ https://www.centerprode.com/ojsh.html Open Journal for Studies in History, 2019, 2(2), 35-42. ISSN (Online) 2620-066X ▪ https://doi.org/10.32591/coas.ojsh.0202.02035s _________________________________________________________________________ May Plato’s Academy be Considered as the First Academic Institution? Zhulduz Amangelidyevna Seitkasimova M. Auezov South Kazakhstan State University, KAZAKHSTAN Faculty of Pedagogy and Culture, Shymkent Received 8 November 2019 ▪ Revised 17 December 2019 ▪ Accepted 23 December 2019 Abstract Plato’s Academy is undoubtedly the first higher education institution in history, and in ancient Athens itself represents the most important educational institution. It constituted in the context of the universal development that took place in ancient Athens, in the 5th and 4th century BC, and it continued to work until the Byzantine Emperor Justinian forbade the work of all schools of philosophy (529 AD). This development, which is part of the so-called Golden Age of ancient Athens, represents the period of Greek history in which the foundations of Western civilization originated, as we know it today. Plato appears as one of the greatest philosophers of ancient Greece, along with Socrates and Aristotle, to the first of whom appears as a student and to the second as a teacher. Philosophy in the true sense of the word was created in Plato’s era in ancient Athens (Russell, 1975), and Plato’s Academy, in which he, along with his students, talked about various philosophical topics through the Garden of Akademos, was the impetus for this development. There are also opinions that the development of philosophy after Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle is only of reproductive character when it comes to the basics of philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Editions Perna, Petrus. 1580. Plotini platonicorum facile coryphaei operum philosophicorum omnium libri LIV: in sex enneades distributi. Basileae: Ad Perneam Lecythum. Fabricius, Johann Albert. 1711. Bibliothecae graecae libri IV. Hamburgi: [Christiani Liebezeit]. Creuzer, Georg Friedrich, Georg Heinrich Moser, and Daniel Wyttenbach. 1835. Plotini opera omnia, Porphyrii liber de vita Plotini. 3 vols. Oxonii: e typographaeo Academico. Westermann, Anton. 1850. Porphyrius De vita Plotini apud Carel Gabriel Cobet, Diogenis Laertii de clarorum philosophorum vitis, dogmatibus et apophthegmatibus libri decem. Paris: Firmin Didot. Kirchhoff, Adolf. 1856. Plotini opera. 2 vols. Bibl. Teubneriana. Lipsiae: in aedibus B. G. Teubneri. Müller, Hermann Friedrich. 1878-80. Plotini Enneades. 2 vols. Berolini: apud Weidmannos. von Volkmann, Richard. 1883-4. Plotini Enneades, praemisso Porphyrii de vita Plotini deque ordine librorum eius libello. Bibl. Teubneriana. Lipsiae: in aedibus B. G. Teubneri. Bréhier, Émile. 1924-38. Plotin: Ennéades. 6 vols. in 7. Coll. Budé. Paris: Les Belles Lettres. Pugliese Carratelli, Giovanni. 1946. Porfirio: Vita di Plotino ed ordine dei suoi libri. Napoli: G. Machiaroli. Faggin, Giuseppe. 1947-8. Plotino: Le Enneadi e Porfirio: Vita di Plotino. 3 vols. Milano: Istituto editoriale italiano. Rev. ed. 2000, Milano: Bompiani. Henry, Paul, and Hans-Rudolf Schwyzer. 1951-73. Plotini opera. (Editio maior.) 3 vols. Museum Lessianum Series Philosophica 33-5. Bruxelles: L’Édition Universelle and Paris: Desclée de Brouwer. ———. 1964-82. Plotini opera. (Editio minor.) 3 vols. OCT. Oxonii: e typographeo Clarendoniano.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity
    THE CAMBRIDGE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY IN LATE ANTIQUITY The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity comprises over forty specially commissioned essays by experts on the philosophy of the period 200–800 ce. Designed as a successor to The Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval Philosophy (ed. A. H. Armstrong), it takes into account some forty years of schol- arship since the publication of that volume. The contributors examine philosophy as it entered literature, science and religion, and offer new and extensive assess- ments of philosophers who until recently have been mostly ignored. The volume also includes a complete digest of all philosophical works known to have been written during this period. It will be an invaluable resource for all those interested in this rich and still emerging field. lloyd p. gerson is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Toronto. He is the author of numerous books including Ancient Epistemology (Cambridge, 2009), Aristotle and Other Platonists (2005)andKnowing Persons: A Study in Plato (2004), as well as the editor of The Cambridge Companion to Plotinus (1996). The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity Volume I edited by LLOYD P. GERSON cambridge university press Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sao˜ Paulo, Delhi, Dubai, Tokyo, Mexico City Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 8ru,UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521876421 C Cambridge University Press 2010 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    Bibliography 1969 [1] ‘The Law of Contradiction’, Philosophical Quarterly 19, 302-309 [2] ‘Aristotle’s Theory of Demonstration’, Phronesis 14, 123-152 [3] (trans.) G.Patzig, Aristotle’s Theory of the Syllogism (Reidel, Dordrecht) 1970 [4] ‘Property in Aristotle’s Topics’, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 52, 136-155 [5] rev. G.E.L.Owen (ed), Aristotle on Dialectic, Philosophical Review 79, 558-565 1971 [6] ‘Homonymy in Aristotle and Speusippus’, Classical Quarterly 21, 65-80 1972 [7] The Ontological Argument (Macmillan, London) [8] ‘Aristotle’s Concept of Mind’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 72, 101-114 [9] ‘Mr Locke’s Darling Notion’, Philosophical Quarterly 22, 193-214 [10] (with Richard Robinson) ‘Untruisms’, Metaphilosophy 3, 189-197 [11] rev. A.Dreizehnter (ed), Aristoteles Politik, Classical Review 22, 339-341 1973 [12] rev. J.Bennett, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Philosophical Quarterly 23, 73-76 [13] rev. H.Stachowiak, Rationalismus im Ursprung, Mind 82, 292-293 [14] rev. R.A.Gauthier (ed), Aristote: Ethique à Nicomaque, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 55, 79-82 [15] rev. M.L.West, Early Greek Philosophy and the Orient, Oxford Magazine 91, 10-11 [16] rev. J.W.Gough, John Locke’s Political Philosophy, Oriel Record, 57-60 [17] rev. P.Moraux and D.Harlfinger (edd), Untersuchungen zur Eudemischen Ethik, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 55, 334-338 1974 [18] rev. R.Sorabji (ed), Aristotle on Memory, Isis 65, 412-413 2 [19] rev. J.Aubonnet (ed), Aristote: Politique III-IV, Classical Review 24, 292-293 1975 [20] Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics (Clarendon Press, Oxford) [21] ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Article — Development, Non-Philosophers, and Laws
    REVIEW ARTICLE — DEVELOPMENT, NON-PHILOSOPHERS, AND LAWS Harold Tarrant1 Christopher Bobonich, Plato’s Utopia Recast: His Later Ethics and Politics (New York and Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002), xi + 643 pp., £40.00, ISBN 0 19 925143 6 (cloth); £20.00, ISBN 0 19 927410 0 (pbk.). This is a monumental book about the final phase in the development of Plato’s political and ethical theory in the Laws. It would not be quite correct to call it a work about the political theory of the Laws, for it is not starting off with the overall text of that work as something in need of explanation. Nor is its pri- mary interest in what Plato seeks to discuss in the Laws. For instance, I had reason to look and see if the index mentioned the important topics of commu- nal meals or land division. The former received a little attention, the latter none that I could find. The principal subject is the underpinnings of Plato’s political theory, above all its underpinnings in Plato’s concept of the human person itself. The author is therefore raising issues of his own concerning Plato’s own position in the Laws, and how that position had evolved. Given the strong ancient tradition concerning this being the last of the dia- logues, prepared for ‘publication’ by Philip of Opus, one does not have to be a developmentalist to accept the legitimacy of Bobonich’s chronological sup- positions. The Laws is contrasted primarily with the Phaedo and the Republic, and strong claims are made concerning developments in political theory, which follow developments in Plato’s psychology and epistemology.
    [Show full text]
  • The Socratic Dubia
    The Socratic Dubia Harold Tarrant University of Newcastle Australia 1 Introduction It is hard to be sure about the authenticity of several of the dialogues within the Platonic corpus. Most of these employ Socrates as principal speaker, and seem genuinely interested in aspects of the historical or at least the Platonic “Socrates” and his methods, and my title refers to these collectively. I am neither claiming that they offer special insights into the historical Socrates, nor that they should always be treated as a group. Rather I would claim that there is some merit in examining them together from time to time, revealing their similarities, and discussing whether some or all might have found their way into the corpus by a common path. Any such examination would naturally include discussion of the portrait of Socrates that they paint, both collectively and individually. If these works were designed by Plato or were given his approval then they have received the imprimatur of a follower of Socrates. If they have no close connection with Plato, nor with any other follower of Socrates, then they may rather be important as indications of what Socrates had come to mean for those who had not known Socrates themselves. The shape of the Platonic corpus, as we now know it, cannot with certainty be traced back before Thrasyllus (d. 36ce),1 but even then several works were already agreed to be spurious (dl 3.62).2 Several survive in the Appendix Pla- 1 I have treated Thrasyllus’ activities in Tarrant 1993, and I included the testimonia there.
    [Show full text]
  • Elementary Number Theory in Nine Chapters
    Elementary number theory in nine chapters JAMES J. TATTERSALL PUBLISHED BY THE PRESS SYNDICATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 1RP, United Kingdom CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RU, UK http:==www.cup.cam.ac.uk 40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, USA http:==www.cup.org 10 Stamford Road, Oakleigh, Melbourne 3166, Australia # Cambridge University Press 1999 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 1999 Printed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge Typeset in Times 10=13pt, in 3B2 [KT] A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in publication data Tattersall, James J. (James Joseph), 1941± Elementary number theory in nine chapters/James J. Tattersall. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0 521 58503 1 (hb).±ISBN 0 521 58531 7 (pb) 1. Number theory. I. Title. QA241.T35 1999 512'.72±dc21 98±4541 CIP ISBN 0 521 58503 1 hardback ISBN 0 521 58531 7 paperback Contents Preface vii 1 The intriguing natural numbers 1.1 Polygonal numbers 1 1.2 Sequences of natural numbers 22 1.3 The principle of mathematical induction 38 1.4 Miscellaneous exercises 41 2 Divisibility 2.1 The division algorithm 49 2.2 The greatest common divisor 58 2.3 The Euclidean algorithm 64 2.4
    [Show full text]
  • Copyrighted Material
    the life of plato of athens 1 The Life of Plato of Athens DEBRA NAILS Plato died in the first year of the hundred and eighth Olympiad in the thirteenth year of the reign of Philip of Macedon – 347 bce by contemporary reckoning – and was buried at the Academy.1 So venerable and so widespread was the philosopher’s repu- tation that mythologizing was inevitable and prolonged: Plato was sired by the god Apollo and born to the virgin Perictione; he was born on the seventh of Thargelion, Apollo’s birthday, and the bees of Mount Hymettus dripped honey into the mouth of the newborn babe. Renaissance Platonists celebrated Plato’s birth on the seventh of November, the same day his death was commemorated. Woodbridge’s 1929 The Son of Apollo begins, “The demand of history that we be accurate contends with the demand of admiration that we be just. Caught between the two, biographers of Plato have written, not the life of a man, but tributes to a genius.” Genius he certainly was, but he deserves better than a tribute and better than the standard vita cut to fit the pattern of the Alexandrian librarian Apollodorus who divided ancient lives into four twenty-year periods with an akmB at age 40.2 By this scheme, Plato is duly born in 427, meets Socrates at age 20 (when Socrates is 60), founds the Academy at 40, voyages to Sicily at 60, and dies at the age of 80. Ample evidence belies the neat fit. Plato of Collytus, son of Ariston – for that was his full legal name, under which he had rights of Athenian citizenship and by which his name will have been recorded on the Aegis tribal lists – was born in 424/3, the fourth child of Ariston of Collytus, son of Aristocles, and Perictione, daughter of Glaucon; Ariston and Perictione had married by 432.
    [Show full text]