Talk:Euclid/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Four postulates?

What are the first 4 postulates?

Is Euclid Really Greek?

Wikipedia should be different and not like other encyclopedia that contradict themselves. It is written on this euclid page that not much is known about him except his book. How then do we know he was a greek? Alexandria was in Africa (Egypt) not Greece. It was ruled (or under the colony) of Greece as at that time. That does not make him Greek. USA was once colonized by Great Britain before the independence.That does not make americans British or all other countries colonized by britain, British. One error that has plagued many encyclopaedia today is the designation of a Greek nationality to some early philosophers that not much is known of. Wikipedia is not like those encyclopedia. How does it seem to read about euclid of Alexandria(Egypt) and read that he is greek and then click on the alexandria link only to discover that Alexandria is actually in egypt? Avoid Contradiction. We have a clue to his nationality. That clue is his name. "Euclid of alexandria". In those days people were surnamed after there place of origin/birth. I am considering changing the greek nationality to egypt or at least removing the word "greek". io_anthony 20:33 Sep 23, 2006 (UTC)

Euclid's name was not "Euclid of Alexandria". His name was simply Εὐκλείδης in the ancient Greek language; "Euclid" iss an approximaion of the English pronunciation of his Greek name. In some historical contexts, he was called "Euclid of Alexandria", to distinguish him from other Greek Euclids, because he was known, indeed famous, for his work in mathematics at the university in Alexandria. For more historical information, see Speculation about Euclid's nationality deleted below. Finell (Talk) 01:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

---

I could not verify the name "Euclides". Everybody seems to call him "Euclid of Alexandria", and the original Greek name was Eukleides. AxelBoldt 20:29 Feb 23, 2003 (UTC)

Indeed, Alexandria is in Egypt, but during the Hellenistic (Alexandrian) period, there were Greek communities/ colonies in many places outside mainland Greece and outside modern day Greece. The analogy between mainland Greece of the Hellenistic period and Egypt to the USA-UK is silly. Euclid's name is Greek, he wrote in Greek, he spoke in Greek (his mother tongue was Greek), the rest of the Greek scholars considered him Greek (and the Greeks were extremely peculiar whom they would consider Greek those days). If Euclid was anything other than Greek, what was he exactly? An alien perhaps so as to satisfy someone's agenda on wikipedia? For the Greek scholars during the Hellenistic period, I recommend Will Durant's 'Story of Civilization' (Volume II) for a start. An Arabian author, al-Qifti (d. 1248), recorded that Euclid's father was Naucrates and his grandfather was Zenarchus, that he was a Greek, born in Tyre and lived in Damascus.

The ancient Greeks had established communities in Asia Minor (modern day Turkey), Palestine (modern day Israel), Phoenicia (modern day Syria and Liban), Libya, southern Italy etc. Some of these communities have remained until present day. One such community still exists in modern day Egypt.

Twin Prime

I deleted a bullet which listed the "Twin Prime Conjecture" as one of the four works of Euclid, which it isn't. The conjecture is due to Euclid, however. I'm just not sure if it's notable enough to be listed somewhere else.

Deleted text

In the edit I just made (to Euclid), I removed the following text:

[[Janos Bolyai]] (and probably [[Carl Friedrich Gauss]] before him) realized that its negation leads to consistent [[non-euclidean geometries]], which were later developed by [[Nikolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky|Lobachevsky]], [[Riemann]] and [[Jules-Henri Poincaré|Poincaré]].

Along with some other stuff about the Parallel postulate that's nearly duplicated in Euclid's Elements. I was planning to merge this information into the latter article, where I think most of the discussion of mathematical issues related to the Elements should go, when I noticed that the former one (on the PP) and Non-euclidean geometry#History both talk about these matters, as well. Someone should try to separate out what info belongs in what article and insert links in place of non-germaine text in each, as I have done in this article.

I also excised:

In addition to a treatment of plane geometry, including proofs of the [[Pythagorean theorem]] and a version of the more general [[law of cosines]], Euclid's book also contains the beginnings of elementary [[number theory]], such as the notion of divisibility, the [[greatest common divisor]] and the [[Euclidean algorithm]] to determine it, and the infinity of [[prime number|prime numbers]]. Later chapters deal with three-dimensional geometry and the [[platonic solid]]s. The book also contains proofs that the [[area]] of a [[circle]] is [[proportional]] to the square of its [[radius]], and that the [[volume]] of a [[sphere]] is proportional to the cube of its radius.

Since it clearly belongs in the Elements article.

- dcljr 10:02, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC) (<code> tags changed to <tt> by dcljr on 03:35, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC) — no other changes)

I think a little of the first sentence should be included in the Euclid article. Brutannica 22:39, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Keep Euclid and Elements separate

There has been some discussion in Talk:Euclid's Elements about possibly merging the articles Euclid and Euclid's Elements. I say that's a bad idea.

The Euclid article should be used for biographical information (and there is a little more of this than is here) and some discussion of his general importance in math and science, as is currently touched on in this article. What should be added here is information about Euclid's other works (4 other extant works and 4 lost ones). See, for example, this paper I wrote in college and the references therein.

Euclid's Elements, OTOH, should be mainly about the contents, structure and impact of that work. Again, see my paper for ideas. (I don't have much about the impact of the Elements — I didn't have time to get into it!) I'll write on some of this when I feel inspired, but I don't want to end up just recapitulating my paper here. ;) (But feel free to use it as a source. Just put a link to it if you use it to a significant degree.)

- dcljr 10:23, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I agree. Euclid should be about the man and should include an overview of his works. The Elements article should be more in-depth. Thanks for the clean-up! Brutannica 22:41, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Algebra

I removed the mention of algebra in:

The text also includes sections on algebra, number theory, and three-dimensional geometry.

There is much debate as to whether Euclid actually had anything like algebra in mind when he presented the techniques sometimes referred to as geometrical algebra (I wish there were an article there!). Certainly, there is no symbolic algebra or explicit solving of equations anywhere in the work. It's only in retrospect (looking back from our post-Renaissance perspective) that one can see in the purely geometrical ideas of the work premonitions of "modern" algebraic notions. Simply put: I think it's misleading to say the work contains algebra. - dcljr 03:53, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Should it be replaced with "geometrical algebra" then? Brutannica 02:07, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No. Algebra begins about 1000 years after Euclid, and algebraic notation several centuries after that. At most, one might say that some of his theorems (propositions in his terminology) would today be expressed using algebra, giving specific examples. But if this belongs anywhere, it is in Elements. Finell (Talk) 20:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

When Euclid lived

According to the following sites, Euclid lived 325-265

http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Euclid.html http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Euclid.html http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/E/Euclid.html ( 330-270, but still closer ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.241.134.241 (talk) 3 Aug 2005

he wrote the elements in 300 B.C. his book can't be older then he is —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.51.89.85 (talk) 11 Dec 2006

If you do the math, the above dates imply that he wrote The Elements when he was around 25-30 years old. - dcljr (talk) 19:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Reference for image

hello,

whoever uploaded the image of Euclid -- probably a good idea to reference it.

How could Euclid live in 330 B.C. if he wrote The Elements in 300 B.C.? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.51.89.85 (talk)

Years count down when they're B.C. Born in 330 B.C.; wrote work in 300 B.C. - dcljr (talk) 19:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Somebody removed the image (picture ) today , that is pretty rude !!!!!!

Time line

330 B.c. 300 B.c. A.d. 1 A.d. 2000

If he lived from 330 to 270 B.c. he would have been alive when Elements was written

Euclid Dump Truck

Hello,

How can we separate this entry with Euclid the truck manufacturer.

I have a link to this page that doesn't make sense

Well, you could use Euclid (company), maybe. The relevant entry at Euclid (disambiguation) links to Euclid trucks, but that's probably not a good choice. From a Google search, it looks like the name of the company is actually Euclid-Hitachi. - dcljr (talk) 19:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Speculation about Euclid's nationality deleted

No source was cited for the recent additions to this article to the effect that Euclid was an Alexandrian or Egyptian or African by birth or nationality, so I deleted them — twice. All information in Wikipedia must be verifiable and published reliable and reputable sources must be cited. "Speculation" as such is not permitted. If there is scholarly debate on a subject, both sides should be presented with at least one reliable source for each viewpoiint cited.

Euclid's nationality is not, so far as we are aware, such a subject. A leading history of mathematics says of Euclid, "Of his life we know next to nothing, save that he was of Greek descent ..." (W.W. Rouse Ball, A short Account of the History of Mathematics p. 52). Other scholarly histories say the same (see, for example, the refrences cited in the article). I am personally aware of no scholarship to the contrary.

Alexander the Great of Macedon (located in the northern part of Ancient Greece) founded the city of Alexandria around 334 BC when he conquered Egypt as part of his empire. He and his immediate successor (a Mecedonian general) established a great university in Hellenistic Alexandria and sought out the greatest scholars of his day for its faculty. Euclid came to the university to teach mathematics; he was not born there. He wrote all his works in Greek. When Euclid taught in Hellenistic Alexandria, that city was regarded as the center of Greek culture. Euclid's published works draw directly on the works of prior Greek mathemacitioans, and his education was Greek according to all responsible histories.

If there exists differing verifiable responsible scholarship published by reliable and reputable sources, in accordance with Wikipedia's official policies, it may be added to improve the article. Speculation, however, is not permitted.

Finell (Talk) 00:55, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Cultural depictions of Nicolaus Copernicus

I've started an approach that may apply to Wikipedia's Core Biography articles: creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information. I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a featured list. Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article. Since cultural references sometimes get deleted without discussion, I'd like to suggest this approach as a model for the editors here. Regards, Durova 15:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Very few biography subjects warrant a separate page just for cultural references. Separating them detracts from the completeness of the article and forces the reader to follow a link for information that belongs in the same article. Cultural references frequently get deleted because they are unsourced or are too trivial to be meet encyclopedic standards. Finell (Talk) 16:35, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Too short

This article is too short! There needs to be more info about Euclid and his life. Randomfrenchie 22:52, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep in mind, there really isn't that much verifiable information out there about his life. - dcljr (talk) 18:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

awful

this page is full of lies pleas emake it so it is nt i would ate this a failing F because it sucks! make it beter —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.51.89.85 (talk) 11 Dec 2006

format

this article has some issues with format. a key example is taht it switches between BC and BCE in one case within two words of each other —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.29.56.119 (talk) 20:02, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

Patrician Theorem?

I just deleted the following section:

==The Patrician Theorem== Best known for his contributions to non-Euclidean geometry, Sir Patrick Black, of Minnesota has recently endorsed Euclid's final theorem, saying that "I believe that Euclid was 'right on' with this theorem concerning the Pythagorean Roots of differential integers, and for that I commend him." Sir Black developed his theory at the age of twenty-four.

While I'd like to assume good faith, it seems pretty clear that there is no such theorem. A search for the Patrician Theorem yields no results except for this Wikipedia entry. Its description also sounds like an intentionally nonsensical string of math words. Even if the person and the theorem were real, its obscurity makes it inappropriate for an encyclopedia entry.

Recent documentary analysis?

I question the accuracy of two edits in May 2007 that add details about Euclid's life. Both are said to be based on documentary analysis, but none is cited. I flagged both of them with {fact} tags. Both were contributed by editors who were not logged in, so there is no way to ask the contributor for sources. If someone can supply sources, these are useful additions to the article. On the other hand, if no one comes up with sources, I intend to delete these contributions. Finell (Talk) 21:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. Finell (Talk) 01:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

External links to Elements

The External links section is exclusively links to various online versions of Elements. In my opinion, these should be moved to the Euclid's Elements article if they are not already there. That article already has lists of versions of Elements including online versions. Does anyone disagree? Finell (Talk) 01:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Image

Please, it needs to me mentioned that this is just some artist'--24.86.252.26 07:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)s imagination of Eudlid. We have no idea what he actually looked like. And please, WHO is the artist who made this picture? I can't find this info.

In dire need of expansion; mind if i do so?

I'm just gathering a few books that are based upon his works, but also a few that are based more upon him as a person (hopefully). Would anyone mind if i expanded it? :-) Uxorion 14:42, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome! There is no need to ask permission. However, in my opinion, any additional material about Euclid's Elements should be added to that article, rather than here. Also, please be wary of dubious statements about details of Euclid's life, about which little is really known. Finell (Talk) 02:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Euclid street

The story behind the frequent Euclid Streets in U.S. cities is supposedly that land surveyors considered Euclid to be kind of a patron of surveying, and would pencil in "Euclid street" or "Euclid avenue" when they surveyed the sites of future cities for that reason... AnonMoos 02:28, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Euclid/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

* needs inline citations plange 02:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC) beyond the lead, this article has nothing more than a list of works. it is woefully undeveloped. --jacobolus (t) 22:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 22:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 20:32, 2 May 2016 (UTC)