FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60  
61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   >>   >|  
_ part of a unit, that is, to _four_ places of decimals. A modern classical dictionary represents it as done by Philo to _ten thousand_ places of decimals. Lacroix comments on Montucla to the effect that _myriad_ (in Greek _ten thousand_) is here used as we use it, vaguely, for an immense number. On looking into Eutocius, I find that not one definite word is said about the extent to which Philo carried the matter. I give a translation of the passage: "We ought to know that Apollonius Pergaeus, in his Ocytocium [this work is lost], demonstrated the same by other numbers, and came nearer, which seems more accurate, but has nothing to do with Archimedes; for, as before said, he aimed only at going near enough for the wants of life. Neither is Porus of Nicaea fair when he takes Archimedes to task for not giving a line accurately equal to the circumference. He says in his Cerii that his teacher, Philo of Gadara, had given a more accurate approximation ([Greek: eis akribesterous arithmous agagein]) than that of Archimedes, or than 7 to 22. But all these [the rest as well as Philo] miss the intention. They multiply and divide by _tens of thousands_, which no one can easily do, unless he be versed in the logistics [fractional computation] of Magnus [now unknown]." Montucla, or his source, ought not to have made this mistake. He had been at the Greek to correct Philo _Gadetanus_, as he had often been called, and he had brought away {42} and quoted [Greek: apo Gadaron]. Had he read two sentences further, he would have found the mistake. We here detect a person quite unnoticed hitherto by the moderns, Magnus the arithmetician. The phrase is ironical; it is as if we should say, "To do this a man must be deep in Cocker."[24] Accordingly, Magnus, Baveme,[25] and Cocker, are three personifications of arithmetic; and there may be more. ON SQUARING THE CIRCLE. Aristotle, treating of the category of relation, denies that the quadrature has been found, but appears to assume that it can be done. Boethius,[26] in his comment on the passage, says that it has been done since Aristotle, but that the demonstration is too long for him to give. Those who have no notion of the quadrature question may look at the _English Cyclopaedia_, art. "Quadrature of the Circle." Tetragonismus. Id est circuli quadratura per Campanum, Archimedem Syracusanum, atque Boetium mathematicae perspicacissimos adinventa.--At the end, Impressu
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60  
61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Archimedes

 
Magnus
 

accurate

 
passage
 

Cocker

 

Aristotle

 
quadrature
 

mistake

 

decimals

 

places


thousand

 
Montucla
 

phrase

 

ironical

 

personifications

 

arithmetic

 

Baveme

 
arithmetician
 

Accordingly

 

unnoticed


quoted

 

brought

 

called

 

correct

 

Gadetanus

 
Gadaron
 
person
 

hitherto

 
detect
 

sentences


moderns
 

SQUARING

 

Tetragonismus

 

circuli

 
quadratura
 

Circle

 

Quadrature

 

English

 
Cyclopaedia
 

Campanum


adinventa

 
Impressu
 

perspicacissimos

 

mathematicae

 

Archimedem

 
Syracusanum
 

Boetium

 
question
 

notion

 

category