After these came to be relished, an infinite scale of infinites and s (ascending and descending always by infinite steps) was imagined and proposed to be received into geometry, as of the greatest use for penetrating into its abstruse parts. Some have argued for quantities more than infinite; and others for a kind of quantities that are said to be neither finite nor infinite, but of an intermediate and indeterminate nature.

This way of considering what is called the sublime part of geometry has so far prevailed, that it is generally known by no less a title than the Science, Arithmetic, or Geometry of infinites. These terms imply something lofty, but mysterious; the contemplation of which may be suspected to amaze and perplex, rather than satisfy or enlighten the understanding... and while it seems greatly to elevate geometry, may possibly lessen its true and real excellency, which chiefly consists in its perspicuity and perfect evidence; for we may be apt to rest in an obscure and imperfect knowledge of so abstruse a doctrine... instead of seeking for that clear and full view we ought to have of geometrical truth; and to this we may ascribe the inclination... of late for introducing mysteries into a science wherein there ought to be none.

But to return to Kepler, his great sagacity, and continual meditation on the planetary motions, suggested to him some views of the true principles from which these motions flow. In his preface to the commentaries concerning the planet Mars, he speaks of gravity as of a power that was mutual betwixt bodies, and tells us that the earth and moon tend towards each other, and would meet in a point so many times nearer to the earth than to the moon, as the earth is greater than the moon, if their motions did not hinder it. He adds that the tides arise from the gravity of the waters towards the moon. But not having just enough notions of the laws of motion, he does not seem to have been able to make the best use of these thoughts; nor does he appear to have adhered to them steadily, since in his epitome of astronomy, published eleven years after, he proposes a physical account of the planetary motions, derived from different principles.

They found, that similar triangles are to each other in the duplicate ratio of their homologous sides; and, by resolving similar polygons into similar triangles, the same proposition was extended to these polygons also. But when they came to compare curvilineal figures, that cannot be resolved into rectilineal parts, this method failed.

In delivering the principles of this method, we apprehend it is better to avoid such suppositions: but after these are demonstrated, short and concise ways of speaking, though less accurate, may be permitted, when there is no hazard of our introducing any uncertainty or obscurity into the science from the use of them, or of involving it in disputes.

Share Your Favorite Quotes

Know a quote that's missing? Help grow our collection.

But, because the Method of Infinitesimals is much in use, and is valued for its conciseness, I thought it was requisite to account explicitly for the truth, and perfect accuracy of the conclusions that are derived from it; the rather, that it does not seem to be a very proper reason that is assigned by Authors, when they determine what is called the Difference (but more accurately the ) of a Quantity, and tell us, That they reject certain Parts of the Element, because they become infinitely less than the other parts; not only because a proof of this nature may leave some doubt as to the accuracy of the conclusion, but because it may be demonstrated that those parts ought to be neglected by them at any rate, or that it would be an error to retain them.

Unlimited Quote Collections

Organize your favorite quotes without limits. Create themed collections for every occasion with Premium.

They proceeded therefore in another manner, less direct indeed, but perfectly evident. They found, that the inscribed similar polygons, by increasing the number of their sides, continually approached to the areas of the circles; so that the decreasing differences betwixt each circle and its inscribed polygon, by still further and further divisions of the circular arches which the sides of the polygons subtend, could become less than any quantity that can be assigned: and that all this while the similar polygons observed the same constant invariable proportion to each other, viz. that of the squares of the diameters of the circles. Upon this they founded a demonstration, that the proportion of the circles themselves could be no other than that same invariable ratio of the similar inscribed polygons; of which we shall give a brief abstract, that it may appear in what manner they were able... to form a demonstration of the proportions of curvilineal figures, from what they had already discovered of rectilineal ones. And that the general reasoning by which they demonstrated all their theorems of this kind may more easily appear, we shall represent the circles and polygons by right lines, in the same manner as all magnitudes are expressed in the fifth book of the Elements.

Several Treatises have appeared while this was in the press, wherein some of the same Problems have been considered, though generally in a different manner. I have had occasion to mention most of them in the last Chapter of the second Book; but had not there an opportunity to take notice, that the Problem in 480 has been considered by Mr. Euler in his Mechanics.

G<small>EOMETRY</small> is valued for its extensive usefulness, but has been most admired for its evidence; mathematical demonstration being such as has been always supposed to put an end to dispute, leaving no place for doubt or cavil. It acquired this character by the great care of the old writers, who admitted no principles but a few self-evident truths, and no demonstrations but such as were accurately deduced from them.

There were some, however, who disliked the... use of infinites and infinitesimals in geometry. Of this number was Sir Isaac Newton (whose caution was almost as distinguishing a part of his character as his invention), especially after he saw that this liberty was growing to so great a height. In demonstrating the grounds of the method of fluxion, he avoided them, establishing it in a way more agreeable to the strictness of geometry.

The greatest part of the first Book was printed in 1737: but it could not have been so useful to the Reader without the second; and I... recommend... to peruse the first Chapters of the second Book, before the five last of the first; there being a few passages... that will be better understood by... [having] some knowledge of the principal Rules of the Method of Computation... in the second Book.

Circles are the only curvilineal plane figures considered in the elements of geometry. If they could have allowed... these as similar polygons of an infinite number of sides (as some have done who pretend to abridge their demonstrations), after proving that any similar polygons inscribed in circles are in the duplicate ratio of the diameters, they would have immediately extended this to the circles themselves and would have considered the second proposition of the twelfth book of the Elements as an easy corollary from the first. But there is ground to think that they would not have admitted a demonstration of this kind. It was a fundamental principle with them, that the difference of any two unequal quantities, by which the greater exceeds the lesser, may be added to itself till it shall exceed any proposed finite quantity of the same kind: and that they founded their propositions concerning curvilineal figures upon this principle... is evident from the demonstrations, and from the express declaration of Archimedes, who acknowledges it to be the foundation...[of] his own discoveries, and cites it as assumed by the antients in demonstrating all their propositions of this kind. But this principle seems to be inconsistent with... admitting... an infinitely little quantity or difference, which, added to itself any number of times, is never supposed to become equal to any finite quantity whatsoever.

Besides an answer to ... the Author concealed his real name... a second, by the same hand, in Defense of the first, a Discourse by Mr. Robins, a Treatise of Sir Isaac Newton, with a Commentary by Mr. Colson, and several other Pieces, were published on this Subject.

And as this has been the occasion of my delay in publishing... I hope it will serve for an apology, if some mistakes have escaped me in treating of such a variety of subjects, in a manner different from that in which they have usually been explained.