Unlimited Quote Collections
Organize your favorite quotes without limits. Create themed collections for every occasion with Premium.
" "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.
Colin Maclaurin (February 1698 – 14 June 1746) M'Laurine, or MacLaurin, was a Scottish mathematician who made important contributions to geometry and algebra. He is also known for being a child prodigy and holding the record for being the youngest professor. The Maclaurin series, a special case of the Taylor series, is named after him.
Biography information from Wikiquote
Unlimited Quote Collections
Organize your favorite quotes without limits. Create themed collections for every occasion with Premium.
Related quotes. More quotes will automatically load as you scroll down, or you can use the load more buttons.
A <small>LETTER</small> published in the year 1734, under the title of first gave occasion to the ensuing Treatise; and several reasons concurred to induce me to write on this subject at so great a length. The Author of that Piece had represented the as founded on false Reasoning, and full of Mysteries. His Objections seemed to have been occasioned in a great measure, by the concise manner in which the Elements of this Method have been usually described; and their having been so much misunderstood by a person of his abilities, appeared to me a sufficient proof that a fuller Account of the Grounds of them was requisite.
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.