 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 (nobody)...and 294 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2613472 Today 10 Topics 127501 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i'm starting to read this book, anybody ever heard about this stuff? i'd be great to discuss together if there is someone interested. i'm copying and pasting an exctract of the introduction to make some sense, the first page was intentionally left blank. This book represents a new departure in science studies: an analysis of a scientific style of writing, situating it within the context of the contemporary style of literature. Its philosophical significance is that it provides a novel way of making sense of the notion of a scientific style. For the first time, the Hellenistic mathematical corpus – one of the most substantial extant for the period – is placed center-stage in the discussion of Hellenistic culture as a whole. Professor Netz argues that Hellenistic mathematical writings adopt a narrative strategy based on surprise, a compositional form based on a mosaic of apparently unrelated elements, and a carnivalesque profusion of detail. He further investigates how such stylistic preferences derive from, and throw light on, the style of Hellenistic poetry. This important book will be welcomed by all scholars of Hellenistic civilization as well as historians of ancient science and Western mathematics. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
So what sparked your interest,mohamed?Literary writing styles?Hellenistic culture?Western mathematics? Not that I know anything about any of these subjects ,I'm just curious. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
just random stuff i stubled into |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
*m |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
This is strangely interesting. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
number 7 and 4 is footballs |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i must resist the lazyness then |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
so, Eudoxus of Cnidus (408-355 BC), teacher of Plato, author of On Speeds, says that movement is geometry regulated by time |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
no sorry, student of plato |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
another interesting point i came across says that into Euclid's Element is stated that numbers are acceptable if, for example, they translate themselves in relations between line segments |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
have fun reading.. never heard of it |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
thanks mate |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
What does word "Ludic" meen? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Fourth, the word “Ludic” in the title typically encodes a certain playful spirit and, in one central case, it encodes the mathematics of a certain game – the Stomachion. But most often in this book “ludic” should be read as no more than an abbreviated reference to “works sharing certain stylistic features” (which, to anticipate, includes in general narrative surprise, mosaic structure and generic experiment, and, in an important set of works, a certain “carnivalesque” atmosphere). I do not suggest that Hellenistic mathematics – or, for that matter, Hellenistic poetry – were not “serious.” Even while serious, however, they were definitely sly, subtle, and sophisticated – a combination which the term “ludic” is meant to suggest. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"Ludic derives from Latin ludus, "play." It means literally 'playful', and refers to any philosophy where play is the prime purpose of life. Ludic derives from the Latin and connotes anything that is "fun."" wikipedia.org So then what is "Ludic proof"? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Playful proof. Sounds alogical. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
My theoretical assumption in this book is very modest: people do the things they enjoy doing. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
So this book basicly represents feelings and intuisions of other people rather then logical proof? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i would give a personal conclusion if i finish to read it |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I will wait resumé. Maybe its worth reading. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it's quite difficult for me to understand (or pretend to) this kind of stuff, i am forced to translate everything that stops me following, from a symbol to a concept, to my native language. and when i translated them in my native language, i have to search for the basics that are the beginning of those concepts. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Its not as tough going as I first thought it would be. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that is what brought me here btw |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
how come i can follow the explanation by Archimedes even if i manage to do it after a lot of time, and not the mathematical translations made by the author? like into pag 6-7 of the introduction. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Because youre not a geometry professor? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I dont understand u. I am completely fucked up, can you give me a clue about what u just said? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ah ok |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
watch fig. 3 after reading this Given a circle and, in the circle, a line smaller than the diameter, and another, touching the circle at the end of the in the circle: it is possible to produce a certain line from the center of the circle to the the taken of it between the circumference of the circle and the given line in the circle has to the taken of thetangent the given ratio – provided the given ratio is smaller than that which the half of given in the circle has to the perpendicular drawn on it from the center of the circle. i can conclude myself it's a relationship between proportions. i can't after than reading this stuff (In terms of fig. 3, the claim is that given a line in the circle AG and the tangent there XL, as well as the ratio Z:H, it is possible to find a line KN so that BE:BI::Z:H.) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
maybe cos it goes the other way around |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Figure 3 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hey, where's my picture |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
fuck the picture. anyway, the same goes for page 7, words appear to work way better than numbers. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
lol |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i can approximately conclude that numbers are just a different way of thinking an NOT something better, and i'm at page 7. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I guess I need another beer can to understand anything. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
