Infinitesimal: How a Dangerous Mathematical Theory Shaped the Modern World
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | 4.57 (659 Votes) |
| Asin | : | B00M4LU9UY |
| Format Type | : | |
| Number of Pages | : | 234 Pages |
| Publish Date | : | 2016-07-02 |
| Language | : | English |
DESCRIPTION:
A Deeply Divisive Debate about Reality This book is much more than an esoteric history of an area of mathematics. It tracks the ancient rivalry between ‘rationalists’ and ‘empiricists’. The dominant rationalists have always believed that human minds (at least those possessed by educated intellectuals) are capable of understanding the world purely by thought alone. The empiricists acknowledge that reality is far too complicated for humans to just guess its detailed structures. This is not simply an esoteric philosophical distinction but the. "Fascinating but overdrawn" according to Matt Young. I like the book, though I found it a bit overlong and sometimes redundant. Further, I suspect that the author may have the cart before the horse in thinking that failure to study infinitesimals stultified Italy, rather than the other way round. Also, I sometimes found the going hard because the author failed to distinguish between an infinitesimal and an indivisible. Nevertheless, it was fascinating to learn that the Jesuits opposed the study of infinitesimals on theological grounds whereas in northern Europe – Protest. Ken Blakely said Interesting, fascinating, enlightening. Isn't that what we're all looking for?. Interesting, fascinating, enlightening. Infinitesimal introduced me to concepts and characters I had never encountered and showed me how a long forgotten series of catfights among snooty-nosed intellectuals led us to the world we live in. The closest equivalent concept I have at hand is the struggle between Keynesian and Hayekian economics.At the same time, I got the feeling that the author had been paid for x pages, but his thesis only required Interesting, fascinating, enlightening. Isn't that what we're all looking for? Ken Blakely Interesting, fascinating, enlightening. Infinitesimal introduced me to concepts and characters I had never encountered and showed me how a long forgotten series of catfights among snooty-nosed intellectuals led us to the world we live in. The closest equivalent concept I have at hand is the struggle between Keynesian and Hayekian economics.At the same time, I got the feeling that the author had been paid for x pages, but his thesis only required 4x/5. He filled the remaining 20% with a never-ending re-explanation of the basi. x/5. He filled the remaining "Interesting, fascinating, enlightening. Isn't that what we're all looking for?" according to Ken Blakely. Interesting, fascinating, enlightening. Infinitesimal introduced me to concepts and characters I had never encountered and showed me how a long forgotten series of catfights among snooty-nosed intellectuals led us to the world we live in. The closest equivalent concept I have at hand is the struggle between Keynesian and Hayekian economics.At the same time, I got the feeling that the author had been paid for x pages, but his thesis only required Interesting, fascinating, enlightening. Isn't that what we're all looking for? Ken Blakely Interesting, fascinating, enlightening. Infinitesimal introduced me to concepts and characters I had never encountered and showed me how a long forgotten series of catfights among snooty-nosed intellectuals led us to the world we live in. The closest equivalent concept I have at hand is the struggle between Keynesian and Hayekian economics.At the same time, I got the feeling that the author had been paid for x pages, but his thesis only required 4x/5. He filled the remaining 20% with a never-ending re-explanation of the basi. x/5. He filled the remaining 20% with a never-ending re-explanation of the basi. 0% with a never-ending re-explanation of the basi
The concept was deemed dangerous and subversive, a threat to the belief that the world was an orderly place, governed by a strict and unchanging set of rules. Indeed, not everyone agreed with the Jesuits. On August 10, 1632, five men in flowing black robes convened in a somber Roman palazzo to pass judgment on a deceptively simple proposition: that a continuous line is composed of distinct and infinitely tiny parts. From the imperial cities of Germany to the green hills of Surrey, from the papal palace in Rome to the halls of the Royal Society of London, Alexander demonstrates how a disagreement over a mathematical concept became a contest over the heavens and the Earth. Philosophers, scientists, and mathematicians across Europe embraced infinitesimals as the key to scientific progress, freedom of thought, and a more tolerant society. With the stroke of a pen the Jesuit fathers banned the doctrine of infinitesimals, announcing that it could never be taught or even mentioned. As Alexander reveals, it wasn't long before the two camps set off on a war that pitted Europe's forces of hierarchy and order against those of pluralism and change. If infinitesimals were ever accepted, the Jesuits feared, the entire world would be plunged into chaos. The legitimacy of popes and kings, as well as o