Talk:Euclid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics.
	Mathematics grading:	B Class	Top Importance	Field: Mathematicians
A vital article.
Comments: needs inline citations plange 02:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] See comments
Core	This article is listed on this Project's core biographies page.

Euclid is either included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards, and if possible stick to GFDL and GFDL-compatible images.

This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Math article has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Euclid article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

Contents 1 Four postulates? 2 Is Euclid Really Greek? 3 Twin Prime 4 Deleted text 5 Keep Euclid and Elements separate 6 Algebra 7 When Euclid lived 8 Reference for image 9 Euclid Dump Truck 10 Speculation about Euclid's nationality deleted 11 Cultural depictions of Nicolaus Copernicus 12 Too short 13 awful

[edit] Four postulates?

What are the first 4 postulates?

See Euclid's Elements. - dcljr

[edit] Is Euclid Really Greek?

Wikipedia should be different and not like other encyclopedia that contradict themselves. It is written on this euclid page that not much is known about him except his book. How then do we know he was a greek? Alexandria was in Africa (Egypt) not Greece. It was ruled (or under the colony) of Greece as at that time. That does not make him Greek. USA was once colonized by Great Britain before the independence.That does not make americans British or all other countries colonized by britain, British. One error that has plagued many encyclopaedia today is the designation of a Greek nationality to some early philosophers that not much is known of. Wikipedia is not like those encyclopedia. How does it seem to read about euclid of Alexandria(Egypt) and read that he is greek and then click on the alexandria link only to discover that Alexandria is actually in egypt? Avoid Contradiction. We have a clue to his nationality. That clue is his name. "Euclid of alexandria". In those days people were surnamed after there place of origin/birth. I am considering changing the greek nationality to egypt or at least removing the word "greek". io_anthony 20:33 Sep 23, 2006 (UTC)

Euclid's name was not "Euclid of Alexandria". His name was simply Εὐκλείδης in the ancient Greek language; "Euclid" is an approximaion of the English pronunciation of his Greek name. In some historical contexts, he was called "Euclid of Alexandria", to distinguish him from other Greek Euclids, because he was known, indeed famous, for his work in mathematics at the university in Alexandria. For more historical information, see Speculation about Euclid's nationality deleted below. Finell (Talk) 01:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

---

I could not verify the name "Euclides". Everybody seems to call him "Euclid of Alexandria", and the original Greek name was Eukleides. AxelBoldt 20:29 Feb 23, 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Twin Prime

I deleted a bullet which listed the "Twin Prime Conjecture" as one of the four works of Euclid, which it isn't. The conjecture is due to Euclid, however. I'm just not sure if it's notable enough to be listed somewhere else.

[edit] Deleted text

In the edit I just made (to Euclid), I removed the following text:

[[Janos Bolyai]] (and probably [[Carl Friedrich Gauss]] before him) realized that its negation leads to consistent [[non-euclidean geometries]], which were later developed by [[Nikolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky|Lobachevsky]], [[Riemann]] and [[Jules-Henri Poincaré|Poincaré]].

Along with some other stuff about the Parallel postulate that's nearly duplicated in Euclid's Elements. I was planning to merge this information into the latter article, where I think most of the discussion of mathematical issues related to the Elements should go, when I noticed that the former one (on the PP) and Non-euclidean geometry#History both talk about these matters, as well. Someone should try to separate out what info belongs in what article and insert links in place of non-germaine text in each, as I have done in this article.

I also excised:

In addition to a treatment of plane geometry, including proofs of the [[Pythagorean theorem]] and a version of the more general [[law of cosines]], Euclid's book also contains the beginnings of elementary [[number theory]], such as the notion of divisibility, the [[greatest common divisor]] and the [[Euclidean algorithm]] to determine it, and the infinity of [[prime number|prime numbers]]. Later chapters deal with three-dimensional geometry and the [[platonic solid]]s. The book also contains proofs that the [[area]] of a [[circle]] is [[proportional]] to the square of its [[radius]], and that the [[volume]] of a [[sphere]] is proportional to the cube of its radius.

Since it clearly belongs in the Elements article.

- dcljr 10:02, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC) (<code> tags changed to <tt> by dcljr on 03:35, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC) — no other changes)

I think a little of the first sentence should be included in the Euclid article. Brutannica 22:39, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Keep Euclid and Elements separate

There has been some discussion in Talk:Euclid's Elements about possibly merging the articles Euclid and Euclid's Elements. I say that's a bad idea.

The Euclid article should be used for biographical information (and there is a little more of this than is here) and some discussion of his general importance in math and science, as is currently touched on in this article. What should be added here is information about Euclid's other works (4 other extant works and 4 lost ones). See, for example, this paper I wrote in college and the references therein.

Euclid's Elements, OTOH, should be mainly about the contents, structure and impact of that work. Again, see my paper for ideas. (I don't have much about the impact of the Elements — I didn't have time to get into it!) I'll write on some of this when I feel inspired, but I don't want to end up just recapitulating my paper here. ;) (But feel free to use it as a source. Just put a link to it if you use it to a significant degree.)

- dcljr 10:23, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I agree. Euclid should be about the man and should include an overview of his works. The Elements article should be more in-depth. Thanks for the clean-up! Brutannica 22:41, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Algebra

I removed the mention of algebra in:

The text also includes sections on algebra, number theory, and three-dimensional geometry.

There is much debate as to whether Euclid actually had anything like algebra in mind when he presented the techniques sometimes referred to as geometrical algebra (I wish there were an article there!). Certainly, there is no symbolic algebra or explicit solving of equations anywhere in the work. It's only in retrospect (looking back from our post-Renaissance perspective) that one can see in the purely geometrical ideas of the work premonitions of "modern" algebraic notions. Simply put: I think it's misleading to say the work contains algebra. - dcljr 03:53, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Should it be replaced with "geometrical algebra" then? Brutannica 02:07, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No. Algebra begins about 1000 years after Euclid, and algebraic notation several centuries after that. At most, one might say that some of his theorems (propositions in his terminology) would today be expressed using algebra, giving specific examples. But if this belongs anywhere, it is in Elements. Finell (Talk) 20:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] When Euclid lived

According to the following sites, Euclid lived 325-265

http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Euclid.html http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Euclid.html http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/E/Euclid.html ( 330-270, but still closer ) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.241.134.241 (talk • contribs) 3 Aug 2005.

he wrote the elements in 300 B.C. his book can't be older then he is —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.51.89.85 (talk • contribs) 11 Dec 2006.

If you do the math, the above dates imply that he wrote The Elements when he was around 25-30 years old. - dcljr (talk) 19:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reference for image

hello,

whoever uploaded the image of Euclid -- probably a good idea to reference it.

Olaf Ciolek-->

How could Euclid live in 330 B.C. if he wrote The Elements in 300 B.C.? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.51.89.85 (talk • contribs).

Years count down when they're B.C. Born in 330 B.C.; wrote work in 300 B.C. - dcljr (talk) 19:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Euclid Dump Truck

Hello,

How can we separate this entry with Euclid the truck manufacturer.

I have a link to this page that doesn't make sense

Well, you could use Euclid (company), maybe. The relevant entry at Euclid (disambiguation) links to Euclid trucks, but that's probably not a good choice. From a Google search, it looks like the name of the company is actually Euclid-Hitachi. - dcljr (talk) 19:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speculation about Euclid's nationality deleted

No source was cited for the recent additions to this article to the effect that Euclid was an Alexandrian or Egyptian or African by birth or nationality, so I deleted them — twice. All information in Wikipedia must be verifiable and published reliable and reputable sources must be cited. "Speculation" as such is not permitted. If there is scholarly debate on a subject, both sides should be presented with at least one reliable source for each viewpoiint cited.

Euclid's nationality is not, so far as we are aware, such a subject. A leading history of mathematics says of Euclid, "Of his life we know next to nothing, save that he was of Greek descent ..." (W.W. Rouse Ball, A short Account of the History of Mathematics p. 52). Other scholarly histories say the same (see, for example, the refrences cited in the article). I am personally aware of no scholarship to the contrary.

Alexander the Great of Macedon (located in the northern part of Ancient Greece) founded the city of Alexandria around 334 BC when he conquered Egypt as part of his empire. He and his immediate successor (a Mecedonian general) established a great university in Hellenistic Alexandria and sought out the greatest scholars of his day for its faculty. Euclid came to the university to teach mathematics; he was not born there. He wrote all his works in Greek. When Euclid taught in Hellenistic Alexandria, that city was regarded as the center of Greek culture. Euclid's published works draw directly on the works of prior Greek mathemacitioans, and his education was Greek according to all responsible histories.

If there exists differing verifiable responsible scholarship published by reliable and reputable sources, in accordance with Wikipedia's official policies, it may be added to improve the article. Speculation, however, is not permitted.

Finell (Talk) 00:55, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cultural depictions of Nicolaus Copernicus

I've started an approach that may apply to Wikipedia's Core Biography articles: creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information. I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a featured list. Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article. Since cultural references sometimes get deleted without discussion, I'd like to suggest this approach as a model for the editors here. Regards, Durova 15:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Very few biography subjects warrant a separate page just for cultural references. Separating them detracts from the completeness of the article and forces the reader to follow a link for information that belongs in the same article. Cultural references frequently get deleted because they are unsourced or are too trivial to be meet encyclopedic standards. Finell (Talk) 16:35, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Too short

This article is too short! There needs to be more info about Euclid and his life. Randomfrenchie 22:52, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep in mind, there really isn't that much verifiable information out there about his life. - dcljr (talk) 18:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] awful

this page is full of lies pleas emake it so it is nt i would ate this a failing F because it sucks! make it beter —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.51.89.85 (talk • contribs) 11 Dec 2006.