• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

The History of Mathematics for Dinkeldog

Lonely Tylenol

First Post
Based on this post, I just thought I'd follow up on the Leibniz/Newton thing.

From what I've read, while Leibniz and Newton both developed calculus independently, Newton was hailed as the "real" creator, and Leibniz was relegated to the status of "lame plagiarist" in most circles. As Leibniz was a fairly well-known academic, this really put a damper on his ability to get anyone to take him seriously after that. I think some people went so far as to accuse him of being a Spinozist (which is bad, FYI), in order to further tar his image.

Leibniz, being the really nice guy he apparently was, tried to make protest, but it seems as though it took quite a while for him to be vindicated by history. And, personally, I'd rather not have to wait until I'm dead in order to be vindicated, thank you very much.

Post your math anecdotes and historical footnotes here.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Something I think is telling about the whole Liebniz/Newton thing. When every calc teacher I've ever seen is introducing calculus, they use Newton. Once it gets tricky, they pull out Liebniz's notation.

Which makes me wonder why they don't just use it to begin with.

Demiurge out.
 



Anyone remember conic sections? Remember how boring and annoying it was to study them? Well you can feel vindicated when you hear about what happened to their main theorist, Hypatia of Alexandria. See, she was a girl, and we all know that girls can't be mathematicians* , so the civilised men of Alexandria decided that it would be great fun to scrape off her skin with clamshells and then drag her tied up behind a chariot across the ground. Ouch!

(* Obviously, just kidding here)
 


Yes- that's problematic, and this situation does crop up from time to time: Issac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz both invented Calculus independently of one another, but most only remember or credit Newton. There have been lots of discussions on how to handle it, none has accumulated any real consensus.

Mini-Hijack + apologies:

Sorry, Dinkledog...I phrased that post very awkwardly...then you closed the thread before I could clarify.

I meant that the problem of simultaneous independent IP creation is recurrent, and has spawned much discussion, but no solution has won the day as yet.

Hijack over.

As for Hypatia of Alexandria...I'm amazed that the ancients didn't realize that women would gain understanding conic sections as a part of their daily life...

you know...dealing with water urns and such. ;)
 

demiurge1138 said:
Something I think is telling about the whole Liebniz/Newton thing. When every calc teacher I've ever seen is introducing calculus, they use Newton. Once it gets tricky, they pull out Liebniz's notation.

Which makes me wonder why they don't just use it to begin with.

Demiurge out.
They do. Newton is often credited with Calculus rather than Leibniz, but it's for a different reason. See, Leibniz developed Calculus for the sake of Mathematics, and because of that, his notation is more useful in solving equations. It's actually his notation we use all the time.

Newton created Calculus for the sake of Physics, which is considered a more practical application of Calculus, eventhough his notation wasn't more practical. It's because of Newton we have equations for Velocity and Acceleration. It's because of Leibniz that we can write the equations in a way that makes sense.
 

OK, I dislike conic sections, but their developer certainly didn't deserve that. Ouch.

And Jdvn1, what I meant to say was, why don't calculus teachers teach Liebniz notation from the very beginning. Both calculus classes I've taken have given Liebniz notation the merest lip service until the class hits differentials, when it takes over completely.

Maybe I've just had poor Calc teachers. I don't know.

Demiurge out.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top