this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
1247 points (98.7% liked)

memes

15660 readers
2970 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Has anything changed in Euclid's Elements?

[–] ricecake 12 points 1 week ago

We discovered one of the postulates was really interesting to fuck with.

It's better to say that we've discovered more math, some of which changes how we understand the old.

Since Euclid, we've made discoveries in how geometry works and the underpinnings of it that can and have been used to provide foundation for his work, or to demonstrate some of the same things more succinctly. For example, Euclid had some assumptions that he didn't document.

Since math isn't empirical, it's rarely wrong if actually proven. It can be looked at differently though, and have assumptions changed to learn new things, or we can figure out that there are assumptions that weren't obvious.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The number of hypotheses we've proven, mostly. Also, we have this whole field of non-Euclidean geometry. And the modern Pythagoreans are a lot more chill about people knowing the irrationality of Pi.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah but I mean revision not additive change. From what I remember nothing in elements is wrong. I don't think anyone proved that last postulate

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Nothing is wrong, it's just more incomplete than a modern book.

But if you're at the 101 level, sure. It works fine.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

Yes, some of the shit he wrote was basically meaningless (the "definitions" before the axioms) and we would just leave it out.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Nope. Thats why I gifted it to my son, who studies math.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Not sure, I've only gotten to the middle of the third season. No spoilers, please!