The Discovery of Incommensurability by Hippasus of Metapontum

  • Kurt von Fritz
Part of the Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science book series (BSPS, volume 240)

Abstract

The discovery of incommensurability is one of the most amazing and far-reaching accomplishments of early Greek mathematics. It is all the more amazing because, according to ancient tradition, the discovery was made at a time when Greek mathematical science was still in its infancy and apparently concerned with the most elementary, or, as many modern mathematicians are inclined to say, most trivial, problems, while at the same time, as recent discoveries have shown, the Egyptians and Babylonians had already elaborated very highly developed and complicated methods for the solution of mathematical problems of a higher order, and yet, as far as we can see, never even suspected the existence of the problem.

Keywords

Eter Pyrite Dition Penta Nite 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 10.
    H. Hasse and H. Scholz, Die Grundlagenkrisis der griechischen Mathematik, Charlottenburg, Kurt Metzner, 1928, pp. 10 ff.Google Scholar
  2. 17.
    For the date see K. von Fritz, Pythagorean Politics in Southern Italy (Columbia University Press, 1940), pp. 77 ff.Google Scholar
  3. 18.
    Schol. in Plat. Phaed. 108d; see Scholia Platonica, ed. W. Chase Greene (Philol. Monographs publ. by Am. Philol. Ass., vol. VIII, 1938), p. 15. All the passages quoted in notes 18–24 are also collected, though sometimes in a slightly abbreviated form, in H. Diels, Vorsokratiker, Vol. 1.Google Scholar
  4. 40.
    This is also the case with the word horos designating the terms of a ratio or a proportion. See K. von Fritz, Philosophie und sprachlicher Ausdruck bei Demokrit, Platon und Aristoteles ( New York, Stechert, 1938 ), p. 69.Google Scholar
  5. 43.
    For details see my article on Oinopides of Chios in Pauly-Wissowa Realencyclopaedie, vol. 17, p. 2260–67.Google Scholar
  6. 44.
    Proclus, In primum Euclid. elem. librum Comment., p. 426 Friedlein.Google Scholar
  7. 45.
    For the various possibilities see the lucid exposition of Th. Heath in his commentated translation of Euclid’s Elements (Cambridge 1926), vol. 1, pp. 352 ff.Google Scholar
  8. 80.
    The proof attributed to the Pythagoreans by Eudemus seems to presuppose the famous fifth postulate of Euclid. But Aristotle (An. Pr., 65a, 4) indicates that there existed an old mathematicalGoogle Scholar
  9. 88.
    See Euclid, Elements, V, def. 5 and Scholia in Euclid. Element. V. 3 (Euclidis Opera. ed. I. L. Heiberg, vol. V, Leipzig, Teubner, 1889, p. 282.)Google Scholar
  10. 89.
    See K. von Fritz, ‘Die Lebenszeit des Eudoxos von Knidos’ in Philologus, 85 (1930). p. 478 ff.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kurt von Fritz

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations