The solutions of Girolamo Saccheri and Giovanni Ceva of ``Geometram quaero'' of Ruggero Ventimiglia: Italian projective geometry during the latter 17th century (Q798631): Difference between revisions

From MaRDI portal
Added link to MaRDI item.
Import240304020342 (talk | contribs)
Set profile property.
 
Property / MaRDI profile type
 
Property / MaRDI profile type: MaRDI publication profile / rank
 
Normal rank

Latest revision as of 02:15, 5 March 2024

scientific article
Language Label Description Also known as
English
The solutions of Girolamo Saccheri and Giovanni Ceva of ``Geometram quaero'' of Ruggero Ventimiglia: Italian projective geometry during the latter 17th century
scientific article

    Statements

    The solutions of Girolamo Saccheri and Giovanni Ceva of ``Geometram quaero'' of Ruggero Ventimiglia: Italian projective geometry during the latter 17th century (English)
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    1984
    0 references
    In 1693 a little tract appeared by G. Saccheri, Quaesita geometrica, in which he answered (aided by G. Ceva) a mathematical challenge by R. Ventimiglia. Till nowadays this work has been regarded as a hastily published, unfinished juvenile work of no great importance. In the paper under review the authors try to revaluate Saccheri's tract. At the same time they give a picture of the general development of geometry in Italy during the latter half of the 16th century. Also person and work of R. Ventimiglia are considered. Especially interesting is the part on Ventimiglia, where, as it seems, all that is known on him has been assembled. The 2nd part is also treated fairly well. One only has to be aware of the authors' rather inconsidered use of the concept projective (esp. summary, p. 15). The main result (p. 28/29) is correct. As to the first part it must be said, however, that the authors endeavoring to assign to Saccheri's work a post of honour widely miss the mark. There are some interesting (yet by no means new) ideas in it, the general judgement persists nevertheless. It is interesting to see that Ceva in some of his contributions to the Quaesita adheres to his old, statical methods, while Saccheri, seemingly, uses new ones. One may ask, why the authors didn't take up this point. - Some of the authors' assertions seem at least to be highly debatable; in the reviewer's opinion there is neither such a close connection between Ceva's main work and the Quaesita, nor between it and Saccheri's mature works, as the authors want to have it; and there is no perceptible influence of Descartes on the development of (sit venia verbo) synthetic geometry. Some other assertions, even, are mere speculation (so p. 31). - Despite of these shortcomings in interpretation, because of the material presented, a lecture of the paper is profitable.
    0 references
    projective geometry
    0 references
    the concept projective
    0 references
    statical methods
    0 references
    Descartes
    0 references
    synthetic geometry
    0 references

    Identifiers