Did Euclid's elements, Book I, develop geometry axiomatically?

DOI10.1007/BF00327296zbMATH Open0357.01005OpenAlexW2014404077MaRDI QIDQ1237702FDOQ1237702

A. Seidenberg

Publication date: 1975

Published in: Archive for History of Exact Sciences (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00327296

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

History of Greek and Roman mathematics (01A20) History of mathematical logic and foundations (03-03) History of geometry (51-03)

Cites Work

• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• The ritual origin of geometry
• On the area of a semi-circle
• On the value equivalent to \(\pi\) in ancient mathematical texts. A new interpretation

Cited In (3)

• The role of diagrams in mathematical arguments
• Euclid's fourth postulate: its authenticity and significance for the foundations of Greek mathematics
• The ritual origin of the circle and square

This page was built for publication: Did Euclid's elements, Book I, develop geometry axiomatically?

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q1237702)