Comments on a paper on alleged misconceptions regarding the history of analysis: who has misconceptions?

DOI10.1007/S10699-015-9424-0MaRDI QIDQ2013405zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Authors Gert Schubring

Publication date 17 August 2017

Published in Foundations of Science (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-015-9424-0

zbMATH Keywords

Cauchyinfinitesimalsnon-standard analysishermeneuticscounter-statementscientific ethic

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

History of mathematics in the 19th century (01A55) History of real functions (26-03)

Recommendations

• Controversies in the foundations of analysis: comments on Schubring's \textit{Conflicts}
• Comment on a paper by Z-Z. Zhong [J. Math. Phys. 2 6, 404 (1985)]
• On a missed opportunity for collaboration between historians and mathematicians: a biographical avalanche triggered by Professor Ioan James, FRS.
• Why should historical truth matter to mathematicians? Dispelling myths while promoting maths
• Ten misconceptions from the history of analysis and their debunking

Cites work

• Cauchy and the continuum: the significance of non-standard analysis for the history and philosophy of mathematics
• Conflicts between generalization, rigor and intuition. Number concepts underlying the development of analysis in 17th--19th century France and Germany
• Ten misconceptions from the history of analysis and their debunking

Cited in

(2)

• Controversies in the foundations of analysis: comments on Schubring's \textit{Conflicts}
• On a missed opportunity for collaboration between historians and mathematicians: a biographical avalanche triggered by Professor Ioan James, FRS.

This page was built for publication: Comments on a paper on alleged misconceptions regarding the history of analysis: who has misconceptions?

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q2013405)