Why aren't mixed ratios allowed in Euclid's Elements ?

In summary, the conversation discusses the reasoning behind Euclid's decision to forbid comparing different kinds of magnitudes in his "Elements." The participants also explore the consequences of comparing unlike quantities and the evolution of this concept in both everyday life and mathematics. They also consider the impact of Euclid's approach on the discovery of physical relations.
  • #1
prosteve037
110
3
Why aren't mixed ratios allowed in Euclid's "Elements"?

Why did Euclid forbid the comparing of different kinds of magnitudes? And was it the same for numbers? Or were ratios specifically meant for magnitudes (lines, planes, solids)

What are the consequences of comparing 2 different kinds of magnitudes? I mean, we eventually figured out that the concept of velocity and rate change could be useful but why did it take so long to realize this?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2


They simply don't make sense. What sense does it make to say that "x meters" is larger or smaller than "y square meters"? Or that "x seconds" is larger or smaller than "y kilograms"?
 
  • #3


HallsofIvy said:
They simply don't make sense. What sense does it make to say that "x meters" is larger or smaller than "y square meters"? Or that "x seconds" is larger or smaller than "y kilograms"?

I'd rather have a million dollars than 3 apples.

But then you could argue, well, dollars and apples are not the same but yet they can be converted to each other via the market price, which is well known.

Then I would argue that everything can be converted to everything else via market value. So Euclid was wrong. What do you think about that?

I can't think of any two (physical) things that can't be compared to each other. Would you rather have six cars or three cans of tuna fish? Easy comparison, right?

But even mathematically you can make the same argument. In the theory of order, we can put a partial order, a total order, a well order, etc. on any set. There's no requirement that the elements of the underlying set have to be "like each other."

So I'd say that Euclid is wrong in every day life and also mathematically.
 
  • #4


SteveL27 said:
I'd rather have a million dollars than 3 apples.

Not if they were Zimbabwean dollars, which after several devalations ended up worth ##10^{-25}## of their original value.

Maybe Euclid was right to leave "market forces" out of pure math :smile:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimbabwean_dollar
 
  • #5


prosteve037 said:
Why did Euclid forbid the comparing of different kinds of magnitudes? And was it the same for numbers? Or were ratios specifically meant for magnitudes (lines, planes, solids)

What are the consequences of comparing 2 different kinds of magnitudes? I mean, we eventually figured out that the concept of velocity and rate change could be useful but why did it take so long to realize this?

The greeks viewed everything very geometrically. What does it mean for area to be "more" than a line? A volume and an area? A volume and a line?
 
  • #6


Mandlebra said:
The greeks viewed everything very geometrically. What does it mean for area to be "more" than a line? A volume and an area? A volume and a line?

HallsofIvy said:
They simply don't make sense. What sense does it make to say that "x meters" is larger or smaller than "y square meters"? Or that "x seconds" is larger or smaller than "y kilograms"?

Ah okay, I see. It seems like the Ancient Greeks made it very clear in keeping magnitudes separate from numbers; they kept physical quantities separate from numbers and instead represented them with magnitudes (figures). Why did they do this though? What makes numbers so special that they felt the need to segregate them from representing other things besides quantities?
 
  • #7


... Unless I'm mistaken and they did in fact represent physical quantities with numbers?

But if this was the case, why then did it take so long for mixed ratios like velocity and/or rate change to be accepted as viable comparisons? This is why I assumed that physical quantities were identified with different "types" (and thus as magnitudes instead of numbers).
 
  • #8


what are you talking about? Have you read Euclid? Can you give me a citation of what you claim?
 
  • #9


mathwonk said:
what are you talking about? Have you read Euclid? Can you give me a citation of what you claim?

Unfortunately I have a very fragmented understanding of the very little I've read of the Elements. So basically, no I have not :frown: Forgive me!

I guess what I'm really asking is how concepts that involve mixed ratios (like velocity and density) came to be when their Euclidean roots forbade such notions. I always assumed (which I know is very nonsensical) that Classical Mechanics used Euclidean Geometry as its mathematical foundation to describing mathematical relations; so I guess I just associated this to how Euclid wrote the Elements.

Secondly, and if this assumption is correct, I was curious as to how this may have affected the discoveries of physical relations. If the physicists of the past had compared unlike quantities before/instead of like quantities, would it have affected their discoveries? I'm sure the implications for this scenario would be few and far between, having little effect on what we know today, but I was just in the mood for some opinions and discussion :-p
 

Related to Why aren't mixed ratios allowed in Euclid's Elements ?

1. Why did Euclid not allow mixed ratios in his Elements?

Euclid believed that the concept of ratio should be limited to whole numbers, as it is a fundamental and pure mathematical concept. He did not want to complicate the understanding of ratios by including fractions or decimals.

2. How did Euclid's restriction on mixed ratios impact the study of geometry?

Euclid's restriction on mixed ratios had a significant impact on the study of geometry as it allowed for a more systematic and logical approach. By limiting ratios to whole numbers, it made it easier to prove geometric theorems and establish a solid foundation for the study of geometry.

3. Were there any exceptions to Euclid's restriction on mixed ratios?

No, there were no exceptions to Euclid's restriction on mixed ratios in his Elements. However, later mathematicians, such as Archimedes, did allow for the use of mixed ratios in their work.

4. How did other ancient mathematicians view Euclid's restriction on mixed ratios?

Some ancient mathematicians, such as Archimedes and Apollonius, disagreed with Euclid's restriction on mixed ratios and believed that it limited the scope of geometry. They argued that including fractions and decimals in ratios could lead to more precise and accurate calculations.

5. Is Euclid's restriction on mixed ratios still relevant in modern mathematics?

While Euclid's restriction on mixed ratios is still taught in geometry, it is not strictly followed in modern mathematics. With the development of more advanced mathematical concepts and tools, mixed ratios are commonly used in various fields of mathematics, including geometry.

Similar threads

  • General Math
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
33
Views
5K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
830
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
28
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
9K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
646
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
95
Views
4K
Back
Top