Orion1 Chain Theorem

[Orion1]

Expired Thread...

Expired Thread...

 

[matt grime]

Mathematicians do not name things after themselves. This is doubly true if the idea to proven can be done so (or if it can be disprioven) from elementary calculus (and is a special case of something extant). So, how about stopiing the rampant egotism?

 

[Orion1]

'rampant egotism'...


'Orion1' is not my name. It is the name of a stellar constellation.

As for the elimination of 'rampant egotism' from science, do we really want to discuss that type of philosopical hyperbolae, do we?

 

[matt grime]

The names given to theorems are never given by the person so named. Other people name them after the person who invented them, and occasionally they get it wrong, when it becomes clear that it is important, needs some distinguishing label and the oringator deserves credit for somethnig clever. There are two notorious trolls on sci,math who grandiloquently name (incorrect) mathematical 'theorems' after themselves. It should have been apparent that you weren't in that mould, sorry.

 

[Galileo]

Euler, who first introduced the number e=2.71... used the letter e.
He probably claimed it came from exponential... yeah right :tongue2:

 

[Tide]

Euler probably chose e for other reasons. He was a very modest man and not at all egotistical (http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/e.html).

 

[Orion1]

Egotism..

the notation e made its first appearance in a letter Euler wrote to Goldbach in 1731. He made various discoveries regarding e in the following years, but it was not until 1748 when Euler published Introductio in Analysin infinitorum that he gave a full treatment of the ideas surrounding e.

Euler gave an approximation for e to 18 decimal places
e = 2.718281828459045235

Yes, that is definitely $$\sum$$gotistical...

 

[matt grime]

the fact that exponential starts with an e (and not an S) mightn't also have something to do with it?

 

[Galileo]

Euler probably chose e for other reasons. He was a very modest man and not at all egotistical (http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/e.html).

Ofcourse I was insinuating no such thing. Twas just a joke.