CodalSearch this book — or all of Codal…⌘K
nydus/A History of MathematicsPublic

This text examines the transition from the Middle Ages to the Modern era, highlighting how the fall of Constantinople and the invention of the printing press catalyzed a revival of classical learning. It traces the shift toward scientific inquiry through the rise of pure mathematics and astronomy, detailing the intellectual struggle against established scholastic and ecclesiastical authority.

Page 88 of 219
Table of Contents

Euler, Lagrange, and Laplace

residual calculus, professing a similar object, was unknown to him. Lagrange attempted to prove Taylor's theorem (the

power of which he was the first to point out) by simple algebra, and then to develop the entire calculus from that theorem. The principles of the calculus were in his day involved in philosophic difficulties of a serious nature. The infinitesimals of Leibniz had no satisfactory metaphysical basis. In the

differential calculus of Euler they were treated as absolute

zeros. In Newton's limiting ratio, the magnitudes of which it

is the ratio cannot be found, for at the moment when they should be caught and equated, there is neither arc nor chord. The chord and arc were not taken by Newton as equal before vanishing, nor after vanishing, but when they vanish. "That method," said Lagrange, "has the great inconvenience of considering quantities in the state in which they cease, so to speak, to be quantities; for though we can always well conceive the ratios of two quantities, as long as they remain finite, that ratio offers to the mind no clear and precise idea, as soon as its terms become both nothing at the same time." D'Alembert's method of limits was much the same as the

method of prime and ultimate ratios. D'Alembert taught

that a variable actually reached its limit. When Lagrange

endeavoured to free the calculus of its metaphysical difficulties, by resorting to common algebra, he avoided the whirlpool of Charybdis only to suffer wreck against the rocks of Scylla. The algebra of his day, as handed down to him by Euler, was founded on a false view of infinity. No correct theory of

infinite series had then been established. Lagrange proposed

to define the differential coefficient of f(x) with respect to x as the coefficient of h in the expansion of f(x+h) by Taylor's theorem, and thus to avoid all reference to limits. But he used infinite series without ascertaining that they were convergent, and his proof that f(x+h) can always be expanded in a series of ascending powers of h, labours under serious defects. Though Lagrange's method of developing the calculus was at first greatly applauded, its defects were fatal, and to-day his "method of derivatives," as it was called, has been generally

abandoned. He introduced a notation of his own, but

it was inconvenient, and was abandoned by him in the second edition of his Mécanique, in which he used infinitesimals. The primary object of the Théorie des fonctions was not attained, but its secondary results were far-reaching. It was a purely abstract mode of regarding functions, apart from geometrical

or mechanical considerations. In the further development of higher analysis a function became the leading idea, and Lagrange's work may be regarded as the starting-point of the theory of functions as developed by Cauchy, Riemann, Weierstrass,

88