Timeline for Interpreting the Famous Five equation
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 2017 at 9:42 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://upload.wikimedia.org/ with https://upload.wikimedia.org/
|
|
| Nov 24, 2014 at 18:32 | comment | added | yo' | I haven't done much on MO, but I've just given a golden badge to somebody :) | |
| Jun 6, 2010 at 4:15 | comment | added | Sunil Nanda | A couple of quotes on this equation from people who seem to have given it serious thought. Benjamin Pierce "Gentlemen, it is absolutely paradoxical; we cannot understand it, and we don't know what it means. But we have proved it, and therefore we know it must be the truth." Lukoff & Nunez "The expression makes sense if, but only if, we understand that mathematics consists of the metaphorical extension of familiar notions into unfamiliar areas." | |
| Jun 5, 2010 at 5:11 | comment | added | José Hdz. Stgo. | Really nice. Reminds me of a cute argument that appears in the superb book on Complex Analysis by Tristan Needham. As Professor Needham says, an individual putting forward an answer of the type "well that's just a definition" is giving a low blow to one of Euler's greatest contributions to Math. | |
| Jun 5, 2010 at 4:26 | comment | added | Andrey Rekalo | Yes. And the 3D vizualization of Euler's formula is also instructive en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Euler%27s_Formula_c.png | |
| Jun 5, 2010 at 4:18 | comment | added | Dan Ramras | Specifically, here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler%27s_identity | |
| Jun 5, 2010 at 4:00 | comment | added | Andrey Rekalo | Thanks, Kevin, that's very kind of you. The credit really goes to Wikipedia :) | |
| Jun 5, 2010 at 3:15 | comment | added | Kevin O'Bryant | This may be the best answer I've seen on all of Math Overflow. | |
| Jun 5, 2010 at 3:05 | history | answered | Andrey Rekalo | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
