A quarrel between Joseph Liouville and Guillaume Libri at the French Academy of Sciences in the middle of the nineteenth century

Ehrhardt, Caroline

doi:10.1016/j.hm.2011.02.002

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, the early modern period appears as particularly rich in mathematical controversies. Common and interrelated causes of dispute continue to reemerge in later periods of mathematics such as the nature and methodology of mathematics or noteworthy fields of study within mathematics (Phillips 2014;Epple 2005;Schubring 2005;Ageron 2002;Posy 1998;Mazzotti 1998) and the equivalence or originality of particular solutions, proofs, and theories (Ehrhardt 2011;Brechenmacher 2007). Particularly relevant to our study here, historians have found particular affinity for controversy in the publications of Poncelet (Grattan-Guinness 1990;Bruter 1987) and Gergonne (Gérini 2010b;Stigler 1976).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The gain for preserving a unified scientific front was to show "natural science as straightforward and objective knowledge" (Rudwick 1985, 25). Similarly, Caroline Ehrhardt portrayed how an acrimonious controversy among the Parisian mathematicians, Guillame Libri and Joseph Liouville, over similar issues of priority, generality and accuracy in the study of functions during the 1840s, was edited into a disciplined interchange within publications by the Parisian Académie des Sciences (Ehrhardt 2011). In both of the above instances, alternative media outlets popularized more sensational, argumentative versions of the events.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Polemics in Public: Poncelet, Gergonne, Plücker, and the Duality Controversy

Lorenat¹

2015

Sci Context

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A plagiarism charge in 1827 sparked a public controversy centered between Jean-Victor Poncelet (1788-1867) and Joseph-Diez Gergonne (1771-1859) over the origin and applications of the principle of duality in geometry. Over the next three years and through the pages of various journals, monographs, letters, reviews, reports, and footnotes, vitriol between the antagonists increased as their potential publicity grew. While the historical literature offers valuable resources toward understanding the development, content, and applications of geometric duality, the hostile nature of the exchange seems to have deterred an in-depth textual study of the explicitly polemical writings. We argue that the necessary collective endeavor of beginning and ending this controversy constitutes a case study in the circulation of geometry. In particular, we consider how the duality controversy functioned as a medium of communicating new fundamental principles to a wider audience of practitioners.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polemics in Public: Poncelet, Gergonne, Plücker, and the Duality Controversy

Lorenat¹

2015

Sci Context

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Mathematical consensus: a research program

Wagner

2022

Axiomathes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the distinguishing features of mathematics is the exceptional level of consensus among mathematicians. However, an analysis of what mathematicians agree on, how they achieve this agreement, and the relevant historical conditions is lacking. This paper is a programmatic intervention providing a preliminary analysis and outlining a research program in this direction.First, I review the process of ‘negotiation’ that yields agreement about the validity of proofs. This process most often does generate consensus, however, it may give rise to another kind of disagreement: whether the original and new proof are effectively the same, leading to potential disagreement about the validity of the original proof.Second, I historicize the phenomenon of consensus. I show that in earlier European mathematics and other mathematical cultures, consensus about the validity of arguments was substantially weaker or conceived differently than it is today. This means that contemporary consensus about the validity of mathematical proofs should be explained by historical changes in mathematical practice.Finally, I conjecture what brought about the contemporary form of mathematical consensus. Since a sharp rise in consensus occurs around the turn of the 20th century, it makes sense to explain this consensus by the concurrent formalization of mathematics. However, this explanation has a major flaw: it explains a really existing phenomenon (consensus) by something that hardly ever happens (writing proofs in formal languages). I will therefore explain the ways in which formalization does enter mathematical practice so as to account for contemporary forms of mathematical consensus.

show abstract

Entrer à l’École préparatoire en 1829

Verdier¹

2017

RDS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A quarrel between Joseph Liouville and Guillaume Libri at the French Academy of Sciences in the middle of the nineteenth century

Cited by 6 publications

References 16 publications

Polemics in Public: Poncelet, Gergonne, Plücker, and the Duality Controversy

Polemics in Public: Poncelet, Gergonne, Plücker, and the Duality Controversy

Mathematical consensus: a research program

Entrer à l’École préparatoire en 1829

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About