(April 17, 2023 at 4:35 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(April 17, 2023 at 2:16 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: Seriously, dude? You think Euclid worked alone? You think Euclid did not ask other mathematicians (most of which are presumably unknown today) what they think about his work before publishing it? You think that scientists in ancient times were acting like cranks today, bombarding ignorant people with controversial statetements they don't know how to evaluate?
Yes, I think Euclid worked alone - there is no evidence indicating otherwise. As has been explained to you, talking to people about your work isn’t the same as peer review.
In fact, until the mid-17th century (and, to a lesser extent, after), scientific works were evaluated after publication, not before. Please understand - I am NOT denying the value of peer review. When properly conducted, it is vital to the dissemination of scientific information. But science as science would chug along just fine without it.
Your other question is too stupid to bother with.
Boru
Then how was his work basically free of errors? It seems so unlikely somebody would be able to write 17 books full of original proofs without somebody reviewing it, without any significant errors. The only famous error was speculation that the Euclid's 5th Postulate can be proven using the first four.
Scientific works are nearly always also evaluated after publication, not only before. Most of the published research is wrong. Peer-review is there to eliminate obvious errors.
