|
|
> I don't expect people who have grown used to the bad usage to
> correct themselves, but I'd obviously prefer that they did.
> The good usage keeps "Euclidean" a bit closer to what Euclid
> presumably thought he was talking about (surely you don't
> think that *he* imagined his lines, planes, or space to have
> non-arbitrary origins? much less that he thought they came
> equipped with particular coordinate systems!), and makes a
> distinction that is deeply meaningful. The bad usage encourages
> sloppy thinking, stupidity, and pointless arguments.
>
> Lee Rudolph
The clarification is very useful, and since Euclid came before Descartes, I
certainly dont want to put descarte before de horse.
Points well taken.
|
|