/lit/ - Literature

>>11068951
I'm assuming Euclid meant it as 'something that cannot exist'. For instance, rationality under Euclid is defined in relation so some given number of units/length. If the number of units is 'one', irrationality is defined as a space which is not composed of whole units. Technically the length exists, but not in whole numbers, and remember decimals were not a thing back then (and I don't see fractions being utilized until around Diophantus). So this irrationality was thought to CONCEPTUALLY exist, but not numerically. It existed as an idea.

Interestingly, this does seem to go against Aristotle a bit, when he defines the highest form of existence as numerical existence. So irrationality, therefore, must not exist numerically, only 'formally' (under Aristotleian metaphysics).

Very literally then, irrational numbers DO. NOT. EXIST. Even as far as you stretch out Pi, found by Archimedes, it is not a concrete number, only the form of the number.

Yes, since a medial area (and therefore an apotome) cannot exist, it is irrational. The entire book X of Elements is dealing with things that can never exist.

>mfw

Ever feel like half of the posts on this site are paid for? Like, not genuine posting, but posting because of money?

And anytime you try to point it out, when you get a consistent response the mods delete the thread?

(fuck you retard)

Ever feel like half of the posts on this site are paid for? Like, not genuine posting, but posting because of money?

>>10924041
>idk but it wasnt like there was some unspoken contract saying "we demand above and beyond our subsistence hats and beer" and the ruling classes decided to give up some of their cash and shower the workers with free hats (beer was always an important source of calories in the european diet so calling beer "not subsistence" is somewhat disingenuous)