Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-19T04:26:28.901Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A New Attempt to Prove the Parallel Postulate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2016

Extract

Periodically until the end of time there will appear published works purporting to prove the parallel postulate, and it has fallen to the writer's lot to read what is perhaps the most recent of these. While the exact mathematical value of such attempts can always be gauged a priori, it is useful to put on record any new method followed, if only to warn future generations of parallel-postulate-provers against trying it. But such attempts are not without all value , some readers may find it a congenial occupation to spend a little time in discovering the inherent fallacy , alternatively, the task may be given to a student as a profitable and novel exercise in geometry

For these reasons, then, the following résumé of this most recent attempt is given here. And in order that the full interest of discovering the fallacy may not be denied to the reader or the luckless student to whom he delegates the task, it has been thought better to give only the proof as the author gives it, and not to point out where the fallacy lies. The writer has, however, allowed himself to make one or two comments on certain noteworthy points.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Mathematical Association 1933

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

* Euclid or Einstein, n Proof of the Parallel Theory and a Critique of Metageometry, by Callahan, J. J. President of Duquesne University. (Published by the Devin Adair Company, New York; price $4.50.)Google ScholarPubMed As the title indicates, the author is concerned with more than his attempt to prove the parallel postulate; with the rpst of his worlr, however, this article does not deal.