Barry Mazur against Papps -- 15 centuries of error on a Euclid's proposition

TL;DR

This paper investigates a historical mathematical error regarding Euclid's proposition X.9, exploring how and why such a misconception persisted despite contrary evidence presented by Barry Mazur.

Contribution

It analyzes the historical and mathematical reasons behind the misinterpretation of Euclid's proposition X.9, highlighting a long-standing error in mathematical history.

Findings

Identification of a 15-century-old error in Euclid's proposition interpretation

Analysis of the reasons behind the misinterpretation by historians

Clarification of the correct understanding of Euclid's original proposition

Abstract

Barry Mazur published an article some year ago, where he showed, among other things, that the result in the so-called mathematical passage of Plato s Theatetus and Euclid s proposition X.9 in the Elements are very different, while almost all historians and commentators have claimed the opposite. In this lecture, we consider this question to try to understand how and why could have happened such an error, this 'strange delusion' to quote Mazur.