Katz, M.; Sherry, D. "Leibniz's Infinitesimals: Their Fictionality,
Their Modern Implementations, And Their Foes From Berkeley To Russell
And Beyond." Erkenntnis 78 (2013), no. 3,
571-625.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10670-012-9370-y,
http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.0174
A review by Marcel Guillaume appears at
http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=3053644; see also
Guillaume's review in pdf
Bair, J.; Błaszczyk, P.; Ely, R.; Henry, V.; Kanovei, V.; Katz,
K.; Katz, M.; Kutateladze, S.; McGaffey, T.; Schaps, D.; Sherry, D.;
Shnider, S. "Is mathematical history written by the victors?"
Notices of the American Mathematical Society
60 (2013) no. 7, 886-904.
http://www.ams.org/notices/201307/rnoti-p886.pdf,
http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=3086638,
http://arxiv.org/abs/1306.5973
A response by Fraser appears at
http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319120294
and our response to Fraser's response appears at 17a and 18e.
Błaszczyk, P.; Katz, M.; Sherry, D. "Ten misconceptions from
the history of analysis and their debunking." Foundations of
Science 18 (2013), no. 1, 43-74.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10699-012-9285-8,
http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=3031794,
http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.4153
A response by Schubring appears at
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10699-015-9424-0
An illuminating MathSciNet review of Schubring's article by Albert
C. Lewis can be found here:
http://u.math.biu.ac.il/~katzmik/lewis17.pdf
Our response to Schubring's response appeared at
Błaszczyk, P.; Kanovei, V.; Katz, M.; Sherry, D. "Controversies
in the foundations of analysis: Comments on Schubring's
Conflicts." Foundations of Science
22 (2017), no. 1, 125-140.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10699-015-9473-4
Our response was reviewed by Lewis at
http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=3605125
Kanovei, V.; Katz, K.; Katz, M.; Sherry, D. "Euler's lute and
Edwards' oud." The Mathematical Intelligencer (2015).
http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.02586,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00283-015-9565-6
A response by Edwards appears at
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00283-015-9560-y
The response by Edwards was published at online first on 23 oct '15,
as recorded in a pdf here:
Edwards'
response at online first
Our article to which Edwards responded was published at "online first"
nearly two weeks later, on 5 nov '15, as recorded in a pdf here:
The oud
article at online first
Both pdfs were generated on 11nov'15 so as to preserve a record of the
dates of "online first" publication, since these dates have already
disappeared from the Springer site after the articles were published
in an issue of the journal. We have not received any clarification
from the journal as to why and how a response to our article could
appear online before the publication of our article itself.
Błaszczyk, P.; Borovik, A.; Kanovei, V.; Katz, K.; Katz, M.;
Kudryk, T.; Kutateladze, S.; Sherry, D. "A non-standard analysis of a
cultural icon: The case of Paul Halmos." Logica Universalis
10 (2016), no. 4.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11787-016-0153-0,
http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.00149
A response by Amos Shalit: Counterattack on Halmos's critique of nonstandard analysis
Katz, M.; Kuhlemann, K.; Sherry, D.; Ugaglia, M.; van
Atten, M. "Two-track depictions of Leibniz's fictions." The
Mathematical Intelligencer 44 (2022), no. 3,
261-266
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00283-021-10140-3,
https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.00922,
https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=4480193
A response by Archibald, Arthur, Ferraro, Gray, Jesseph, Lützen,
Panza, Rabouin, and Schubring appears at
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00283-022-10217-7
Our response to Archibald's response appears at
23a.
See also
Depictions
Infinitesimal topics
Publications on the mathematics, history,
and philosophy of infinitesimals
Return to home page