Why is Euclid’s book called ‘The Elements’?

I wonder why the second most read book in history is called ‘the Elements’? It is about math and mostly geometry. What does this have to do with Elements? It cannot refer to elements in chemistry because those were obviously not known yet.

Another definition is given:

A component or constituent of a whole or one of the parts into which a whole may be resolved by analysis.

So it could be that the axioms and propositions Euclid gives in his book are like the components of math and in this way it is called the ‘Elements’.

Another reason could be because it is named after Plato’s Elements or Plato’s Platonic Solids. These are 3D geometrical objects where all the surface and angles between the surface are all equal. 5 solids satisfy these criteria:

 

Plato was amazed by these and thought that they represented the elements as regarded as important that time: fire, earth, water, air and the fifth one he corresponded to the ‘heavens’. Aristotle later corresponed to ‘quintessence/aether’.

Euclid proves propositions about these in the last and most difficult book of the Elements. I wonder that this was the whole goal, and that is why it is called the elements. To show these beautiful symmetric objects and the importance they thought these had in physical world.

Ironic

Obviously the world isn’t build up with these objects even though how nice they look. But what make them so nice is their symmetries. And in a certain sense, symmetry and group theory (studies of symmetries) are really important, maybe the most important thing using elementary particle physics and physics as a whole. Physicist danced around this principle for ages, but Noether appreciated this fully.

 

 

 

Vicious circle and virtuous circle in parenting

Situation #1

Imagine a couple where the husband is low paid, alcoholic and abusive and the mom is a heroine junkie. They have low education and low intelligence/planning. She accidently gets pregnant and smokes during pregnancy. A child has been born in very bad circumstances and in bad situation. The cause of the problems of the parents is partly genetic, which means this kid will also inherent not optimal genes. He will be brought up in a not optimal education, even though he actually needs extra support and education because of situation.

The childs circumstances demand above average support, but he will get below average support, which will exacerbate the problems. He will get kids on his own who will propagate this problem, in a way a vicious circle started with bad parenting and bad upbringing.

This is obviously a very extreme case which is rare in developed countries, however along the spectrum there will be examples that are more common.

Situation #2

Compare this to two parents who are both highly educated and well paying jobs. They are healthy and planned & prepared to get a child. The mother refrains from any unhealthy behaviour as good as she can around the pregnancy and she goes to the check ups as planned. Because of their wealth they buy lots of good material for the baby, to create a good environment to grow up. Baby grows up and inherents good genes that partly explain the parents succes. At this headstart he even may enjoy even more oppurtinities that his parents create with their wealth and intelligence. Even though the baby already had a headstart, he will get above average support and thus enters a virtuous circle of parenting.

These are examples on the opposite of the spectrum, but I think that is important to make sure that everyone gets to the good side of the spectrum. This will only compound and create more families on the right side of the spectrum.

14386395