Zu-Geng's axiom vs Cavalieri's theory
To begin with, the author introduces his subject by saying that ``little has been discussed on ancient Chinese mathematics in some of the most famous monographs on history of mathematics''. This is perhaps true if these ``most famous monographs'' are taken to be those of M. Kline and H. Eves, but this kind of statement badly overlooks the very large number of Western studies on ancient Chinese mathematics which have been published, even when limiting ourselves to the question of Cavalieri's principle and his treatment of indivisibles. After such a superficial judgement, the author displays a limited knowledge of the history of both Chinese and Western mathematics, the whole being crowned by a serie of violent anachronisms, such as the one which consists in calling Zu Geng's statement ``an axiom''.
scientific article; zbMATH DE number 2102851