You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
1

[–] TheBuddha 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

The latter - I'm pretty sure. Print wasn't that accurate and the number has a history he's not aware of. It's known as Euler's constant and, while not formalized, was almost certainly in use long before calc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_(mathematical_constant)#History

0
0

[–] UlyssesEMcGill [S] ago 

It says the first reference was in 1618, 9 years after the collected sonnets.

print wasn't that accurate

What? Are you saying the large period was a mistake?

What's the reason for the two blank lines?

0
2

[–] TheBuddha 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

It says the first written reference was then - which says a lot. Many things were written but not printed, not saved for posterity, etc...

Yes, they didn't have uniform letters in their printing presses. Old books are full of such. The two lines are most probably there because they didn't want the additional expense of adding an illustration - which used a variety of processes. They were letters cast in lead, not uniform as they were hand made, and the precision in manuscripts wasn't seen for another ~300 years.