Talk:Apollonius of Perga

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:12, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: To say that "Apollonius lived toward the end of the hellenistic period" seems to me misleading. The hellenistic period goes from the rise of Alexander to the death of Cleopatra. Therefore Apollonius was right in the middle.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.28.55.45 (talk) 03:52, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The times of Apollonius 

message: Do we really want so much about St. John's College in an article on Apollonius?  E.g., do we need to know that they lost their accreditation in 1936?  I'm talking about this passage:
:: Heath's work is indispensable. He taught throughout the early 20th century, passing away in 1940, but meanwhile another point of view was developing. St. John's College (Annapolis/Santa Fe), which had been a military school since colonial times, preceding the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland, to which it is adjacent, in 1936 lost its accreditation and was on the brink of bankruptcy. In desperation the board summoned Stringfellow Barr and Scott Buchanan from the University of Chicago, where they had been developing a new theoretical program for instruction of the Classics. Leaping at the opportunity, in 1937 they instituted the “new program” at St. John's, later dubbed the Great Books program, a fixed curriculum that would teach the works of select key contributors to the culture of western civilization. At St. John's, Apollonius came to be taught as himself, not as some adjunct to analytic geometry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Baez (talk • contribs) 20:35, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: St. John's

message: As one of the most historically important mathematics books, it seems to me like Conics deserves its own article, just as we have separate articles for Euclid and Elements. It's good to have a solid summary here, but at some level of detail it starts to distract from the subject of Apollonius himself, so having that topic hosted as a section here makes it harder to add material about individual important theorems within, its historical influence, etc. that starts to seem out of scope for an article about the person of Apollonius. –jacobolus (t) 04:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Perhaps ''Conics'' should be split into a new article? 

message: The Astrolabe article mentions Apollonius as the inventor of the instrument.  But no mention of it here.  Could maybe someone add it? Thanks.  2600:1700:1C64:8240:3D5F:3F0D:1558:A2A8 (talk) 07:42, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: There's an ongoing discussion about the early history of astrolabes at talk:astrolabe. See also . The only evidence that Apollonius had anything to do with them is circumstantial: the theorem that the stereographic projection maps circles on the plane to circles on the sphere relies on a related theorem which can be found in Conics. Any attribution of the stereographic projection or planar astrolabe to Apollonius is highly speculative. –jacobolus (t) 13:07, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Astrolabe 

message: Double cone is referred to but not defined 24.192.101.186 (talk) 13:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: If you click the immediately preceding wiki-link cone you can see some discussion (albeit not great) about double cones. –jacobolus (t) 14:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Double cone