
Huygens and Barrow, Newton and Hooke
by ARNOLD · first published 2004
4mentions
3recommended by
3HN commenters
2016–2024first – last mentioned
100% recommend
Translated from the Russian by E.J.F. Primrose "Remarkable little book." -SIAM REVIEW V.I. Arnold, who is renowned for his lively style, retraces the beginnings of mathematical analysis and theoretical physics in the works (and the intrigues!) of the great scientists of the 17th century. Some of Huygens' and Newton's ideas. several centuries ahead of their time, were developed only recently. The author follows the link between their inception and the breakthroughs in contemporary mathematics and physics. The book provides present-day generalizations of Newton's theorems on the elliptical shape
Affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.




Huygens and Barrow, Newton and Hooke [1] by mathematician V. I. Arnol'd. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Huygens-Barrow-Newton-Hooke-quasicrys...
on “Ask HN: What book have you given as a gift?” ↗"Huygens and Barrow, Newton and Hooke" by Vladimir Arnold (would literally recommend any of his books).
on “Ask HN: What kind of math do you study in your free time?” ↗I've read the Dune and LOTR and Foundation trilogies multiple times, like many others on this list. I'll try to list some less obvious ones. Huygens and Barrow, Newton and Hooke by VI Arnold: neither a popular science book nor a technical treatise, it discusses mathematical ideas from Newton's times and their modern mannifestations. I learn something new each time I read it.…
on “Ask HN: What book have you re-read 3x or more?” ↗…by Canadian pianist Glenn Gould Eye, Brain, Vision by David Hubel, IMO an excellent introduction to visual neuroscience for the layperson and a really, really nice example of good scientific writing Huygens and Barrow, Newton and Hooke by VI Arnold, for the density of ideas Perceptrons by Minsky and Papert, mainly as an example of clear mathematical exposition
on “Ask HN: What nonfiction books do you keep rereading?” ↗