answersLogoWhite

0

If you go by what he said, then yes. He did defined a point which has no part. However, you should be asking is what the hell does he mean by "parts"? Turns out the Greek mathematics definition of part is equivalent to our definition of dimensions. So what he meant to say was a point is defined as something with no width or length or thickness.

User Avatar

Wiki User

14y ago

Still curious? Ask our experts.

Chat with our AI personalities

SteveSteve
Knowledge is a journey, you know? We'll get there.
Chat with Steve
CoachCoach
Success isn't just about winning—it's about vision, patience, and playing the long game.
Chat with Coach
LaoLao
The path is yours to walk; I am only here to hold up a mirror.
Chat with Lao

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Did Euclid define a point as that which has no part?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp