Skip to main content
MathOverflow

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

9
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ And in what sense was Integration lost? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 28, 2017 at 6:18
  • 64
    $\begingroup$ @Lucia It was lost for medical researchers until these magnificent discovery. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 28, 2017 at 6:21
  • 21
    $\begingroup$ +1 just for the laughs. It reminds me of books on Quantum Information Theory and Quantum Computing which spend an awful lot of time reinventing (badly) linear algebra over the complex numbers. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 13, 2018 at 22:50
  • 15
    $\begingroup$ As I understand it, medical researchers actually had integration in the form of Riemann sums; what Tai rediscovered in 1994 was the Trapezoid Rule. (In both cases without an error estimate, so not really mathematically satisfactory.) This makes sense, since the Applied Calculus textbooks, that we use (at least in the USA) to teach premed students about integration, mention Riemann sums but not any more sophisticated methods of numerical integration. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 29, 2018 at 5:37
  • 13
    $\begingroup$ The story about that paper and its popularity bothers me because AFAIK education of every medical doctor includes at least a year of Calculus. In US a year of Calculus is a part of undergraduate pre-med education, and the medical school is unlikely to admit if you have grades below B in your undergraduate transcripts. How do YOU, gentlemen, teach Calculus, so that your former students don't remember what integration is after getting A or B in your course? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 16, 2019 at 16:17