English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

MR. DODGSON thinks “it worth while to point out a mistake made in the paragraph about Mr. Morell's book” (NATURE, vol. xx. p. 240). In the words “ the thing not being capable of proof,” the “thing” referred to is Mr. Morell’s assertion that “the perimeter M D Q R S T M is less than the perimeter M P Q R S T M,” which is not necessarily true, and of course is incapable of proof. Surely this assertion, which I quote two lines before “thing” occurs, is its grammatical antecedent? You refer it back to the theorem itself, which Mr. Morell is trying to prove—a theorem which is true and easily proved.” I gladly accept Mr. Dodgson's statement, which is, if I remember rightly—for I am here far away from Mr. Dodgson's book—perfectly correct—and apologise for having inaccurately represented his meaning.

“Euclid and His Modern Rivals”