Comment by rdbl27

16 hours ago

The claim is falsifiable; the bulk of 18th century math is "forgotten" in the sense that few, if any, people still use or apply or even know about it.

It's not "forgotten" in the technical sense that one _can_ still go dig into the dusty archives of any number of old university libraries, and review learned journals, diaries, commonplace books, personal correspondence, and so on from the 1700s that describe the mathematical work of the day in detail.

You can then systematically review that work, and test whether the claim that "nearly all mathematical output of the 18th century has been generally forgotten and never found any use."

I hypothesize that this experiment will show that nearly all of the mathematical output of the time long ago fell into oblivion. This is a falsifiable claim.

Your claim is still rubissh, as you neglected to interact with the rest of my comment: economic utility does not necessitate all mathematical output directly contributes.

You redefine "forgot" to make it falsiable, but also neglect that you need to refute that some "forgotten" work didn't contribute to new work down the line.