Skip to content

Please be aware that some material may contain words, descriptions or illustrations which will not reflect current scientific understanding and may be considered in today's context inaccurate, unethical, offensive or distressing.

Referee's report by Thomas Archer Hirst, on a paper 'On the sextactic points of a plane curve' by Arthur Cayley

Reference number: RR/5/45

Date: 08 February 1865

Description

Recommended for publication in the 'Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society'. The paper completes the author's earlier paper 'On the conic of five-pointic contact at any point of a plane curve' in the Philosophical Transactions for 1859.

Subject: Mathematics

[Published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 1865]

Reference number
RR/5/45
Earliest possible date
08 February 1865
Physical description
Letter on paper
Page extent
3 pages
Format
Manuscript

Creator name

Thomas Archer Hirst

View page for Thomas Archer Hirst

Use this record

Citation

Thomas Archer Hirst, Referee's report by Thomas Archer Hirst, on a paper 'On the sextactic points of a plane curve' by Arthur Cayley, 08 February 1865, RR/5/45, The Royal Society Archives, London, https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/items/rr_5_45/referees-report-by-thomas-archer-hirst-on-a-paper-on-the-sextactic-points-of-a-plane-curve-by-arthur-cayley, accessed on 16 April 2024

Link to this record

Embed this record

<iframe src="https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/embed/items/rr_5_45/referees-report-by-thomas-archer-hirst-on-a-paper-on-the-sextactic-points-of-a-plane-curve-by-arthur-cayley" title="Referee's report by Thomas Archer Hirst, on a paper 'On the sextactic points of a plane curve' by Arthur Cayley" allow="fullscreen" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>

Related Publications

Related Records

Related Fellows

Explore the collection

  • Referee Reports

    Date: 1832-1949

    This collection contains reports on scientific papers submitted for publication to the Royal Society. Started in 1832 when the system was formalised, it is a record of the origins of peer review publishing in practice.

    View collection