Here's a sample of some citations in an article.

I have been asked for an extension on the draft assignment.  Here are the reasons I think that's unreasonable:  You have known these dates since the opening of the course, and I have emphasised them, so I don't think it's reasonable that you have forgotten.  You should have written a first start over break or sooner and now be merely tidying.  Aside from all of this, the paper is rather short and the more than month since last component has been plenty.  And the one reason I think it's impractical - I need time to read them all to get them back to you to improve to the final versions.  To earn full credit for the draft you must submit by the end of the music in class on Monday.  That all being said, I'm willing to offer the following sale prices:  to get the paper at 10% off you must submit by the end of the music in class on Wednesday and to get the paper at 20% off you must submit by the end of the music in class on Friday.  If you do not submit by then, I will record a zero for your draft.  I will return those drafts submitted on Monday first as a batch, then those on Wednesday as a batch, then those on Friday as a batch, and any submitted after that when I get around to it (I don't expect we'll have those.  A draft not meeting the minimum requirement (1250 words) will not earn a passing grade.  

I also decided yesterday to start trying out IM office hours.  The account is JohannesOhrs on AOLIM.  Please tell me if you have any questions or thoughts about this idea.  
 
Quick Answers §8.2

An interesting observation that we're seeing a number of familiar mathematicians.  Does it mean that they're the best?  Probably not.  I think it's reasonable to say that this is merely the period of time which you are most familiar with.  

We're also in a time of a large amount of mathematics being produced.  There was surely an air of excitement in mathematics - and results came fast and furious.  Sometimes in this intensity some of the details weren't attended to carefully, but the intuition was there.  Details came later (many in the 19th century).  Series in particular require questions of convergence (as you know), but most of those weren't addressed at this time.  

Jeff Suzuki is a mathematics professor at Brooklyn College with a PhD in math. history.  I know him, think highly of him, and trust his authority on most subjects.  He is also human and hence fallible and as we well know sometimes he's presenting bold opinions rather than facts.  I like that too.  

No debating it - Euler was amazingly prolific in any measure.  And he had 13 children.  And he had memorised the Aeneid (about 10,000 lines of epic poetry).  And he was blind for part of his life, and could only see out of one eye for most of it.  Anything you read about Euler sounds amazing - and almost all of it is true.  One of Euler's most important contributions is our modern notion of function.  That in itself probably gives him some claim to being the founder of modernn mathematics - with all the rest he did - it's difficult to argue (but not impossible).  

I say again, there's much we don't have an opportunity to do.  I would be most pleased if someone took me up on my offer to explore other - e.g. Euler's work on either Fermat result.  

Surely it was well understood at this time what irrational meant.  √2 had been long known to be irrational before this time (probably even called as much for around 200 years).  

The idea of Euler's god story is that he was supposed to be intimidating enough with the (meaningless) mathematics to silence the doubters.  As Suzuki says, seems unlikely that this oft-repeated story is true.  

Witch of Agnesi

Nicolaus II worked on trajectories, differential equations, probability, and was heavily invovled in the Newton-Leibniz controversy - working out details comparing the precise mathematics in their works.  

I would say Jakob and Johann are the "most important" Bernoullis, but htat's probably open to debate.  There are 8 listed at the MacTutor site.  

Did l'Hospital to anthing original?  Not that I know of.  

Neither Lambert nor Saccheri proved the 5th postulate (as we will see, that is impossible).  They basically repeated what was done around the 11th century by al-Khayyami and al-Haytham.  I won't say much about them because of that.  Non-Euclidean Geometry is a BIG DEAL.  When we get to it actually being understood, I'll say more about it.  It definitely was a surprise about 2000 years in the making.  

Although they are still rare, we will now start occasionally seeing women at this point.  

I don't have information about Daniel B's epidemiology work, but I imagine it could be found with a little effort.  

Suzuki isn't saying much about Lagrange here because he'll say much more about him later.  I'll follow his lead on that.  

Remember:  continental calculus is like Leibniz, English is like Newton.  So, our characters now all on the continent are doing Leibniz-style calculus.  

Russia took a while coming to the world stage, and even at this point, it's not really Ruessians be W. Europeans in Russia.  Although they have done important mathematics in the 20th century, it takes a while.  As an indicator, we only get to listen to one piece of Russian music.

We have some dates in Russia - remember they're using the Julian calendar still, so they are "O.S."  

Complex numbers are definitely appearing sporadically at this point in history.  

"The number of Bernoulli's prominent in mathematics reminds me of the Bach family in the musical area."  I would wager at least one of each must've known the other.  

Last time:  Yes, l'Hospital's rule to him looked like y = dp / dq, i.e. derivative of p divided by derivative of q.

Long ago:  Rectangles go back to prehistory, probability has been building for about 200 years at this point.