conv.

All stories
ScienceQuiet 4d · day 8

Oxford mathematician Alain Goriely debunks the Parthenon optical-illusion myth

A new study finds no evidence that the temple's famous curves were built to correct visual illusions, tracing the 2,000-year-old claim to a Roman writer.

newest coverage 3d agosummary written 8d ago35 pieces98 likes & upvotes NewswiresMastodonRedditGoogle NewsHacker NewsBluesky

What to know

  • A peer-reviewed study by Oxford mathematician Alain Goriely re-examines 12 claimed 'optical corrections' in the Parthenon's design and finds most lack supporting evidence or are too small to be perceptible.
  • The myth is traced to Roman architect Vitruvius, writing roughly 400 years after the temple's construction; the claim persists today, including in AI chatbot answers.
  • Goriely proposes alternative explanations, such as drainage for the curved base and aesthetic or construction preferences for column curvature.
  • Other scientists, including a Harvard neuroscientist and a University of Arizona scholar, offer their own competing non-illusion explanations for the temple's curves.

“There are certain effects such as the Hering illusion that, on paper, would give qualitatively the same direction of effect, but if you actually do the computation, you realise that the effect does not appear.”

Alain Goriely, Mathematician, University of Oxford · New Scientist ↗ · Sep 14

Alain Goriely Professor of mathematics, University of OxfordVitruvius 1st-century Roman architect and engineerMarge Livingstone Neuroscientist, Harvard Medical SchoolJohn Senseney Scholar, University of Arizona

Oxford mathematician Alain Goriely debunks the Parthenon optical-illusion myth
theguardian.com

How it unfolded 2 developments, newest first · click a bar or a number to jump articlesposts

Peak 10 pieces in two hours at Sep 16, 2 AM; 35 pieces over 8 days (16 articles · 18 posts · 1 comment) Sep 15, 6 PM — 1 piece · 1 article — Newswires 1Sep 15, 8 PM — quietSep 15, 10 PM — 4 pieces · 4 articles — Newswires 2, Google News 1, Mastodon 1Sep 16, 12 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Reddit 1Sep 16, 2 AM — 10 pieces · 5 articles · 4 posts · 1 comment — Google News 5, Mastodon 3, Hacker News 1, +1 moreSep 16, 4 AM — 3 pieces · 3 posts — Mastodon 2, Bluesky 1Sep 16, 6 AM — quietSep 16, 8 AM — 3 pieces · 3 articles — Google News 2, Newswires 1Sep 16, 10 AM — 1 piece · 1 article — Google News 1Sep 16, 12 PM — 2 pieces · 2 posts — Mastodon 1, Hacker News 1Sep 16, 2 PM — quietSep 16, 4 PM — quietSep 16, 6 PM — quietSep 16, 8 PM — 1 piece · 1 post — Hacker News 1Sep 16, 10 PM — quietSep 17, 12 AM — quietSep 17, 2 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Hacker News 1Sep 17, 4 AM — quietSep 17, 6 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Hacker News 1Sep 17, 8 AM — quietSep 17, 10 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Mastodon 1Sep 17, 12 PM — quietSep 17, 2 PM — quietSep 17, 4 PM — quietSep 17, 6 PM — quietSep 17, 8 PM — quietSep 17, 10 PM — quietSep 18, 12 AM — quietSep 18, 2 AM — quietSep 18, 4 AM — quietSep 18, 6 AM — quietSep 18, 8 AM — quietSep 18, 10 AM — quietSep 18, 12 PM — 2 pieces · 1 article · 1 post — Mastodon 1, Newswires 1Sep 18, 2 PM — quietSep 18, 4 PM — quietSep 18, 6 PM — quietSep 18, 8 PM — quietSep 18, 10 PM — quietSep 19, 12 AM — quietSep 19, 2 AM — quietSep 19, 4 AM — quietSep 19, 6 AM — quietSep 19, 8 AM — quietSep 19, 10 AM — quietSep 19, 12 PM — quietSep 19, 2 PM — 1 piece · 1 article — Newswires 1Sep 19, 4 PM — quietSep 19, 6 PM — quietSep 19, 8 PM — quietSep 19, 10 PM — quietSep 20, 12 AM — quietSep 20, 2 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Mastodon 1Sep 20, 4 AM — 2 pieces · 2 posts — Mastodon 1, Reddit 1Sep 20, 6 AM — quietSep 20, 8 AM — quietSep 20, 10 AM — quietSep 20, 12 PM — quietSep 20, 2 PM — quietSep 20, 4 PM — quietSep 20, 6 PM — quietSep 20, 8 PM — quietSep 20, 10 PM — quietSep 21, 12 AM — quietSep 21, 2 AM — quietSep 21, 4 AM — quietSep 21, 6 AM — quietSep 21, 8 AM — quietSep 21, 10 AM — quietSep 21, 12 PM — quietSep 21, 2 PM — quietSep 21, 4 PM — quietSep 21, 6 PM — quietSep 21, 8 PM — quietSep 21, 10 PM — quietSep 22, 12 AM — quietSep 22, 2 AM — quietSep 22, 4 AM — quietSep 22, 6 AM — quietSep 22, 8 AM — quietSep 22, 10 AM — quietSep 22, 12 PM — quietSep 22, 2 PM — quietSep 22, 4 PM — quietSep 22, 6 PM — quietSep 22, 8 PM — quietSep 22, 10 PM — quietYesterday, 12 AM — quietYesterday, 2 AM — quietYesterday, 4 AM — quietYesterday, 6 AM — quietYesterday, 8 AM — quietYesterday, 10 AM — quietYesterday, 12 PM — quietYesterday, 2 PM — quietYesterday, 4 PM — quietYesterday, 6 PM — quietYesterday, 8 PM — quietYesterday, 10 PM — quietToday, 12 AM — quietToday, 2 AM — quiet 1–2
Sep 16Sep 17Sep 18Sep 19Sep 20Sep 21Sep 22yesterdaynow · 4:44 AM ET
  1. 2

    Guardian traces myth's origin to Roman writer Vitruvius

    The Guardian's coverage details how Goriely's Royal Society Open Science paper traces the myth to the 1st-century Roman architect Vitruvius, who wrote about the Parthenon 400 years after it was built, and notes the story persists even in AI chatbot answers today.

    “I do think it might be the oldest myth that we have, apart from religion.”
    — Alain Goriely
    1. 8 outlets UK mathematician debunks myth around Parthenon’s optical illusions

      first by Mastodon, 8d ago · also New Scientist, The Times, IFLScience, Popular Science, ScienceAlert, Guardian Science +1

      7 more headlines
    • greshamcollege.bsky.social

      Gresham Prof, @alaingoriely.bsky.social has debunked the myth that the Parthenon included deliberate optical illusions in @theguardian.com bit.ly/parthenon-il... Check out his lecture on the #maths of actual optical illusions: gres.hm/deceived-brain #ancientgreece #GreshamCollege

      greshamcollege.bsky.socialBluesky7d ago6▲view on Bluesky ↗
    2 more of the top 3 · 5 posts in this stretch
    • patrickhadfield@mastodon.scot

      Fascinating! (PS the "Elgin marbles" being in the Parthenon museum.) "UK mathematician debunks myth around Parthenon’s optical illusions." https://www. theguardian.com/science/2026/s ep/16/uk-mathematician-debunks-myth-parthenon-optical-illusions?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

      patrickhadfield@mastodon.scotMastodon7d agoview on Mastodon ↗

    • Nothing. It was mean and unhelpful of me to point it out. As was your silly comment about 'being paid to speculate on speculations' – which is inaccurate, mean and unhelpful.

      LongOverGoatr/worldnews8d agoview on r/worldnews ↗
    all of them →
  2. 1

    Other scientists offer competing explanations for the curves

    Harvard neuroscientist Marge Livingstone and University of Arizona's John Senseney respond with alternative accounts, citing drainage needs and the physical process of construction rather than an intended optical illusion.

    “I think it must have been for drainage, just like on roads.”
    — Marge Livingstone
  3. background

    Goriely's study finds Parthenon 'optical corrections' unsupported — New Scientist reports that Alain Goriely examined 12 proposed optical corrections in the Parthenon's design and found them either unsupported by evidence or too small to be perceptible under normal viewing conditions.

What people are saying 2 voices from 1 site · best of 5 · verbatim