RE: virus: Mermaid, a lady of faith making a phule of herself?

From: Steele, Kirk A (SteeleKA@nafm.misawa.af.mil)
Date: Sun Jan 06 2002 - 19:47:22 MST


L'erm,
        Lemme simplify this discussion a wee bit. 'Creative' steganography
don't cut it folks. The steganographic method as a formal system insists on
declared a priori structure. To para quote Douglas Adams, "A thousand
monkeys (vedic or hessitic) pounding on a thousand typewriters for a
thousand years will eventually come up with a coherent sentance"

        You have to apply a systematic filter over the EN-FREAKING-TIRE body
of text for the method to be valid. One filter applied to one paragraph to
"retrieve" (keyword that, it doesn't mean 'create')the text "the hand of
god" must be applied to ALL other paragraphs, even if it yields the
plaintext "is up the ass of a mule".

        Oh, and one more thing folks, it has to be applied to the
untranslated text. So any mention of this method to the bible is out. Does
anybody know how many DIFFERENT original languages make up that collection
of gibberish?

        The other test of a theory is it's longevity and reproducability;
back to " a thousand monkeys". Does the cyrptographic culture of
mathematical monkeys have any truck with this argument. If the answer is a
resounding "WHAT?! A YOU FREAKIN STONED?!" Then there must be another one of
those "miraculous" conspiracy theories afoot.

        Knock it off folks, there are more creative ways to waste neural
pathways. I for one am all for the #3 Have you appeared in any pornographic
movies - venure of wasting pathways.

Kirkasaurus Wrecks

-----Original Message-----
From: L' Ermit [mailto:lhermit@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 10:07 AM
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: virus: Mermaid, a lady of faith making a phule of herself?

Mermaid, unless you really wish to place your great faith and
anti-occidental prejudices, on display, your posts have now descended to the

ridiculous. I repeat. If you are allowed to select the "keys" to decode a
supposed steganographic message, then <em>anything</em> can be found in
<em>any</em> text. In other words, your entire post proves nothing except
your inability to reason about anything concerning India (or is it a problem

with mathematics?).

I have posted a reply to Yash's tirades, which address this problem in some
detail, and which will also apply to your continuous and voluminous, but
ultimately futile postings of Indian myths (which are of course no better
than any other kinds of myth). Unfortunately, I did so while the Phinmaid
was logged in and inconsequence, my message seems to have jammed somewhere
in Lucifer's craw. As I have no intention of rewriting the whole thing,
these few lines will have to suffice until it is shaken loose - presumably
tomorrow.

The problem that your arguments have is that the entire saga you keep
asserting is "TRUE," depends entirely on Shri Bharati Krishna Tirthaji's
alleged "key". I strongly suggest that Shri Bharati Krishna Tirthaji's
alleged key was made up by ascribing values to the text which matched both
PI and his desires, as there is no <em>evidence</em> whatsoever that this
"key" was intended by the original authors and there is clear evidence that
the original cleartext source contains multiple conflicting values of PI*
making it quite evident that the "priest/mathemeticians" of the day had not
recognized the qualities of PI, grasped its transcendental nature or
ascertained it's value beyond that which could be established by
mensuration. Given all this, asserting that the text holds this value in a
hidden form which contradicts that published makes no sense at all. Only an
idiot would aver that it does. So, knowing that you are not an idiot, it
seems that you have adopted a similar faith to the other mathematically and
logically impaired navel-gazers (including my least favorite Yogi), as you
have not presented <em>any</em> reasons for your holding to your assertions
in the absence of such evidence, have seemingly failed to grasp this fact
(which devastates <em>all</em> your claims) - failed to provide <em>any</em>

contrary argument and have only persisted in sending more and more quotes
based on the same apparently <em>invalid</em> pseudo-key.

Hermit

*The following is from
http://www-groups.dcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Indian_sulbasutra
s.html
a site that you claim to have discovered independently and presumably
evaluated and liked well enough to cite it. Are you disagreeing with your
sources now? A silly thing to do... "All the Sulbasutras contain a method to

square the circle. It is an approximate method based on constructing a
square of side 13/15 times the diameter of the given circle as in the
diagram on the right. This corresponds to taking = 4 (13/15)2 = 676/225 =
3.00444 so it is not a very good approximation and certainly not as good as
was known earlier to the Babylonians." and "It is worth noting that many
different values of appear in the Sulbasutras, even several different ones
in the same text. This is not surprising for whenever an approximate
construction is given some value of is implied. The authors thought in
terms of approximate constructions, not in terms of exact constructions with

  but only having an approximate value for it. For example in the Baudhayana

Sulbasutra, as well as the value of 676/225, there appears 900/289 and
1156/361. In different Sulbasutras the values 2.99, 3.00, 3.004, 3.029,
3.047, 3.088, 3.1141, 3.16049 and 3.2022 can all be found; see [6]. In [3]
the value = 25/8 = 3.125 is found in the Manava Sulbasutras."

Also from that site:
http://www-groups.dcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Indian_mathematic
s.html

"Histories of Indian mathematics used to begin by describing the geometry
contained in the Sulbasutras but research into the history of Indian
mathematics has shown that the essentials of this geometry were older being
contained in the altar constructions described in the Vedic mythology text
the Shatapatha Brahmana and the Taittiriya Samhita. Also it has been shown
that the study of mathematical astronomy in India goes back to at least the
third millennium BC and mathematics and geometry must have existed to
support this study in these ancient times. "

and

"The next mathematics of importance on the Indian subcontinent was
associated with these religious texts. It consisted of the Sulbasutras which

were appendices to the Vedas giving rules for constructing altars. They
contained quite an amount of geometrical knowledge, but the mathematics was
being developed, not for its own sake, but purely for practical religious
purposes. The mathematics contained in the these texts is studied in some
detail in the separate article on the Sulbasutras"

And back to the first page.

http://www-groups.dcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Indian_sulbasutra
s.html

"The Vedic people entered India about 1500 BC from the region that today is
Iran. The word Vedic describes the religion of these people and the name
comes from their collections of sacred texts known as the Vedas. The texts
date from about the 15th to the 5th century BC and were used for sacrificial

rites which were the main feature of the religion. There was a ritual which
took place at an altar where food, also sometimes animals, were sacrificed.
The Vedas contain recitations and chants to be used at these ceremonies.
Later prose was added called Brahmanas which explained how the texts were to

be used in the ceremonies. They also tell of the origin and the importance
of the sacrificial rites themselves."

"The Sulbasutras are appendices to the Vedas which give rules for
constructing altars. If the ritual sacrifice was to be successful then the
altar had to conform to very precise measurements. The people made
sacrifices to their gods so that the gods might be pleased and give the
people plenty food, good fortune, good health, long life, and lots of other
material benefits. For the gods to be pleased everything had to be carried
out with a very precise formula, so mathematical accuracy was seen to be of
the utmost importance. We should also note that there were two types of
sacrificial rites, one being a large public gathering while the other was a
small family affair. Different types of altars were necessary for the two
different types of ceremony."

"All that is known of Vedic mathematics is contained in the Sulbasutras.
This in itself gives us a problem, for we don't know if these people
undertook mathematical investigations for their own sake, as for example the

ancient Greeks did, or whether they only studied mathematics to solve
problems necessary for their religious rites. Some historians have argued
that mathematics, in particular geometry, must have also existed to support
astronomical work being undertaken around the same period."

"Certainly the Sulbasutras do not contain any proofs of the rules which they

describe. Some of the rules, such as the method of constructing a square of
area equal to a given rectangle, are exact. Others, such as constructing a
square of area equal to that of a given circle, are approximations. We shall

look at both of these examples below but the point we wish to make here is
that the Sulbasutras make no distinction between the two. Did the writers of

the Sulbasutras know which methods were exact and which were
approximations?"

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:38 MDT