A waste of time? was RE: virus: Yash - a brief history eloquent redolence, but n

From: L' Ermit (lhermit@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun Jan 13 2002 - 14:53:43 MST


[Yash] I condemn your obvious racist slant in your comments.

[Hermit] If all else fails, and you cannot defend your bullshit, your
opponent is a "racist"? Mermaid plays that card too. But it does not work.
Either his arguments are valid - or they are invalid. He could be Hitler or
Eichmann and it would still be irrelevant. You on the other hand are a
self-proclaimed fuckwit. And the reason for that is that you don't know what
an argument is.

[Yash] You don't know what esoteric means. Too bad for you.

[Hermit] You are making stupid, insulting and unsustainable assumptions
again, fuckwit.

[Yash] To me it's interesting to see how people come about their
discoveries, even though they say they are inspired by divine things. Have
you read Newton and Kepler?

[Hermit] Read my reply to "RE: virus: One more time, mebbe little snipe Yash
will pay attention this time." to find out why this is also irrelevant,
fuckwit.

[Yash] I do not dismiss these simply because of religious links.

[Hermit] More assumptions and insults? Who said we do, fuckwit.

[Yash] BTW, Mermaid said she had no problem with me mentioning my
qualifications in response to challenges by Hermit.

[Hermit] Neither did I. Although I took no notice of it as it was not
germane to whether or not you could defend your assertions. I simply asked
you to substantiate your assertions, fuckwit.

[Yash] See the sources already cited by Mermaid and Hermit for chronologies.
You obviously didn't.

[Hermit] He obviously did. Here - where do you see "Vedic PI"?

1 Rhind papyrus 2000 BC 1 3.16045 (= 4(8/9)2)
2 Archimedes 250 BC 3 3.1418 (average of the bounds)
3 Vitruvius 20 BC 1 3.125 (= 25/8)
4 Chang Hong 130 1 3.1622 (= 10)
5 Ptolemy 150 3 3.14166
6 Wang Fan 250 1 3.155555 (=142/45)
7 Liu Hui 263 5 3.14159
8, Tsu Ch'ung Chi 480 7 3.141592920 (= 355/113)
9 Aryabhata 499 4 3.1416 (=62832/2000)
10 Brahmagupta 640 1 3.1622 (= 10)
11 Al-Khwarizmi 800 4 3.1416
12 Fibonacci 1220 3 3.141818
13 Madhava 1400 11 3.14159265359
14 Al-Kashi 1430 14 3.14159265358979
15 Otho 1573 6 3.1415929
16 Vičte 1593 9 3.1415926536
17 Romanus 1593 15 3.141592653589793
18 Van Ceulen 1596 20 3.14159265358979323846
19 Van Ceulen 1596 35 3.1415926535897932384626433832795029
20 Newton 1665 16 3.1415926535897932

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

[Hermit] And:
<quote>
The Sulbasutras are appendices to the Vedas which give rules for
constructing altars...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?
The Sulbasutras were written by a scribe, although he was not the type of
scribe who merely makes a copy of an existing document but one who put in
considerable content and all the mathematical results may have been due to
these scribes. We know nothing of the men who wrote the Sulbasutras other
than their names and a rough indication of the period in which they lived.
Like many ancient mathematicians our only knowledge of them is their
writings. The most important of these documents are the Baudhayana
Sulbasutra written about 800 BC and the Apastamba Sulbasutra written about
600 BC. Historians of mathematics have also studied and written about other
Sulbasutras of lesser importance such as the Manava Sulbasutra written about
750 BC and the Katyayana Sulbasutra written about 200 BC.
</quote>
Source
http://www-groups.dcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Indian_sulbasutras.html

[Hermit] Please note that the grammar for the written language upon which
your sainted fucking guru based his claims was not written until after
500BCE (Refer
http://www-groups.dcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~history/Chronology/30000BC_500BC.html#600BC)
and the Sulbasutras date from Baudhayana (around 800BCE) onwards. So the
claims to great antiquity are ridiculous in the extreme.

<snip spurious references seemingly inserted by Yash to bulk out his reply -
certainly no argument is developed around them>

[Yash] Here's an extract that shows you just where Pythagoras got his
inspiration (the kind of thing that would make you puke but not me).

[Hermit] Where the "inspiration" came from, even had the supposed author
been imaginary (he wasn't), whether there was previous work done (there was
- infra) or not - all this is irrelevant. Is it significant? Is it
supported? Is it repeatable? Is it falsifiable? Is it persuasive? That is
what matters.

[Hermit] Descarte, founder of the scientific method was inspired by a dream.
Betrand Russel was inspired by a vision. It doesn't matter. We look at the
work, not the "story." The work attributed to Pythagoras is significant -
even if he did not exist.

[Yash] Pythagoras Theorem or Baudhayana Theorem The so called Pythagoras
Theorem - the square of the hypotenuse of a right angled triangle is equal
to the sum of the square of the other sides which was worked out earlier by
the Indian mathematician Baudhayana, in Baudhayana Shulba Sutra, a treatise
dating back to the 6th century BCE.

[Hermit] /me notes that Baudhayana may have been earlier - around 800 BCE,
but that this is irrelevant, the Babylonians understood Pythagoras's Theorem
by 1850BCE refer
http://www-groups.dcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Babylonian_Pythagoras.html
and this knowledge would undoubtedly have migrated to India - just like the
decimal system, fractions and "circle formula" <although as mentioned
before, it seems that the Harrapans did not comprehend the nature of PI but
merely worked from known "recipes">.

[Yash] Astronomy - Measurement of Time

[Hermit] Aaaargh!

[Yash] In Surya Siddhanta Bhaskaracharya calculates the time taken for the
Earth to orbit the sun to 9 decimal places (365.258756484 days). The modern
accepted measurement is 365.2596 days. The difference between the ancient
measurement (1500 years ago) and the moderen measurement is only 0.00085
days (0.0002%).

[Hermit] Please show the source of this claim. I find it highly dubious.
Indian astronomers give the honor to Aryabhatta in about 500CE when he
approximated the Sidereal Year to 365.358. The Tropical Year (between two
successive solstices or equinoxes of the same type - which is the basis of
IAU time) [31,556,925.97474 s or 365.24219 days]. The Jyotish (Vedic
astrologers NB not astronomers) worked on the Sidereal Year (relative to the
stars which is about 20 minutes shorter (9.12ms per day). They also used the
Nakshatras (or Vimshottari Dasa system) equivalent to the Eclipse Year (time
from node to node passage of the Moon) which also fails to match Tropical
time. [346.620073]. So how do you obtain this result? [Refer also
http://www.hssworld.org/all/yugaadi/yugabda4.htm]. Like your assertions
about PI this seems spurious. However, I have another problem with your
claim, and that is the supposed precision. We don't, can't calculate it to
more places than this simply because the year on year variances are greater.
So it seems to me that the above is a fabrication, invented to make the
propagator of it appear more significant. Apropos of something, we recognize
Hipparchos as having been the first to determine these differences.

[Hermit] Sniffs the air and wonders what the warm, rich, agricultural scent
might be...

[Yash] India has given the world the idea of the smallest and the largest
meaure of time - from 34,000th of a second (Krati) to 4.32 billion years
(kalpa).

[Hermit] ROFLMAO. We use the SI system. The scalars go from yocto (10E-24)
to yotta (10E+24). Have you any idea how ridiculous your statement really
is? And by the way, what do you call 1/34,0001 and 4.33 E9 years?

[Hermit] Very equarian.

[Yash] Astronomy

[Hermit] Oh sheesh...

[Yash] Indian astronomers have been mapping the skies for more than 3500
years.

[Hermit] Man has been doing so since he first worked out that the years were
regular and began holding fertility rites. The earliest we know of is in
around 30,000 BCE. What is with you, wanting to make India first with
everything? Are you of Indian descent or just besotted with their culture?
It is largely irrelevant - we are all people. And history and science are
not based in assertion, but consensus based on evidence. Something that is
not usually found hidden in horseshit. Of which it seems you have an endless
supply.

[Yash] 100 Years Before Copernicus

[Hermit] Perhaps you meant 1,000?

[Yash] Copernicus published his thoery of the revolution of the Earth in
1543 CW. 1000 years earlier, Aryabhatta in the 5th century CE, stated that
the Earth revolves around the sun using the following specific words. "Just
as a person travelling in a boat feels that the trees on the bank are
moving, people on the Earth feel that the Sun is moving" In his treatise
Aryabhateeam he clearly states that our Earth is round, rotates on its axis,
orbits the Sun and is suspended in Space. He also explained that lunar and
solar eclipses occur through the interplay of the shadows of the Sun, the
Moon and the Earth.

[Hermit] Have you ever heard of the Alexandrian astronomer Eratosthenes? Do
you know that he measured the Earth diameter more than 15 centuries before
Copernicus and Galileo were even born? Eratosthenes was born in Cyrene in
276 BCE, and, upon the death of Callimachus, was offered the post of "Chief
Librarian of the Mouseion", a most highly respected position. His
measurement of the Earth diameter was the most exciting of his achievements,
although not the only one. He believed the Earth is round, and knew that
shadows cast by the sun in Alexandria and Aswan (Syene) were unequal. He
took measurements inside a deep well in Syene and along an obelisk in
Alexandria a year apart, on the same day of the year. Knowing the distance
between both cities, and using simple calculations, he estimated the Earth
diameter at 7,850 miles. Today, we know that Eratosthenes' estimate was only
about 0.5% off. Aristarchus of Samos, Eratosthenes' co-worker in Alexandria,
suggested the heliocentric hypothesis, which states that the Earth and the
planets revolve around the Sun. Unfortunately the Christians burnt their
works as they contradicted the babble.

[Hermit] It seems there is a dreadful lot you don't know. And more that you
don't know that you don't know.

[Yash] 1200 Years Before Newton

[Hermit] Here we go again...

[Yash] The law of gravity was known to the ancient Indian astronomer
Bhaskaracharya. In his Surya Siddhanta he notes "Objects fall on the earth
due to a force of attraction by the Earth. Therefore the Earth, Planets,
Constellations, Moon and the Sun are held in orbit by attraction. In was not
until the late 17th century (1687), 1200 years later that Sir Isaac Newton
rediscovered the law of gravity."

[Hermit] I have also seen this ascribed to Aryabhatt by people with a
mission too. I have seen no <em>proof</em> for either assertion. So, knowing
that an assertion can be challenged, and that you have to have proof of
such, I would appreciate your providing it. Thank-you.

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:39 MDT