11–20 of 82 posts
No one will really bet big on it until Disney takes them over.
Next up: the shocking discovery of a Vedic interpretation of quantum chromodynamics ;) https://www.sanskritimagazine.com/vedic_science/quantum-mech...
However, some people exaggerate in the other direction, I'm not sure if this is just a Hindu thing or a more global phenomenon, but there is a limit of what you can explain using Vedas, at least as far as science is concerned. (Metaphysics is something different, but this a completely different discussion.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The earliest known proof of Pythagorean theorem is due to Euclid. It is strange at all that any credit is attributed to Pythagoras, since Babylonians, Egyptians, Indians and Chinese all had discovered this [1]. And Pythagoras did not prove his theorem, to the best of our knowledge. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem#History
Also weird that (more generally) Euclid is only rarely mentioned by name, and more often nearly anonymously as the author of Elements. Yet, Pythagoras is named early and often.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The earliest known proof of Pythagorean theorem is due to Euclid. It is strange at all that any credit is attributed to Pythagoras, since Babylonians, Egyptians, Indians and Chinese all had discovered this [1]. And Pythagoras did not prove his theorem, to the best of our knowledge. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem#History
Also weird that (more generally) Euclid is only rarely mentioned by name, and more often nearly anonymously as the author of Elements. Yet, Pythagoras is named early and often.
This is what I remember from courses 15 years ago, I may be wrong or outdated on the subject ;)
Next up: the shocking discovery of a Vedic interpretation of quantum chromodynamics ;) https://www.sanskritimagazine.com/vedic_science/quantum-mech...
I believe sites like these do a disservice to the ancient knowledge of Hindu people. There were many important discoveries, some unknown to the West for centuries, and still not having enough exposure (when you read math books, they start with Greeks, then maybe they gloss a bit over al-Khwarizmi and then jump right into the 17th century to all big names, as if nothing was happening for over a thousand years - well,…
There are so many actual great things and findings written in those texts, but it seems like people are either in the ship of "Everything is in Vedas" or "All this isn't worth researching". The lack of interest in researching these ancient texts caused by these 2 extreme sides is disheartening.
Yes, but the point is the approach to proof (proving this for all cases) that represented a paradigm shift in mathematics, largely attributed to Thales.
I think this is the most important point modern readers need to make. If we discover a proof earlier than Thales, regardless of whether it’s Greek, we might revise the discovery of trig. But this is about certain triples being used practically in Babylon (who recorded everything) without any recorded interest in the relationship between triples. Because Greeks first recorded the important part —- the proof —- I think…
The ideas are conceptualization, generalization, and rigor.
The Pythagorean triples are a conceptualization that for certain right triangles, the squares of the three sides obey a relationship.
The Pythagorean theorem is both 1. a generalization that that would be the case for all right triangles and 2. rigorously proved it. Furthermore, at least for the proof in The Elements, it was axiomatic rigor, proving this via a chain of logic starting from base concepts.
Now to the cultural pride aspect. Many cultures came up with concepts in mathematics. Many cultures generalized. Many cultures were rigorous.
The argument is/should really be that the Pythagorean theorem is on the far end of the rigorous, generalization axis. The better argument actually is that The Elements is.
My personal take is that the Pythagorean theorem isn't, at least in the long span of mathematics history, an exemplar of conceptualization.
And yes, there is some overlap and ambiguity with these ideas and you can argue about where the boundaries lie but I don't think we gain that much from that.
If people don't think that other cultures conceptualized, generalized, and were rigorous, just look at The Art of War, Bhagavad Gita, etc...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe sites like these do a disservice to the ancient knowledge of Hindu people. There were many important discoveries, some unknown to the West for centuries, and still not having enough exposure (when you read math books, they start with Greeks, then maybe they gloss a bit over al-Khwarizmi and then jump right into the 17th century to all big names, as if nothing was happening for over a thousand years - well,…
I agree. As an Indian it is just sad that there are people that do this. The effect of such articles is actually the loss of faith in the real findings of those ancient people caused by exaggerated claims presented in these articles. There are so many actual great things and findings written in those texts, but it seems like people are either in the ship of "Everything is in Vedas" or "All this isn't worth researchin…
https://trueindologytwitter.wordpress.com/2020/03/31/indian-...