The Babylonians used Pythagorean ideas long before Pythagoras

Post by spoonjim » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 8:32 PM UTC

tim333 wrote: post #48

etothepii wrote: post #22

I don't know if it's true but we were always taught in the History of Maths course at Cambridge[1] that Pythagoras did not exist, or at least there was no evidence of a specific person called Pythagoras. Further if you followed the footnotes in most any research on the subject (especially claims that the Egyptians or Babylonians knew the theorem) you almost always end up at a loose end. [1] https://www.ice.cam.ac.uk/…

For what it's worth Wikipedia has him as a real person living 570 – c. 495 BC, son of Mnesarchus, a gem-engraver on the island of Samos, who travelled to Croton about 530 BC and set up some kind of school there.

Post by thaumasiotes » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 8:54 PM UTC

ttyprintk wrote: post #9

codekilla wrote: post #6

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…

Post by thaumasiotes » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 8:58 PM UTC

ttyprintk wrote: post #10

sn41 wrote: post #8

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.

Post by thaumasiotes » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 9:00 PM UTC

ttyprintk wrote: post #28

Galanwe wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I remember from my epistemology courses, it's due to historiographical reasons: there are a lot of cross reference of the existence of Pythagoras from other texts, so his historical context and existence is well anchored. As for Euclid, apart from the Elements, there is pretty much no mention of him anywhere, which is even more troubling since the depth and reach of the Elements is massive and should have h…

This is close to what I was taught. I don’t know ancient Greek, so I wonder if that language draws a distinction between singular and plural in the way “the author” of Elements is structured. Fwiw, I do recall that Pythagoras seems to have forbidden written records, so what survives are his followers’ notes, who apparently gave him singular credit where we might expect a collaboration.

Post by estaseuropano » Sun, Aug 08, 2021, 9:38 PM UTC

throw13579 wrote: post #45

ummonk wrote: post #29

So Pythagoras likely didn't even formulate the theorem - he was more into numerology and only cared about sum of squares triplets, not the results about right triangles. On the other hand, we have strong evidence that the Babylonians understood and applied the "Pythagorean" theorem long before Pythagoras lived. Additionally, the first recorded explicit statement of the theorem is actually by the Indian writer Baudhay…

Colonized Indians need to take control of their history like the Chinese did. Otherwise the appropriators will continue to have a field day.