From: L' Ermit (lhermit@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Jan 17 2002 - 02:40:55 MST
Blunderov pondered (after some very nice parody):
I wonder whether Dodgson doesn't deserve a place in the pantheon of the CoV.
l'hermite répond:
Mon ami brillant, je suis aussi certain de lui car je suis sûr que Yas n'est
ni un mathématicien, ni un historien*.
*My brilliant friend, I am as sure of this as I am sure that Yash is not a
mathematician or even an historian.
====
<snip>
[Yash squeaked] I responded at great length in my last post. Care to say
anything about what Georges Ifrah, a recognized historian of mathematics had
to say about the dating of the katapayadi system built by Haridatta, for
example? Maybe you can't understand French, then I'll wait for you to read
the same passages in English if you are really interested in researching the
subject as you obviously are. Then maybe you'd care to take back what you
just said or else you would have to prove that Ifrah's a fraud and that he
is a religious source as you seem to imply even after I have shown you the
evidence from a respected, world-reknowned source.
[Hermit] See below fuckwit.
[Yash squeaked] You only thing you can say is: <bullshit, blah blah blah...,
Fuckwit>
[Yash squeaked] Well, same to you.
[Hermit] The difference is that I can (and did) justify why I said it...
[Yash squeaked] There have been no claims to great antiquity to the Pi
encoding. You are the one raising that claim in the first place. It's a
simple thing: just show us where the dates are claimed or where anybody
claims that the encoding of Pi is very old. It's all things you either
assumed or third parties may have claimed to further their own agendas and
you heard or saw that. Then show us where you found them and which parties
did that. Then go fight them if you so wish...
[Hermit] See below fuckwit.
[Yash squeaked] In any case as I've said already, all this shouldn't detract
from building a new scheme in English or in a new language (I think I'll
rather stay with English than build a whole new language which nobody
speaks).
<snap>
[Hermit responds]
I don't need to comment on Ifrah, as neither he nor the many quotations
which you provided from him, which while interesting, speak to the alleged
decoding of PI from the Sutras, nor indeed to any material predating 850CE.
As there is no question that the Sutras predate this by over 1,000 years
your repeated lies are clearly shown up for what they are - and seeing that
not even you are working through the responses, I really don't feel any need
to swamp the list re-re-re-refuting your claims.
["RE: virus: Weird claims about PI - the sloka, Mermaid, Sun 2001-12-30
23:38]
"There have been different forms of the Sanskrit code but Sri Bharati Krsna
Tirthaji, who reconstructed the ancient system of Vedic Mathematics, used a
particular form which he describes in his book. It seems this was
instrumental in deciphering the Sanskrit texts which were headed Ganita
Sutras (Mathematics) but which the western scholars of the late nineteenth
century were unable to understand."
[Hermit adds a biographical note for Sri Bharati Krsna Tirthaji just to keep
him in perspective - please note "a bit like" a Hindu "pope" - and Yash
thinks that he did not have a religious agenda. Yeah, right. Also note that
neither Yash, nor the Maharishi section below mention this - presumably
because it would detract from their intent to portray this "work" as
"scientific".]
Source:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:Sl6pNFB-9fsC:members.aol.com/inspbooks/got-intro.htm+Ganita+Sutras&hl=en
Tirthaji was born in 1884. His key work on Vedic mathematics appears to have
been done between the years 1911 and 1918. In 1921 he was made
Shankaracharya of Puri (Hindu India being led by four Shankaracharyas, a bit
like having four popes). Shortly before this he became a renunciate, i.e. he
renounced his former life. This, and his considerable religious duties as
Shankaracharya, are no doubt the reasons why he did not turn his attention
to vedic mathematics again until the 1950s, only to realise that the sixteen
volumes were lost. He decided to rewrite them all, and as a preliminary step
wrote another book, Vedic Mathematics, to introduce the whole series. Owing
to ill - health he got no further, and died in 1960, His introductory book,
the only one by him surviving on the subject, was published in 1965.
[Here is another source - Maharishi related:]
Source:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:XlMle2r1jGQC:www.vedicmaths.org/group_files/newsletter/1999/newsletter%2520issue%25201.htm+Ganita+Sutras&hl=en
[Seems like their Vedic Cosmic Computer has crashed, but it is still
available from Google]
The ancient system of Vedic Mathematics was rediscovered from the Vedas
between 1911 and 1918 by Sri Bharati Krsna Tirthaji (1884-1960). The word
'Veda' means 'knowledge' and also refers to a set of ancient Indian texts
written in Sanskrit. These texts were written down about 1700 or 1600 BC
according to western scholars but the content of the Vedas was passed on by
an oral tradition long before writing was invented. The Vedas are said to
cover every aspect and area of knowledge: grammar, architecture, ethics,
astronomy etc. are all covered. During the nineteenth century there was a
great interest in the Sanskrit texts in Europe. Bharati Krsna tells us some
scholars ridiculed certain texts which were headed 'Ganita Sutras'- which
means mathematics. They could find no mathematics in the translation and
dismissed the texts as rubbish. Bharati Krsna, who was himself a scholar of
Sanskrit, Mathematics, History and Philosophy, studied these texts and after
lengthy and careful investigation was able to reconstruct the mathematics of
the Vedas. According to his research all of mathematics is based on sixteen
Sutras, or word-formulae. For example, 'Vertically and Crosswise` is one of
these Sutras.
Bharati Krsna wrote sixteen volumes expounding the Vedic system but these
were unaccountably lost and when the loss was confirmed in his final years
he wrote a single book: Vedic Mathematics, currently available. It was
published in 1965, five years after his death. A copy of the book was
brought to London a few years later and some English mathematicians (Kenneth
Williams, Andrew Nicholas, Jeremy Pickles) took an interest in it. They
extended the introductory material given in Bharati Krsna's book and gave
many courses and talks in London. A book (now out of print), 'Introductory
Lectures on Vedic Mathematics', was published in 1981. Between 1981 and 1987
Andrew Nicholas made four trips to India initially to find out what further
was known about it. Following these journeys a renewed interest was taken by
scholars and teachers in India. It seems that once they saw that some people
in the West took Vedic Mathematics seriously they realised they had
something special. St James' School, then in Queensgate, London and other
schools began to teach the Vedic system, with notable success. Today Vedic
Mathematics is taught widely in schools in India and a great deal of
research is being done. The first Vedic Mathematics Conference was in India
in 1985.
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi began to explain the significance and marvelous
qualities of Vedic Mathematics in 1988. He sent Dr Narinda Puri of Roorkee
University on a world tour to promote Vedic Mathematics (mathematics with
smiles). Maharishi schools around the world began to teach it. At the school
in Skelmersdale, Lancashire, England a full course was written and trialled
for 11 to 14 year old pupils, called The Cosmic Computer. This has proved
very successful and is also to be published in the USA.
Interest in the Vedic system is growing in education where mathematics
teachers are looking for something better and finding the Vedic system is
the answer. Research is being carried out in many areas including the
effects of learning Vedic Maths on children; developing new, powerful
applications of the Vedic Sutras in geometry, calculus, computing etc.
[This response is still applicable and satisfactorily covers everything else
claimed - excepting that the time has now reached a point where - unless new
material or <em>substantiated</em> information is brought forward, I will be
ignoring your writing.]
["virus: Cold (and lumpy) custard. Ping Roly Sookias...", Hermit, Sat
2002-01-05 12:11]
[Hermit] Asserting that "their" works, reduced to writing a long time later,
contained PI to 32 significant digits, is to assert that they did something
hugely significant in mathematics. I rejected that assertion, gave reasons
and supported them. In return I received a barrage of mystical
pronouncements and accusations that the fact that this is rejected is due to
some prejudice or lack of indoctrination. In reality the rejection is due to
a lack of supporting evidence for the suggestion, and the rejection of the
idea that a bronze age civilization eking out a precarious existence leapt
ahead of everyone else without developing the supporting body of work that
everyone else making such contributions appears to have required, and that
having made this vast step, that it was utterly lost without a trace.
[Hermit] My rejection of this stew of mysticism and defense of rational
criticism, including the investment of far more time than it deserves, has
lead to a great deal more expression of belligerent opinion, appeal to
emotion, venting and name calling, but I still don't see any rigorous
support being offered for the ideas which have been expressed - and don't
think that it will be. Bear in mind that I do not have to "prove the
negative" - these are not my assertions. If the people advocating what
appear to be harebrained submissions (including yourself) knew how to argue,
they would have the wit to realize that the onus is upon them to prove what
they claim. But because they are to lazy or incapable of doing this, yet
appear to imagine that they are persuasive, it seemed worthwhile to me to
take the effort to demonstrate why this is not the case. You are welcome to
<em>prove</em> me wrong. As a hint, calling me names - as you attempt here -
is unlikely to be your most effective persuasive tactic.
==========
French - English courtesy L'hermite (Yash pète plus haut de son cul)
Hermit suspects that the reason that Yash (whose English is surely superior
to Hermit's seldom exercised French) did not translate the following is
because he was aware of how little it speaks to, and in fact clearly
contradicts* Yash's assertions. Hermit is sure that Yash will correct any
mistranslations and provide the appropriate translation for the places where
I skipped a word (I can't find my French-English dictionary).
*refer "Aryabhata, whose inventive, concise, meticulous and very systematic
nature, was without any doubt the inventor of the first numeral alphabet in
the history of India." Aryabhata lived in the CE period, long after the
T1:p914
<<Numeric Symbols used by Indian Astronomers [Hermit: Where ever you see
"astronomer/astronomical/astronomy" here and below, punctilious accuracy
should demand its replacement with "astrologer/astrological/astrology"]
Indian astronomical and mathematical texts written in Sanskrit frequently
express numbers in a fashion which undoubtedly is Indian in origin.
Scientific historians have not attached sufficient importance to this. This,
together with the preceding arguments, is the anchor which definitively
proves that our current mathematical notation is exclusively of Indian
origin, [Hermit notes that we now know that the decimal system had been
invented and used in Egypt by 2,600 BCE] and also allows us to date this
invention to having originated before 800 CE. This system is even more
fascinating when we consider that is unique in the annals of numeration.>>
<<... Quoting Al Biruni, a Persian Astronomer, "When they [the Indian
gurus] need to express a number made up of many digits in their astronomical
tables, they express it in the form of a phrase, using words selected to
allow them to encode the number. Rather than a single word, they allow
various words to be used for each numeral, allowing them to select
appropriate words from each "group" [words signifying the same values].
Brahmagupta says, "If you want to write one, express it by means of an
unspecified thing which is single, like the Earth or the Moon; in the same
way you will express two by means of all that exists two... the zero by
means of the names of the sky..." [Hermit notes that this again lends itself
to any translation that a smart reader wishes to justify, and that it
differs completely from the "key" alleged to allow the derivation of PI in
"Vedic Mathematics" - lessening rather than strengthening Yash's claims].
"In place of the word 'eka', which is to say 'one', the Indian atronomers
thus used names like 'âdi' ('beginning', 'tanu' ('body') or 'pitâmaha'
('Ancêtre[Hermit ?]', in allusion to Brahma, considered as the creator of
the Universe). In the place of 'dvi', which means 'two', they used words
expressing the idea of things or characters which occur in pairs: 'Ashvin'
('twin gods'), 'Yama' ('primordial couple' [Hermit "Adam & Eve"]), 'netra'
('eyes'), 'bahu' ('arms'), 'paksha' ('wings'), etc...
In short, rather than using the usual Sanskrit numerals expressing the
numbers from 1 to 9 ('eka', 'dvi', 'tri', 'chatur', 'pañcha', 'shat',
'sapta', 'ashta', 'nava'), the gurus of India indicated them using various
words in a symbolic system. For each number, they had an entire panoply of
words, where each word evoked the concept of the appropriate numerical
value..."
pp917-918
"Sanskrit, a rich and erudite language, lent itself to this task, supporting
poetic expression and a singularly Indian mode of thought. The symbols were
drawn from nature, human animal and vegetable morphology, from everyday
activities, from the legends, traditions, religions, and attributes of the
divinities of the Vedic, Brahmanic, Hindu, Jainian and Buddhist Pantheons,
through association with traditional and mythological ideas or linking to
the various social conventions of Indian civilization. We can say that with
this completely unique method of numeration, we enter a universe comprised
of the symbols of Indian civilization.
The Indian positional representation of numbers
To comprehend the principles supporting this process, here is the literal
translation of Sanskrit "threads" [Hermit: "Sutras"] extracted from a treaty
of astronomy entitled Sûryasiddhânta ("Canonical Solar Astronomy"; cf SûrS,
I, 33; Burgess and Whitney):
[Note from me [Hermit: me = Yash]: if this is the same Ebeneezer Burgess as
the book cited by Mermaid, then to Ifrah it doesn't matter if Kessinger
Publishing decides to re-publish the work, it's proper enough for his
scholarly research - another kind of fallacious thinking -> dismissing
source only because some other party decides to publish same information.
Ifrah states the reference: Burgess et Whitney <<Translation of the
Sûrya-Siddhânta, a text-book of Hindu Astronomy >>, in JAOS, vol. 6/1860, p.
141-498].
[Hermit notes that this may well be true, but when a work is published by
OUP, Cambridge UP, Kluwer, Prentiss-Hall, Addison Wesley, or other reputable
publishers, we are assured that scholars have examined the translation and
source works, proofed, corrected, commented and provided their assurance
that the publication is a "fair representation" of the originals. Where
scientific publication is involved, we can be sure that a peer panel has
performed a review. All of these prerequisites are absent from the
"esoteric" publishers - and when they have an axe to grind, as so many do,
academic rigor demands that one question the source material. As I did and
do.]
Chandrochchasyâgnishûnyâshvivasusarpârnavâ yuge
Vâmam pâtasya vasvagniyamâshvishikhidasrakâh
'Of the apsides of the moon dnas un yuga [Hermit ?],
Fire. Vacuum. Riders. Vasu [Hermit ??]. Snake. Ocean,
and as its node retrogresses
Vasu. Fire. Primordial couple. Riders. Fire. Riders'
The uninformed reader will find these threads' elliptical phrasing a
mystery.
<< Feu. Vacuum. Cavalier. Vasu. Serpent. Océan >>
(agnishûnyâshvivasusarpârnavâ) et << Vasu.
Feu. Couple primordial. Cavaliers. Feu. Cavaliers >>
'Fire. Vacuum. Rider. Vasu. Snake. Ocean.'
(agnishûnyâshvivasusarpârnavâ) and 'Vasu. Fire. Primordial couple.
Riders. Fire. Riders' (vasvagniyamâshvishikhidasra)
correspond, using the Indian astronomers' encoding techniques, with the
representations of 488,203 and 232,238.
The translation of the thread is thus: [the number of the revolutions
>>[should have been ']' here, note by me [Hermit: supposes that me is again
Yash]] of the apsides of the Moon in a yuga [is]: 488,203, and [that] as
its node retrogresses: 232,238. >> In this fashion, the author of the work
expressed two numerical data referring to astronomical elements, relative to
a yuga or 'cosmic cycle'."
"Aryabhata, whose inventive, concise, meticulous and very systematic nature,
was without any doubt the inventor of the first numeral alphabet in the
history of India. [Hermit: which should put the ancient PI claim to rest
once and for all]. He conceived this system in order to express the
constants of his canonical astronomical data, and to represent, using a
notation at the same time more elegant and compressed than the numeric
representation, his astonishing astronomical speculations on the yugas."
[Hermit: I would disagree with this analysis. In my opinion
'agnishûnyâshvivasusarpârnavâ' is far less elegant and longer than
'232,238'.]
Quoting Woepcke:
"In ancient India, grammar and interpretation were closely interlinked with
the handling of large numbers. Thus, the studies the gurus attached to
poetry and metric as well as with arithmetic and grammar, made the
grammarians as qualified as regards calculations as the professional
mathematicians."
On the technique as an aid to memorization, transmission and storage:
pp 959-960:
[Hermit] /me doesn't bother translating the rest as it does not deal with
the topic at hand, but simply repeats and discusses the techniques as well
as asserting that it has advantages for memorization and error correction.
[Hermit] /me suspects that if error detection were required, that parity
would be preferable - but in fact detection and correction may be better
obtained at low cost using check digits and, or, parity - and still be
shorter and simpler. e.g. Assume BCD representation of 232-238. Then 00 XOR
23 XOR 22 XOR 38 = 0000 0000 XOR 0010 0011 XOR 0010 0010 XOR 0011 1000 =
0011 1001 = 23223839 Parity (Odd = 1/Even = 0] = 0100 1011 = 4B = 75. This
could still be written as a single number. Perhaps as 232238.39075. This is
still shorter and offers vastly better resilience than the "Indian Coding"
shown above as it will allow detection and correction of most errors].
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:40 MDT