From: L' Ermit (lhermit@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Jan 17 2002 - 17:08:57 MST
[Yash] And you still can't show me where that claim of Pi chronology is
[Hermit] When do you think the Sutras were written? If you don't know, then 
you perhaps shouldn't have been writing about it. Think about this:
["virus: Rehoe the Yashamite call anybody who can read and understand 
French.", Hermit, Thu Jan 17, 2002 02:40 am]
<quote>
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"
</quote>
[Yash squealed] Maybe Casey has matured his thinking processes enough that 
he can also separate the ideas from the person, something not only you can't 
do, but in a fit of even more gigantic moronic thought-processes, you 
dismiss a work just because some third parties have decided to use the 
information in that source to further their own agenda.
and
[Yash] After bashing Indians, you are latching onto Parisians and New 
Yorkers. You are one sad fellow, aren't you?
===
[Hermit] Where in the following do you see what you claim above. Just give 
the numbers and your reason or as repeatedly stated (see last paragraph) 
that you are misrepresenting - continually - the argument.
[Hermit] Repost [extract from "virus: 20 points, some advice and a challenge 
or two to Yash. PS Ping for Casey/Walter", Hermit, Fri 2002-01-11 10:10]
<quote>
[Hermit] My justification is as follows:
1 "Vedic Maths" made exaggerated (to be kind) claims of accuracy and
significance for early Indian mathematics - claims not supported by any
non-religious affiliated source;
2 "Vedic Maths" asserted that a cited work contained PI, this is not
evident;
3 "Vedic Maths" asserted that PI was encoded in the cited text, using a
"hidden writing" method, there was no claim to this within the work in
question;
4 "Vedic Maths" asserted that a multi-variable "key" was used; there was no 
evidence that this "key" was appropriate and that it was not selected 
specifically to unearth PI. There was no evidence showing the vast number of 
results which could be shown to appear to contain PI given this methodology 
and alleged key;
5 "Vedic Maths" asserted that the key applied only to the portion of the 
cited work where PI was supposedly encoded, but did not support this 
assertion, or explain why the key did not unearth other "significant" 
information;
6 "Vedic Maths" failed to explain why the source works in question contain 
multiple values for the ratio we know as PI, demonstrating that the 
essential nature of PI was unknown to the authors of those works;
7 "Vedic Maths" implied that the accuracy of the alleged hidden value of PI 
proved the significant value of the culture and religion from which it 
supposedly originated, not noting that the work had been rewritten over a 
number of centuries by people who had greater understanding of mathematics 
than the source and who undoubtedly modified the source works over that 
period;
8 "Vedic Maths" failed to acknowledge that the written language was invented 
centuries after the work supposedly embedding PI was first created;
9 "Vedic Maths" asserted knowledge that there was no possible way to explain 
without a vast body of prior art. No evidence is found for such prior art 
except to the assertions of "Vedic Maths";
10 "Vedic Maths" makes no attempt to explain why these techniques were then 
"lost" until the author of "Vedic Maths" then "rediscovered" them;
11 "Vedic Maths" interpolated a number of arithmetic techniques which,
though valid, are trivial and were well known to other cultures which unlike 
the Harrapans and their immediate successors had Mathematical cultures (e.g. 
Sumerian, Babylonian, not so much the Egyptians who like the Harrapans and 
their successors were primarily interested in practical and religious 
results);
12 "Vedic Maths" asserted, that these arithmetic techniques were present, 
not because they were stated, but because they could be argued to match "key 
phrases" in the text. Granted that these techniques are (and were) trivial 
and the majority known to other cultures including that of the author of 
"Vedic Maths," the assertion that they were implied by the Sutras is tenuous 
at best. Many other techniques, some which would work, some which would not 
could also be implied by the same "key phrases." The author makes no attempt 
to show why these "key phrases" were chosen, why others were not, or why 
they <em>had</em> to imply the alleged techniques.;
13 "Vedic Maths" does not attempt to explain why, contrary to other
evidence, the people who allegedly calculated a value for PI were content to 
accept measurements sufficient for construction purposes for all their other 
work;
14 And most damning of all, "Vedic Mathematics" claimed a spurious antiquity 
for its source works not supported by anything but assertion, presumably on 
the common but never the less invalid assumption that age would prove 
something to the authors readership (and it very probably did).
[Hermit] I also observed that:
15 the author was unqualified in the field;
16 occupied a less than universally respected position as priest (cf liar);
17 kept the company of charlatans and irrationals;
18 still attracts the support of irrational people today;
19 and quoted unrecognized sources (which, if you were familiar with the
field, you would realize is significant).
[Hermit] None of the above inspires me with confidence in his (or your)
assertions.
[Hermit] Particularly as:
20 Not even Hindu mathematicians (and contrary to your assertions of bias, 
many Hindu Mathematicians and historians are recognized as being very 
significant) recognize his claims.
[Hermit] You failed and still are failing to address a single one of the 
above issues. I challenge you to respond to them numerically. If you do not 
do so, the attacks which you have brought upon yourself will be shown to 
have been justified and your claim not to be looking for a fight shown to be 
a lie.
</quote>
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:40 MDT