From: L' Ermit (lhermit@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Jan 18 2002 - 12:38:55 MST
[Hermit] I decided for the benefit of those who did not follow the thread
earlier today with Mermaid, and for Yash who is probably unable to piece the
pieces together for himself - and who might claim never to have read "the 20
points" - and whom I expect to wriggle and squeal, to perform a quick
summary.
[Hermit] As, having concluded that it was worthless and so had not bothered
to complete the book at the time I presented the 20 questions, and as Yash
claimed that this invalidated my analysis, I am gratified to discover that I
am prescentient (Not really, I just looked at it as a scientist - and made a
judgment on the basis of "sufficient evidence". Something it seems that Yash
will never comprehend.)
[Hermit] It is perhaps worth noting that the following was written by a
"Senior Professor at the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai" who
writes regularly for "hinduonnet." As Yash (and Mermaid) made the claim that
I was biased against Indians, and "ranted" against religion, this particular
letter is fortuitious, as I think that he will have difficulty supporting an
argument that S.G. Dani has the same problem.
[Hermit] Please also note that my argument was and is against fraudulent
claims for scientific value in "Vedic Mathematics," against spurious claims
of mathematical significance for trivial arithmetic tricks, and against
specious claims of antiquity for the work in question. I would suggest that
the following article vindicates my position on each and every issue, and
indeed, ascribes the same reasons as I did for this.
Unscientific maths?
By S.G. Dani
Important words, like other important things, are often vulnerable to misuse
by elements inclined to derive undeserved benefits from their glory.
[Hermit] 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;
[Hermit] 17 kept the company of charlatans and irrationals;
[Hermit] 18 still attracts the support of irrational people today;
Practitioners of many a trade have found it advantageous to use the
adjective `scientific', even when their basic tenets and methods are quite
inconsistent with the scientific method. `Vedic' is one such word, the use
of which promises dividends, especially in the context of the peculiar
weakness of the popular mind in India. Also, the users seldom seem to be
called upon to justify themselves on account of the pious way such claims
tend to be approached.
[Hermit] 16 occupied a less than universally respected position as priest
(cf liar);
[Hermit] 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;
The so called `Vedic Mathematics' (VM for short) is a case in point. It is
well-acknowledged that, as being practised, it is based on a book of Swami
Sri Bharati Krishna Tirthaji, who was the Shankaracharya at Puri from 1925
until his passing away in 1960.
[Hermit] 15 the author was unqualified in the field;
As commonly understood and implicitly assumed, the adjective `Vedic' means
being from the `Vedas' or the civilisation around their time. While there
are variations on the estimates of the period involved, by any reckoning
they are at least 2500 years old. In what sense do the contents of the book
belong there? Neither has Tirthaji nor have the proteges provided any
evidence or clue in this respect that a rational mind can appreciate.
[Hermit 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;
The book has a preface grandiosely titled `A Descriptive Prefatory Note on
the Astounding Wonders of Ancient Indian Mathematics'. All one finds there
is a lot of raving and ranting, followed by a vague statement to the effect
that `exceedingly tough mathematical problems' can be easily solved with the
help of some `sutras' in the Parishishta (Appendix) of the Atharvaveda.
There is no substantiation or elaboration concerning their being genuinely
from the Vedas.
[Hermit] 19 and quoted unrecognized sources (which, if you were familiar
with the field, you would realize is significant).
It cannot be that it did not occur to Tirthaji to include such details in
the preface or elsewhere in the book.
He was, in fact, confronted by Professor K.S. Shukla, a doyen in the studies
on ancient Indian mathematics, to show the sutras, to which Tirthaji is said
to have replied that they are not in any standard Parishishta, but only in
his `own Parishishta to the Atharvaveda'!
[Hermit] 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";
[Hermit] 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.
The book also contains a short biographical sketch and an account of the
genesis of the work written by Ms. Manjula Trivedi, a disciple of Tirthaji.
She mentions that the `Revered Guruji used to say that he reconstructed the
16 mathematical formulae from the Atharvaveda after assiduous Tapas for
about eight years in the forests surrounding Sringeri'. They were not found
in any version of the Vedas. They were `reconstructed'.
[Hermit] 2 "Vedic Maths" asserted that a cited work contained PI, this is
not evident;
[Hermit] 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;
[Hermit] 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;
[Hermit] 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;
[Hermit] 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;
[Hermit] 10 "Vedic Maths" makes no attempt to explain why these techniques
were then "lost" until the author of "Vedic Maths" then "rediscovered" them;
Contrary to what is made out, `Vedic Mathematics' is no `system' of solving
problems in mathematics or even just arithmetic. It is only an assortment of
tricks, based on simple algebraic principles. It is thoroughly lacking in
coherence or harmony.
[Hermit] 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.;
As one goes along the text of the book, one is introduced to various tricks
to solve certain special problems, and while doing so Tirthaji gives names
to some of the operations. `Ekadhikena Purvena', which means `by one more
than the previous one', is an operation which involves something or the
other to be done with something or the other that happens to be `previous'
in one or the other sense. Lo and behold: you have a sutra for the problem.
Mind you, the string of words does not by itself enable you to solve the
problem and in most instances even the operation it connotes needs to be
supplemented by several others. These one has to learn. It only enables you
remember something of the operation.
In the style of how matters proceed in the book, `hold the bucket' can be
said to be a sutra for milking a cow! From a mathematical point of view, the
sutras of VM are of little value. To some extent, they serve as memory aids
to the practitioners.
[Hermit] 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);
Other than that, their sole role has been as props to the false pretense of
antiquity.
[Hermit] 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).
The main positive contribution of Tirthaji's book lies in highlighting some
tricks with which certain specific calculations can be done faster. In this
sense, it is comparable to Trachtenberg's methods of `high speed'
computation.
The main drawback of such methods is that they are very problem- specific
and depend heavily on identifying special features which may be exploited to
attack the problems.
Secondly, speed in computing mentally, which is the sole feature to which
they contribute to some extent, has become largely redundant in the computer
age.
[Hermit] ["virus: The lying fuckwit has too much time and too little
intelligence...", Hermit, Fri 2002-01-18 01:57 (and prior)] They are simple
arithmetic techniques, not particularly significant
mathematics at any time, and which while possibly useful in an age before
calculators or even the abacus or slide rule, they are irrelevant today.
They are clumsy in the sense that many different techniques have to be
learnt, as opposed to the simple techniques used by anyone who still knows
how to perform mental arithmetic. As for mnemonics, they were used by all
the early cultures, but are recognized not only as being much less useful
than positional arithmetic, but the world (including India) had to wait for
positional arithmetic to come into general usage before any particularly
useful mathematical techniques - other than geometry and basic arithmetic -
were developed.
[Hermit] /me also suggests that Yash read the posts on Madame Blavata made
by the Mermaid and responded to by me earlier today.
[Hermit] The only question left is what Yash intends to do next?
_________________________________________________________________
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