Revision as of 01:33, 16 December 2005 editGrokmoo (talk | contribs)270 edits →Pythagorean Theorem← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:27, 17 December 2005 edit undoPranathi (talk | contribs)1,038 edits →Pythagorean TheoremNext edit → | ||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
::I did not at any point imply that the Indian mathematicians were "silly amatuers" or anything of the like. They certainly had many important contributions to mathematics and science. | ::I did not at any point imply that the Indian mathematicians were "silly amatuers" or anything of the like. They certainly had many important contributions to mathematics and science. | ||
::I have changed the wording to what I hope is an agreeable compromise. As I do not dispute the accuracy of anything written on the ] page, only on this page, I do believe that this is the appropriate place for this discussion. | ::I have changed the wording to what I hope is an agreeable compromise. As I do not dispute the accuracy of anything written on the ] page, only on this page, I do believe that this is the appropriate place for this discussion. - Grokmoo | ||
::: The page says ''Circa 2500 BCE, Megalithic monuments on the British Isles incorporate right triangles with integer sides. B.L. van der Waerden conjectures that these Pythagorean triples were discovered algebraically.'' I am reading that not as strong evidence but as ''conjecture'' by one person. Pythogorean triples were known by many civilizations but not their algebraic nature. To tell you the truth, I am becoming very weary of modern interpretations of mathematical history. If the same monuments were found anywhere other than Europe, there is not much chance anyone would have cared to attribute more knowledge than is directly visible - knowledge of Pythogorean triples. | |||
::: In any case, the current wording is agreeable. --] 16:27, 17 December 2005 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:27, 17 December 2005
This is a nationalist orgy. A good article could be written on this subject; it might even use the list of boasts in the middle section as a framework - but to ascribe the invention of trigonometry to someone who lived two centuries after Claudius Ptolemy is nonsense. Septentrionalis 19:49, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
Many of the claims on this page are patently false. I will do what I can, but this page desperately needs an expert in this field.
Pythagorean Theorem
I don't think there is anyone who thinks the Pythagorus was the first to state the Pythagorean theorem. Indeed it was likely used well before even 800 BC (look at the article). The fact that the Indians were the first to use a "proof with specific numbers" is nonsense. Using specific numbers is not a proof at all, it merely shows one special case. The first real proof we have is due to Euclid. A "proof with specific numbers" does not imply any deeper understanding of geometry, or an understanding of what constitutes a proof. Thus, the pythagorean theorem was used well before Indian mathematicians, and it was first proved by Greek mathematicians. Grokmoo 16:13, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- First of all, calm down. This discussion - what consitutes real proof and what is just silly amatuers dabbling with numbers and have no deep understanding of geometry is not for this page. After reading through the Pythagorean theorem page, I am understanding that Indians were the first to state the theorum and first to give a numerical proof (one that uses specific numbers but in such a way that it can be generalized - not one case as you mentioned). I will change this page to reflect that. If you disagree with wording or timeline please discuss on the Pythagorean theorem page. If I have understood it incorrectly - Indians first to stating theorum and numerical proof - please discuss on this page. --Pranathi 01:14, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
- I'm not so sure that there is any consensus that Indians were the first to state the theorem. There is strong evidence that it was used as far back as 2000 BC, by the monolith builders in ancient Britain and elsewhere. Indeed, there is a specific example of a solution of a problem involving the pythagorean theorem on a Bablyonian tablet which I believe is circa 1200 BC. Furthermore, "numerical proof" is nonsensical. "Proving" the pythagorean with specific numbers, but in such a way that you could also use other specific numbers and prove it for them, as well, is no proof at all.
- I did not at any point imply that the Indian mathematicians were "silly amatuers" or anything of the like. They certainly had many important contributions to mathematics and science.
- I have changed the wording to what I hope is an agreeable compromise. As I do not dispute the accuracy of anything written on the pythagorean theorem page, only on this page, I do believe that this is the appropriate place for this discussion. - Grokmoo
- The page says Circa 2500 BCE, Megalithic monuments on the British Isles incorporate right triangles with integer sides. B.L. van der Waerden conjectures that these Pythagorean triples were discovered algebraically. I am reading that not as strong evidence but as conjecture by one person. Pythogorean triples were known by many civilizations but not their algebraic nature. To tell you the truth, I am becoming very weary of modern interpretations of mathematical history. If the same monuments were found anywhere other than Europe, there is not much chance anyone would have cared to attribute more knowledge than is directly visible - knowledge of Pythogorean triples.
- In any case, the current wording is agreeable. --Pranathi 16:27, 17 December 2005 (UTC)