Who really was first?

[moment]

Who discovered the theory of gravitational force?

1. Bhaskarachārya (1114 - c. 1185)

 

2. Sir Isaac Newton 500 years later.

 

Who was the father of Atomic Theory?

1. John Dalton

 

2. Acharya Kanad over two thousand years earlier

 

Who was the first truly comprehensive economist and political scientist?

1. Chanakya

 

2. Machiavelli two thousand years later

 

 

 

[wandelaar]

These questions cannot be answered without exact descriptions of what you consider to be "the theory of gravitational force", "the atomic theory", and a "truly comprehensive economist and political scientist".  

[moment]

2 hours ago, wandelaar said:

These questions cannot be answered without exact descriptions of what you consider to be "the theory of gravitational force", "the atomic theory", and a "truly comprehensive economist and political scientist".  

 

I understand and largely agree.  But, there is a reason why I am generalizing a little.  Please tell me what you think:  

Bhaskara II or Bhaskarachārya (1114 - c. 1185) was an Indian mathematician and astronomer who extended Brahmagupta's work on number systems. Born in Vijjadit (Jalgaon) in Maharastra, Bhaskaracharya's mathematical works called "Lilavati" and "Bijaganita" are considered to be unparalleled. In his treatise "Siddhant Shiromani" he writes on planetary positions, eclipses, cosmography, mathematical techniques and astronomical equipment.

The credit of discovering Earth’s gravitational force is usually given to Isaac Newton. However,  that gravitational force was already written about by Bhaskaracharya thousands of years ago. In the "Surya Siddhant" he makes a note on the force of gravity: "Objects fall on earth due to a force of attraction by the earth. Therefore, the earth, planets, constellations, moon, and sun are held in orbit due to this attraction." 

Edited November 10, 2018 by moment

[wandelaar]

Did Bhaskaracharya  think that the planets, constellations, moon, and sun are held in orbit due to the attraction of the earth?

[moment]

3 hours ago, wandelaar said:

Did Bhaskaracharya  think that the planets, constellations, moon, and sun are held in orbit due to the attraction of the earth?

 

Bhaskaracharya rightly calculated in his treatise Surya Siddhanta the time taken by the earth to orbit the sun hundreds of years before the astronomer Smart. His calculations were - Time taken by earth to orbit the sun: ( 5th century ) 365.258756484 days.

Today’s accepted measurement is 365.2564 days. Therefore, assuming that today’s figures are correct, it means that Bhaskaracharya was off by only 0.0002%.  So, I am thinking the answer to your question is no.

Edited November 11, 2018 by moment

[thelerner]

Thing is Newton did the math, a whole book of it.  He didn't know what gravity was, I'm not sure we actually know now, but he wrote down the equations that describe and model it.  Equations that hundreds of years later we can incorporate into computer programs, put in weights and speed and Lunar Lander, Asteroids other games and can create models of our solar system and predict paths space crafts, using gravity slings.. etc., 

 

I'm sure Bhaskarachary was a genius who should be better known, but more then the idea of gravity, it was the Newton's formulas that allowed for the advancements that opened up modern physics.  

[Taoist Texts]

5 hours ago, moment said:

Bhaskaracharya rightly calculated in his treatise Surya Siddhanta the time taken by the earth to orbit the sun hundreds of years before

no, after

At the end of his career, Hipparchus wrote a book called Peri eniausíou megéthous ("On the Length of the Year") about his results. The established value for the tropical year, introduced by Callippus in or before 330 bc was 365 + 1/4 days.^[32] 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipparchus#Apparent_motion_of_the_Sun

Hipparchus of Nicaea (/hɪˈpɑːrkəs/; Greek: Ἵππαρχος, Hipparkhos; c. 190 – c. 120 bc) was a Greek astronomer, geographer, and mathematician.

[Taoist Texts]

10 hours ago, moment said:

Who was the father of Atomic Theory?

1. John Dalton

 

2. Acharya Kanad over two thousand years earlier

lol

https://thewire.in/history/kanad-vaisheshik-msu-atom

[wandelaar]

Need not say more than thelerner and Taoist Texts did above.

[moment]

I very much appreciate the feedback above.  It was exactly what I hoped for.  One of the reasons I love good Science fiction is how they come up with ideas that are often proven later and created.  But, it is the genius of those original ideas that give a direction to be followed.

So, Where is the greater genius?  The one that comes up with a novel idea or those who prove that idea later?

Edited November 11, 2018 by moment

[moment]

And now:  

Who was the first truly comprehensive economist and political scientist?

1. Chanakya

 

2. Machiavelli two thousand years later

 

Oh, if only Shakespeare had written a play about Chanakya.  His gift for politics and intrigue my have been unparalleled.

[yuuichi]

This seems like typical Indian nationalistic pseudo-history, where Indians had internet and television 5,000 years ago and everyone else just copied them.

 

Quote

The one that comes up with a novel idea or those who prove that idea later?

 

Newton and other European scientists didn’t know about what a few Indians said thousands of years ago. They both came up with the ideas and proved it.

Edited November 11, 2018 by yuuichi

[wandelaar]

The crucial question is: did Bhaskaracharya have something like Newton's law of universal gravitation:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_law_of_universal_gravitation

 

It's this formula plus Newton's second law of motion that really started things going. 

[Zen Pig]

Interesting discussion.  But in the end, we really have no idea what gravity is.  We really do not know what inertia is.  or for that matter, how a "wave" such as electromagnetic or gravitational can propagate through the vacuum of space,  (in fact the word "wave" brings up a mental picture of a water wave, and we define other forces acting like this is in an almost complete vacuum )   Newtonian science is very good at predicting how two masses will interact, (GMm'/r^2) where G is the gravitational constant, (which is not really constant, but that is discussion might be for another time), M is the largest mass, and m' would be the smaller mass much like the moon is to earth, all divided by r^2 .  This got men on the moon in 69, using slide rulers.  but we still do not know what it IS. Much like consciousness.  We know it when we see it, but could not tell you what it is.  LOL. Little known fact Newton created the calculus and his the physics he was made famous for during some plague years, when he retired to a family farm to stay safe, worked it out on a little hand held kind of chalk board during his stay.  This is an amazing accomplishment, but most folks are unaware that his main love, and what he spent the majority of his life work at was alchemy, and religious studies, but this information was pulled by the powers that be, so he did not seem "unscientific" as defined in our western materialist reductionist world view.  Just a few years ago were his writings on alchemy published by Oxford university (http://www.newtonproject.ox.ac.uk/texts/newtons-works/alchemical), but after a couple of years, while they still have his original writings,  the editor is trying to put a modern chemistry spin on his writings.  have yet to read his religious papers......  humans are so freaking interesting.

[wandelaar]

Bought this many years ago:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Foundations-Newtons-Alchemy-Cambridge-Paperback/dp/0521273811/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8

 

As I now see the book's cover has curled along the edges and bookworms have started eating the front page. I am getting old...

[moment]

2 hours ago, yuuichi said:

This seems like typical Indian nationalistic pseudo-history, where Indians had internet and television 5,000 years ago and everyone else just copied them.

 

 

Newton and other European scientists didn’t know about what a few Indians said thousands of years ago. They both came up with the ideas and proved it.

You, of course, play no favorites.  I suspect that certain aspects of other cultures and ideas were more wide-spread than you think.

For instance-Leonardo Da Vinci was obsessed by the nutritional ideas handed down by Hindu scholars.  He mentioned it several times in his notebooks. Also, what zenpig said above about Newton. BTW, I have no ax to grind.  I just like to explore and exploration is usually more fruitful when bounced off of others.

Edited November 11, 2018 by moment

[wandelaar]

@ moment

 

You systematically refuse to answer our criticism, but nevertheless you write:

 

Quote

BTW, I have no ax to grind.  I just like to explore.

 

If you really liked to explore you would look up what exactly Bhaskarachārya  had to say about the force of gravity and how that compares to Newton's laws. I looked at Wikipedia but didn't find anything that would place Bhaskarachārya on the same level as Newton as far as gravity is concerned. But you may have other sources that prove your case, and I like to know what they are.

[Wu Ming Jen]

I am pretty sure the first things to know gravity were rocks because they could not fly or float. Humans love to theorize about things that just are the way they are. Water sinks and fire rises who was the first person to discover this? Who discovered water?. If we have answers it changes nothing.

 

Conceptualizing things we do not know leads to a lot of trouble like what happens when we die. It all just leads further away from the heart of the matter. Humanity is more important then laying claim to knowledge.

[thelerner]

4 hours ago, moment said:

I very much appreciate the feedback above.  It was exactly what I hoped for.  One of the reasons I love good Science fiction is how they come up with ideas that are often proven later and created.  But, it is the genius of those original ideas that give a direction to be followed.

So, Where is the greater genius?  The one that comes up with a novel idea or those who prove that idea later?

They certainly compliment each other.  Was it Einstein or Newton who said, If i've seen further then others, its because I've stood on the shoulders of giants.  **

 

Geniuses get lost in the cliff notes of history, until there genius become applicable or some how capture the public's imagination as opening up new insights.   

 

** it was Newton Letter To Robert Hooke Feb 1676, If I have seen further it is by standing on ye shoulders of Giants. 

 

Here's another interesting quote of his on wikiquote-

• I have not been able to discover the cause of those properties of gravity from phenomena, and I frame no hypotheses; for whatever is not deduced from the phenomena is to be called a hypothesis, and hypotheses, whether metaphysical or physical, whether of occult qualities or mechanical, have no place in experimental philosophy.
  • Letter to Robert Hooke (15 February 1676) [5 February 1676 (O.S.)]

 

[moment]

6 hours ago, wandelaar said:

@ moment

 

You systematically refuse to answer our criticism, but nevertheless you write: 

 

 

If you really liked to explore you would look up what exactly Bhaskarachārya  had to say about the force of gravity and how that compares to Newton's laws. I looked at Wikipedia but didn't find anything that would place Bhaskarachārya on the same level as Newton as far as gravity is concerned. But you may have other sources that prove your case, and I like to know what they are.

I have no idea what your are talking about. we are just having a discussion here.  If you read everything again, I have taken no sides other than I have mentioned some remarkable things some Indians have done and it was done a long time ago.  I am not saying one is better than the other.  For some reason you seem to take this personally and I have no idea why you care that much.

[Taoist Texts]

6 hours ago, moment said:

For instance-Leonardo Da Vinci was obsessed by the nutritional ideas handed down by Hindu scholars.  He mentioned it several times in his notebooks

Of course he did. The  Hindu scholars say so.

Edited November 11, 2018 by Taoist Texts

[wandelaar]

18 minutes ago, moment said:

I have no idea what your are talking about. we are just having a discussion here.  If you read everything again, I have taken no sides other than I have mentioned some remarkable things some Indians have done and it was done a long time ago.  I am not saying one is better than the other.  For some reason you seem to take this personally and I have no idea why you care that much.

 

In that case I know enough. You are not here to learn something, or to explore who did what, or even to explain to us what you think to be the case. It's no use continuing. Goodbye!

 

Edited November 11, 2018 by wandelaar

[moment]

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

 

In that case I know enough. You are not here to learn something, or to explore who did what, or even to explain to us what you think to be the case. It's no use continuing. Goodbye!

 

Excellent! You can learn things without it being a contest.

Edited November 11, 2018 by moment

[Marblehead]

Wasn't Who on first?

 

[moment]

1 minute ago, Marblehead said:

Wasn't Who on first?

 

Abbot and Costello did it best.