The circle of 360 degrees

Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
 [ 26 posts ] 
The circle of 360 degrees
Author Message
SandracottusUser avatarPosts: 122Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:44 pm Gender: Male

Post The circle of 360 degrees

This post is dedicated to MasterGhostknight who said

And you have the nerve to try and pass religious texts written after the Sumerians where gone as evidence that they Indians invented stuff 2000!!! Years before the Sumerians as if I wasn't going to find out when they were written and that they were religious texts containing nothing of what you have claimed? That is insulting.



I had told him that Modern Trigonometry ( and I mean strictly Modern) began when the sine and cosine functions were defined and their tables formulated around 480 AD by Aryabhatta and his immediate predecessors .But he insisted that " Modern" trigonometry began with the Sumerians , having come to learn that Claudius Ptolemy and Hipparchus are Eurocentric constructs .

But this post , I hope, will change his opinion.

Two things failed to escape me in reading his statement. One is the stereotypical attitude he has ( just as almost everyone else here might have) about the Vedic literature. I am sure he has not read a single page of the near 5000 printed pages equivalent . Yet he is absolutely certain that they are a total waste being , in his words, religious texts. The second is his use of a wrong term " Sumerians" when he should have actually said "Babylonians".

I am well aware of the lack of knowledge of of the majority of mankind about the literary, philosophical and astronomical merits of the Rig Veda and the foremost position it holds in the history of intellectual and scientific thought.

Now I am aware well enough that the few of you who have heard of the Vedas have been led by the colonial version of history to say " Vedas were written around 1500 BC"[/color]

That is a silly, downright disgusting and unforgivable lie. That was a theory based on another theory which itself was based on another unproven theory. . The Rig Veda is a purely neolithic creation dating between 5000 and 3500 BC.

I will surely yield another post in which I will sufficiently provide the archaeological, literary, astronomical and geological evidence that will prove the true antiquity of the Rig veda.

For those of you who would rather investigate it on their own, here is an unchallenged and rigorous paper by Nicholas Kazanas---
http://www.omilosmeleton.gr/pdf/en/indology/rie.pdf

But this post has absolutely no requirement of proving the actual date of the Rig Veda. Even using the date of 1500 BC, though it is extremely incorrect, Babylonians can be defeated as far as the 360 degrees are concerned. So the above little discussion was just to prepare the milieu for the said issue that shall be dealt with in the near future, if indeed anyone expresses their interest, for I have seen the futility of discussions that fail to summon engrossed audience.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------xxxxxxxx-------------------------------------------------------------

" Sumerians founded Trigonometry " is Ghostys assertion.

Some of us may know what he tries to mean by it. He means that the Babylonians were the first to discover the Zodiac and the circle of 360 degrees around 700 BC.

Image


But is it true ?

No. Not in any extant way

For it can be shown in the Rig Veda just as it is fairly easy to show how Vedic astronomy influenced Babylon and through it Greece.

I can even give the name of the man who discovered the 360 degrees. He was Dirgatamas , one of the 321 men and women who contributed to composing the Rig Veda.

Some scholars have claimed that the Babylonians invented the zodiac of 360 degrees around 700 BCE, perhaps even earlier. Many claim that India received the knowledge of the zodiac from Babylonia or even later from Greece. However, as old as the Rig Veda, the oldest Vedic text, there are clear references to a chakra or wheel of 360 spokes placed in the sky. The number 360 and its related numbers like 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 108, 432 and 720 occur commonly in Vedic symbolism. It is in the hymns of the great Rishi Dirghatamas (RV I.140, 164) that we have the clearest such references.

Dirghatamas is one of the most famous Rig Vedic Rishis. He was the reputed purohit or chief priest of King Bharata (Aitareya Brahmana VIII.23), one of the earliest kings of the land, from which India as Bharata (the traditional name of the country) was named. Dirghatamas was one of the Angirasa Rishis, the oldest of the Rishi families, and regarded as brother to the Rishi Bharadvaja, who is the seer of the sixth book of the Rig Veda. Dirghatamas is also the chief predecessor of the Gotama family of Rishis that includes Kakshivan, Gotama, Nodhas and Vamadeva (seer of the fourth book of the Rig Veda), who along with Dirghatamas account for almost 150 of the 1000 hymns of the Rig Veda. His own verses occur frequently in many Vedic texts, a few even in the Upanishads.

Image


Salutations to Dirgatamas

The hymns of Dirghatamas speak clearly of a zodiac of 360 degrees, divided in various ways, including by three, six and twelve, as well as related numbers of five and seven. We must remember that the zodiac is first of all a mathematical division of the heavens such as this hymn outlines. This is defined mainly according to the elements, qualities and planetary rulerships of the twelve signs. The symbols we ascribe to these twelve divisions is a different factor that can vary to some degree. The actual stars making up the constellation that goes along with the sign is yet a third factor. For example, some constellations are less or more than thirty degrees, but the mathematical or harmonic division of each sign will only be thirty degrees. What is important about the hymns of Dirghatamas is that he shows the mathematical basis of such harmonic divisions of a zodiac of 360 degrees.

For Dirghatamas, as was the case for much of later Vedic astronomy, the main God of the zodiac is the Sun God called Vishnu. Vishnu rules over the highest heaven and is sometimes identified with the pole star or polar point, which in the unique view of Vedic astronomy is the central point that governs all celestial motions and form which these are calculated.

According to Dirghatamas Rig Veda I.155.6, "With four times ninety names (caturbhih sakam navatim ca namabhih), he (Vishnu) sets in motion moving forces like a turning wheel (cakra)." This suggests that even in Vedic times Vishnu had 360 names or forms, one for each degree of the zodiac. A fourfold division may correspond to the solstices and equinoxes. Elsewhere Dirghatamas states, I.164.36, "Seven half embryos form the seed of the world. They stand in the dharma by the direction of Vishnu." This probably refers to the seven planets.

We should note that the zodiac of twelve signs is divided into three sections based upon a similar understanding, starting with Aries or fire (cardinal fire ruled by Mars, who in Vedic thought is the fire born of the Earth), then with Leo or the Sun (fixed fire ruled by the Sun), and then with Sagittarius, the atmospheric fire, lightning or wind (mutable fire ruled by Jupiter, the God of the rains).

Seven yoke the chariot that has a single wheel (chakra). One horse that has seven names carries it. The wheel has three naves, is undecaying and never overcome, where all these beings are placed.
RV I. 164. 2

The zodiac is the single wheeled-chariot or circle yoked by the seven planets which are all forms of the Sun or sunlight. It is the wheel of time on which all beings are placed. The Vedic horse (ashva) is symbolic of energy or propulsive force.

11. The wheel of law with twelve spokes does not decay as it revolves around heaven. Oh Fire, here your 720 sons abide.
RV I.164.11

The circle of the zodiac has twelve signs. It has 720 half degrees or twins, making 360 total. The Shatapatha Brahmana X.5.5, a late Vedic text, also speaks of a wheel of heaven with 720 divisions. "But indeed that Fire-altar is also the Nakshatras. For there are twenty seven of these Nakshatras and twenty-seven secondary Nakshatras. This makes 720." Twenty-seven times twenty-seven Nakshatras equals 729, with which some overlap can be related to the 720 half-degrees of the zodiac.


The sevenfold wheel is the zodiac moved by the seven planets. The six spokes are the six double signs through which the planets travel. The same verse occurs in the Prashna Upanishad I.11 as a symbol for the year.

13. Revolving on this five-spoked wheel all beings stand. Though it carries a heavy load, its axle does not over heat. From of old it does not break its ancient laws.
RV I.164 .13

The five-spoked wheel is again the zodiac ruled by five planets and five elements and their various internal and external correspondences.


The planets are often associated with the rishis in Vedic thought, particularly the rishis Brihaspati (Jupiter), Shukra (Venus) and Kashyapa (the Sun) which became common names for the planets. Their ordainer or stabilizer may be the pole star (polar point).

Twelve are its fellies. The wheel is one. It has three naves. Who has understood it? In It are held together like spokes the 360, both moving and non-moving.
RV I.164.48

This perhaps the clearest verse that refers to the zodiac of twelve signs and three hundred and sixty degrees. The same verse also occurs in Atharva Veda (X.8.4). The zodiac has three divisions as fire, lightning and Sun or Aries, Sagittarius and Leo that represent these three forms of fire. The 360 spokes are the 360 degrees which revolve in the sky but remain in the same place in the zodiac.


If we examine the hymn overall, we see that a heavenly circle of 360 degrees and 12 signs is known, along with 7 planets. It also has a threefold division of the signs which can be identified with that of fire, wind (lightning) and Sun (Aries, Sagittarius, Leo) and a sixfold division that can be identified with the planets each ruling two signs of the zodiac. This provides the basis for the main factors of the zodiac and signs as we have known them historically. We have all the main factors for the traditional signs of the zodiac except the names and symbols of each individual sign.

The zodiac in Vedic thought is the wheel of the Sun. It is the circle created by the Sun's rays.
,

"But, indeed, the Fire-altar also is the Sun. The regions are its enclosing stones, and there are 360 of these, because 360 regions encircle the Sun on all sides. And 360 are the rays of the Sun."



The Shatapatha Brahmana X.5.4 ,
Yajur Veda



Western scholars of the history of astronomy like David Pingree have accepted the astronomical basis of this hymn. In an article, "Astronomy in India" in Astronomy Before the Telescope, C. Walker (ed.), St. Martin's Press, New York, 1996, pps. 123-124, Pingree suggests that Mul. Apin, Babylonian tablets that date from 687 to 500 BC has "'an ideal calendar' in which one year contains 12 months, each of which has 30 days, and consequently exactly 360 days; a late hymn of the Rgveda refers to the same 'ideal calendar'. And Mul.Apin describes the oscillation of the rising-point of the sun along the eastern horizon between its extremities when it is at the solstices; the same oscillation is described in the Aitareya Brahmana.'" This ideal calendar is the basis for the zodiac and its twelve signs at a mathematical level. Clearly Pingree is referring to Rig Veda I.164 as his 'late' hymn of the Rig Veda.

To quote from David Pingree's "History of mathematical astronomy in India," in the Dictionary of Scientific Biography, C.S. Gillespie (ed.), pp. 533-633, Charles Scribners, New York, 1981, page 534: "In the case of the priority of the Rgveda to the Brahmanas, it is not always clear that the views expressed in the latter developed historically after the composition of the former. All texts that can reasonably be dated before ca. 500 BC are here considered to represent essentially a single body of more or less uniform material." The point of his statement is to try to get such Rig Veda references as those of Dirghatamas later than the Brahmana texts as both reflect a similar sophisticated astronomy, which is necessary to make it later than the Babylonian references and a product of a Babylonian influence as he proposes. This requires reducing all the layers of Vedic literature to a more or less uniform mass at a very late date, which is contrary to almost every view of the text.

Clearly this Rig Veda hymn, which has parallels and developments in the Brahmanas (like the Shatapatha Brahmana quoted in this chapter), must be earlier and show that such ideas were much older than the Brahmanas. To maintain his late date for Vedic astrology, Pingree must assume that this hymn or its particular astronomical verses were late interpolations to the Rig Veda, around 500 BCE or about the time of the Buddha. This is rather odd because the Buddha is generally regarded as having come long after the Vedic period.

Even the Brahmanas, like the Upanishads that come after them, are pre-Buddhist by all accounts. Perhaps the main Vedic ritual given in the Brahmanas, the Gavamayana, follows the model of a year of 360 days and is divided into two halves based upon the solstices, showing that such an 'ideal' calendar was central to Vedic thought. That such an ideal calendar has its counterpart in the sky is well reflected in Vedic ideas saying that equate the days and nights with the Sun's rays and with the stars (as we have noted in Shatapatha Brahmana with 720 Upanakshatras)*. The Brahmanas, we should also note, emphasize the Krittikas or the Pleiades as the first of the Nakshatras, reflecting an astronomical era of the Taurus equinox. The Shatapatha Brahmana notes that the Krittikas mark the eastern direction.

In addition, the hymn, its verses and commentaries on them are found in many places in Vedic literature, along with support references to Nakshatras. It cannot be reduced to a late addition but is an integral part of the text.

That being the case, a zodiac of 360 degrees and its twelvefold division are much older in India than any Greek or even Babylonian references that he has come up with.

Pingree also tries to reduce the ancient Vedic calendar work Vedanga Jyotish to 500 BCE or to a Babylonian influence. However, the internal date of this late Vedic text is of a summer solstice in Aslesha or 1300 BCE, information referenced by Varaha Mihira in his Brihat Samhita (III.1-2). "There was indeed a time when the Sun's southerly course (summer solstice) began from the middle of the Nakshatra Aslesha and the northerly one (winter solstice) from the beginning of the Nakshatra Dhanishta. For it has been stated so in ancient works. At present the southerly course of the Sun starts from the beginning of Cancer and the other from the initial point of the sign Capricorn." The middle of Aslesha is 23 20 Cancer, while the beginning of Dhanishta (Shravishta) is 23 20 Capricorn. Calculating the precession accordingly, this is obviously a date of around 1560 BCE.

There are yet earlier references in the Vedas like Atharva Veda XIX.6.2 that starts the Nakshatras with Krittika (the Pleiades) and places the summer solstice (ayana) in Magha (00, 13 20 Leo), showing a date before 1900 BCE. Clearly the Vedas show the mathematics for an early date for the zodiac as well as the precessional points of these eras long before the Babylonians or the Greeks supposedly gave them the zodiac.


Conclusion

It is not surprising that India could have invented the zodiac and circle of 360 degrees. After all, the decimal system and the use of zero , Algebra, Trigonometry, Calculus etc have all come from India. In this regard, as early as the Yajur Veda, we find names for numbers starting with one, ten, one hundred and one thousand ending with one followed by twelve zeros (Shukla Yajur Veda XVII.2).



Sources

In search of the cradle of Civilization -By David Frawley and Subash Kak

Astronomical code of the Rig Veda By Subash S Kak

Vedic Origins of the Zodiac: By David Frawley
" The mistake is we try to tie the whole world down to our plane of thought and to make our mind the measure of the universe"
Vivekananda


" The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it seems meaningless"
Steven Weinberg
Fri Aug 10, 2012 1:23 pm
Master_Ghost_KnightContributorUser avatarPosts: 2466Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:57 pmLocation: Portugal Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

Sandracottus wrote:I had told him that Modern Trigonometry ( and I mean strictly Modern) began when the sine and ["¦]
I will surely yield another post in which I will sufficiently provide the archaeological, literary, astronomical and geological evidence that will prove the true antiquity of the Rig veda.

I'm going to skip this first bit because it is as unfounded now as it was before. Just one thing tough, when I said Sumerians I really did meant Sumerians.

Sandracottus wrote:For those of you who would rather investigate it on their own, here is an unchallenged and rigorous paper by Nicholas Kazanas---
http://www.omilosmeleton.gr/pdf/en/indology/rie.pdf

Generally when I see someone needing to classify his sources as "unchallenged and rigorous" I immediately know that is going to be bunk, this was no different.
Let's read the actual paper. Shall we?
I will summarize it:
The author starts by discrediting every other scholar and archeologists as liars, for him no one else has evidence and all evidence is a lie. This sets him up right from the beginning for a massive confirmation bias, the entire paper is nothing but an exercise in spewing his own preconceptions. Any serious persons would have no trouble from dismissing it as complete bunk right from the first page, certainly nobody would be mistaken and take him seriously.
In the text the author as a couple of motifs:
1. In the first motif the author tried to argument that in the geographic location of authorship of the RV that there were indications of much ancient settlements than the dates most scholars attribute the RV to. He then claims that therefor the RV should be as old as those settlements.
This is simply a non-squitter. Just because there are older settlements it doesn't mean that every book had to be written when the first settlement comes in, this is an absurdity for obvious reasons.
2. The linguistic and religious comparison motif. The author tries to compare the RV language to other Indo-European languages of later period. None of his claims are actually founded. He then tries somehow to argue that the texts show a better preservation of theological nomenclature in the case of the RV then what would be expected in other cultures, and instead of seeing this as potential objection he uses it to support his claim instead. How would that work? I have no idea.
He then mangles the 2 aspects and tries to claim similarities between the names of Indian deities to other far more recent cultures, how could that be evidence for its older age? I don't know either. Anyways, even the relations are flimsy and the author downplays the importance of intercultural exchange.
3. The literary motif. Even though the literary motif is claimed, actually little has been read from the book. The author tries to pick ambiguous description of events and tries to match with events that seem to fit those ambiguous descriptions. The author even goes so far as to recognize that such events happened many times in history and could match any of them when he tries to argue for the accuracy of recollected facts, but for some reason he is not able to put 2 and 2 together and realize that the description is so ambiguous that it is not possible to pinpoint which event in history does it correspond to.
4. What is not in the book motif. The author passes his own certification of incompetence by trying to date the book by small items that are not mentioned in them, he cares not if the author of the RV had any interest in mentioning them instead he claims that they couldn't because that proves that they didn't existed back then?
5. The author tries to use references of the RV in other later books and makes the absurd claim that such reference was only possible eons after the memory of the original text was gone.
Even so the author concludes that the RV was not a one shot written book, that even though some hymns comes from ancient traditions (not supported) the remainder of the book is certainly much younger. The remaining of the conclusion to kill for, he recognizes that his claims cannot stand criticism however he tries to shift the aim of criticism to other academics in the very popular crackpot form "well if you think I am wrong then you should take it to every specialist of the field X (not me)".

This is not a unchallenged rigorous paper, its bunk and nobody takes it seriously.

Sandracottus wrote:The number 360 and its related numbers like 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 108, 432 and 720 occur commonly in Vedic symbolism. It is in the hymns of the great Rishi Dirghatamas (RV I.140, 164) that we have the clearest such references.

Most of your assertions are unfounded and your reference to the zodiac is absurd.
Your claim that the 360 comes from mystical symbolism is equally absurd because:
1. Religion isn't math
2. If you knew enough about math you would now that the division in 360 is particularly useful in base 60 calculations (Sumerians used base 60, by your claims Indians base 10). This isn't rocket science.

Sandracottus wrote:For example, some constellations are less or more than thirty degrees, but the mathematical or harmonic division of each sign will only be thirty degrees. What is important about the hymns of Dirghatamas is that he shows the mathematical basis of such harmonic divisions of a zodiac of 360 degrees.

Harmonic divisions? You wouldn't know a harmonic even if I threw you a box full of them at your face. You are talking bunk.

Sandracottus wrote:According to Dirghatamas Rig Veda I.155.6, "With four times ninety names (caturbhih sakam navatim ca namabhih), he (Vishnu) sets in motion moving forces like a turning wheel (cakra)." This suggests that even in Vedic times Vishnu had 360 names or forms, one for each degree of the zodiac. A fourfold division may correspond to the solstices and equinoxes. Elsewhere Dirghatamas states, I.164.36, "Seven half embryos form the seed of the world. They stand in the dharma by the direction of Vishnu." This probably refers to the seven planets.

No it doesn't. You just pluck that out of your behind.
Sandracottus wrote:The circle of the zodiac has twelve signs. It has 720 half degrees or twins, making 360 total. The Shatapatha Brahmana X.5.5, a late Vedic text, also speaks of a wheel of heaven with 720 divisions. "But indeed that Fire-altar is also the Nakshatras. For there are twenty seven of these Nakshatras and twenty-seven secondary Nakshatras. This makes 720." Twenty-seven times twenty-seven Nakshatras equals 729, with which some overlap can be related to the 720 half-degrees of the zodiac.

OMG :O
That was the biggest special pleading, retrofit type of reinterpretation I have ever seen. You are done.
Sandracottus wrote:Twelve are its fellies. The wheel is one. It has three naves. Who has understood it? In It are held together like spokes the 360, both moving and non-moving.
RV I.164.48

This perhaps the clearest verse that refers to the zodiac of twelve signs and three hundred and sixty degrees. The same verse also occurs in Atharva Veda (X.8.4). The zodiac has three divisions as fire, lightning and Sun or Aries, Sagittarius and Leo that represent these three forms of fire. The 360 spokes are the 360 degrees which revolve in the sky but remain in the same place in the zodiac.

Other than the fact that there is a number 360 and a mention of a wheel, there is nothing mentioning the mathematical utility of using an angular metric of 360,º per revolution.
The relation between it and the mathematical usage of 360,º degrees circle is pulled out of your ass.
Sandracottus wrote:"But, indeed, the Fire-altar also is the Sun. The regions are its enclosing stones, and there are 360 of these, because 360 regions encircle the Sun on all sides. And 360 are the rays of the Sun."


The Shatapatha Brahmana X.5.4 ,
Yajur Veda



Western scholars of the history of astronomy like David Pingree have accepted the astronomical basis of this hymn. In an article, "Astronomy in India" in Astronomy Before the Telescope, C. Walker (ed.), St. Martin's Press, New York, 1996, pps. 123-124, Pingree suggests that Mul. Apin, Babylonian tablets that date from 687 to 500 BC has "'an ideal calendar' in which one year contains 12 months, each of which has 30 days, and consequently exactly 360 days; a late hymn of the Rgveda refers to the same 'ideal calendar'. And Mul.Apin describes the oscillation of the rising-point of the sun along the eastern horizon between its extremities when it is at the solstices; the same oscillation is described in the Aitareya Brahmana.'" This ideal calendar is the basis for the zodiac and its twelve signs at a mathematical level. Clearly Pingree is referring to Rig Veda I.164 as his 'late' hymn of the Rig Veda.

This is pure bunk, no only your claims about the astronomical utility of the hymn are false, the hymn itself is factually incorrect.

All you have presented is ad hoc numerology. Bunk! Nonsense!
If you took the time to look at your sources you would find that they are either uneducated mystics or bafoons not educated in the area.
Both more mystic than rational, and they never address the subject in a direct rational matter. They have not supported their claims than you did. The only thing you managed to prove here is that this form of lunacy isn't unique, something that is not even new to me.
"I have an irrefutable argument for the existence of...." NO, STOP! You are already wrong!
Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:29 pm
WWW
SandracottusUser avatarPosts: 122Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:44 pm Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

Ghosty's mater tactic

1. Feign Knowledge on the Issue
2. Quote whole chunks of your opponents posts.
3. Brand them all at the end as " Bogus, mystic, unscientific,ambiguous, irrational" . SImple. No pains needed for argument
4.Use funny links and sarcasm wherever possible
5.Make puerile attacks on the learning, methods, character and dedication of all the scholars taken recourse to by your opponent.
6. Never rationally debate on anything. That may bite back.
7. This will weaken the opponents resolve.

Enjoy



Generally when I see someone needing to classify his sources as "unchallenged and rigorous" I immediately know that is going to be bunk, this was no different.


Oh really ?

When I see a paper that takes a multi disciplinary approach, I call it rigorous.

When I see a paper that no scholar has been able to disprove , I call It unchallenged.

Mystic or not .

Now give me your definition.

Give me some of your papers which disprove Frawley and Subash .

The author starts by discrediting every other scholar and archeologists as liars, for him no one else has evidence and all evidence is a lie. This sets him up right from the beginning for a massive confirmation bias, the entire paper is nothing but an exercise in spewing his own preconceptions. Any serious persons would have no trouble from dismissing it as complete bunk right from the first page, certainly nobody would be mistaken and take him seriously.
In the text the author as a couple of motifs:


The bogus statements have been underlined. Are you feigning knowledge on the issue?

Because otherwise you should have known that there are only two schools of scholars on this Issue . One acknowledges that Rig Veda is much older, while the other sticks to 1500 BC. None has the moral right to insult the others position unless it has been deconstructed.

No modern archaeologist agrees with the invasion scenario. So unlike your wild accusation, most archaeologists agree with them.

The worlds largest ancient civilization--The Indus Saraswathy Civilization(3500--1900 BC).(15 times larger than Egypt and Sumer put together) But no literature of this survived . On the other hand, we have the worlds largest literary corpus of the Vedas. They talk of an advanced urban society. But no archaeological finds correspond with the 1500 BC colonial unscientific dating.
It is clearly a most impossible paradox.

1. In the first motif the author tried to argument that in the geographic location of authorship of the RV that there were indications of much ancient settlements than the dates most scholars attribute the RV to. He then claims that therefor the RV should be as old as those settlements.


He has not said such a thing. Have you even read?


2. The linguistic and religious comparison motif. The author tries to compare the RV language to other Indo-European languages of later period. None of his claims are actually founded. He then tries somehow to argue that the texts show a better preservation of theological nomenclature in the case of the RV then what would be expected in other cultures, and instead of seeing this as potential objection he uses it to support his claim instead. How would that work? I have no idea.He then mangles the 2 aspects and tries to claim similarities between the names of Indian deities to other far more recent cultures, how could that be evidence for its older age? I don't know either. Anyways, even the relations are flimsy and the author downplays the importance of intercultural exchange.


Thats the way linguistics work . They basically examine and compare words. My technical knowledge on this subject is poor. But I can tell you the simple fact from linguistics:---The more a population migrates, the more its language gets altered. Rig Vedic sanskrit is the least corrupted amongst all Indo European languages.


How does that prove an older date?

Because the oldest attested Sanskrit words outside India comes from Mesopotamia and Syria . The Indo Aryan Kassites, Mittani and Hitties who migrated from India to the middle east after the collapse of the Indus civilization.

The rig Vedic Sanskrit is more archaic and therefore older.






You may watch 4 and 5 if you want.

3. The literary motif. Even though the literary motif is claimed, actually little has been read from the book. The author tries to pick ambiguous description of events and tries to match with events that seem to fit those ambiguous descriptions. The author even goes so far as to recognize that such events happened many times in history and could match any of them when he tries to argue for the accuracy of recollected facts, but for some reason he is not able to put 2 and 2 together and realize that the description is so ambiguous that it is not possible to pinpoint which event in history does it correspond to.


I have no idea what you are talking about.

Is this your idea of rigor? You have sucked and vomited something from the paper and given a ludicrous "

4. What is not in the book motif. The author passes his own certification of incompetence by trying to date the book by small items that are not mentioned in them, he cares not if the author of the RV had any interest in mentioning them instead he claims that they couldn't because that proves that they didn't existed back then?



Archaeology is a branch of science. It has its ways and its conclusions. It is a wonderful science. It helps other branches and also takes help from them including when it comes to carbon dating.

Many items are not found in the Rig Veda. These items are characteristic of Urban stage society. But these Items are found in the other three Vedas. Thus some thing phenomenal has happened during the gap between Rig Veda and the Yajur Veda(3500--3000 bc)

There is a conspicuous technological transition between the Rig Veda and the Yajur Veda.

It is the transition from the Neolithic society to an Urban civilization

This transition happens only once in the history of a civilization

Archaeology tells us that this happened around 3500 BC in India.


Such a transition does not happen anywhere in India around 1500 BC. Thus Archaeology does not support that ludicrously late dating of the Rig Veda.

The Rgveda does not have many features that characterise the ISC and appear only later in post-rigvedic texts. Thus there are NOT-

(a) istakࢠthe brick, mostly of raw mud, sometimes baked. This was one of the main construction materials in the Early ISC starting at about 3500. Prior to this houses were fashioned of wood with wattle-and-daub, as described in the RV;
(b) larger urban settlements in the RVas we find them in the ISC;
(c) fixed altars or hearths as described in the Yajur Veda and the Brà¢hmanas;
(d) ruins or ruined towns;
(e) cotton karpà¢sa;
(f)silver rajata;(g) rice vrà®hi;
(h) literacy 'lipi, lekha(-na)';
(i) artistic iconography (sculpture, relief, seals).
Bricks are mentioned first in Yajur Veda and extensively in the Brà¢hmanas. Silver appears as rajata-hiranya in the Yajur Veda; rice vrà®hi in the Atharva Veda; cotton karpà¢sa, first in Baudhà¢yana's Sà»tras; and so on


I will now give you UNCHALLENGED EVIDENCE that the Rig Veda is much older.

I really want you to understand. Thats why I am spending time with you.

No 1: The Saraswathy RIver

All you need to know is here
https://sites.google.com/site/kalyan97/Home

The river Sarasvatà® is praised as a mighty and all nourishing river in all the Books or the RV except the fourth. Even in late hymns such as 8.21 or 10.64 and 10.177 Sarasvatà® is said to give wealth and nourishment and the poets invoke her as ,«great,». In 6.52 Sarasvatà® is ,«swollen by other (three or more) rivers,»; in 6.61 she is endless, swift-moving, most dear among her sisters and nourishing the five tribes of the Vedic people; in 2.41.16 Sarasvatà® is ,«best river, best mother, best goddess,»; in 7.95.2 this mighty river ,«flows pure from the mountains to the ocean,».

One of the highly debated geo-archaeological aspects is existence of the River Sarasvati, most respected river of the land in the ancient Hindu text of Vedas. The debate is of more than one type; (1) whether the river exist at all, (2) if existed during which period, (3) what were its tributaries, (4) where was it flowing, (5) was it debouching into the sea/gulf or was it a tributary of some other major river, (6) if it was debouching into the sea/gulf where and near which geographic location, (7) when and why did it disappear? Several palaeo-channels of rivers have been identified in the region of Rajasthan, Haryana Uttar Pradesh and adjacent areas some of which are assigned to Sarasvati. The River Sarasvati is considered to have migrated from east to west. Most discussions end up the River Sarasvati to the north of the state of Gujarat in western India (viz. Oldham, 1886; Wilhelmy, 1968; Sridhar et al., 1999; Malik et al., 1999), debouching into Arabian Sea/Rann of Kachchh. Whereas a few others placed the river in the eastern part of Kachchh and Saurashtra, emptying itself into the Gulf of Kachchh/Little Rann at Prabhas Patan near Mehsana (Iyengar and Radhakrishna, 2005). There is the view that Saraswati flowed through central Saurashtra and entered Arabian Sea near Prabhas Patan, Somnath-Veraval (Thakker, 2002). The present paper deals with the extension of Sarasvati and other northern rivers into the region of Gujarat and its entry into the sea, taking historical, geomorphic, tectonic and palaeo-climate/sea level changes aspects into consideration.

Image

Two very important factors to be considered are: (1) Rise and fall of the sea level in the last Glacial from,120m around 18,000 yrs BP to +5-7m around 4,500 yrs BP during which the civilization of the region evolved socially and intellectually. The unusually large shelf offered a vast fertile land for the early civilization to prosper and flourish using the waters of the northern rivers flowing through their land. Withdrawal of the sea by,50m and,100m exposes additional 100,000sq.km and 250,000sq.km respectively to the western shelf. The period of late Quaternary Glaciations and subsequent melting of the ice sheets resulted in the onset of dry and wet phases. In addition to melting ice sheets from the Himalayas, copious rains in the wet phase had provided a large network of fluvial system to evolve in western India. (2) Tectonic instability of the region owing stresses generated from intense compression in the late Cenozoic which is expressed in the form of recurring seismic events (two earthquakes of magnitude over M7.5 within the span of last two centuries) and upheaval and subsidence of land (e.g., uplift of Allah Bund by 5-6m and subsidence of Sindree Fort and surrounding area during 1819 Kachchh earthquake. An overall uplift of the region is expected from the existing compress ional regime. These two factors have brought frequent changes in the fluvial system of western India.

Image

A critical study of the satellite imageries reveals several palaeo-channels in Rajasthan, Haryana and Utter Pradesh extending to west and southwest. Further tracing of the channels extend the rivers into the region of Gujarat finally entering the sea through the Ranns and Gulf of Kachchh and Gulf of Cambay. During low sea level regime the Rann of Kachchh and Gulf of Cambay have played a significant role in sustaining the course of northern rivers as well as the human settlements to thrive as evidenced by the following: (1) Discovery of distinct palaeo-channel with fortified settlement within the Great Rann of Kachchh (Thakker, 2001) and numerous channels that appeared in the Great Rann of Kachchh immediately after 2001 Bhuj Earthquake. (2) Recent discovery of underwater township near Surat (Gupta et al., 2002 and Kathiroli et al., 2003). Study of the satellite imageries point to the existence of a channel in the Gulf of Cambay extending for 250km. The channel ends with some obscure features resembling human settlements (Thakker, 2005).

The zone that connects Saurashtra and Gujarat Mainland forms yet another curious structure. It formed a depocentre for the sediments brought by rivers from the east and west, and presently it accommodates the famous Nal Sarovar, a possible remnant of the sea. This zone offered channel for the rivers to flow in the past.

The river under discussion was flowing several millennia ago when the sea level was far lower (-60 to-120m, over 10,000yr BP); i.e., a greater part of the western Indian shelf was exposed and also when the sea level was higher (+5-6m, ~4-5000yr BP) than the present. Study of the satellite imagery reveals the traces of several palaeo-channels and human settlements within the Rann of Kachchh indicating flow of rivers in the Ranns in the past which subsequently flowed through the area between Saurashtra and Gujarat Mainland, further extending into the region which presently forms the Gulf of Cambay and entering the sea around 150 km west of present strandline.


Thus the Saraswathy river stopped reaching the sea around 3000 BC and it dried up and vanished around 2000 BC. Yet the Rig Veda says over and over again that the river flows from the mountains to the ocean

Whats more>? The Veda gives the exact geograpical location of the river which corresponds with modern science


ASTRONOMICAL EVIDENCE

From "Update on the Aryan invasion debate" By Koenrald Elst

One of the earliest estimates of the date of the Vedas was at once among the most scientific. In 1790, the Scottish mathematician John Playfair demonstrated that the starting-date of the astronomical observations recorded in the tables still in use among Hindu astrologers (of which three copies had reached Europe between 1687 and 1787) had to be 4300 BC.His proposal was dismissed as absurd by some, but it was not refuted by any scientist.
(It seems Ghost has stolen his tactic from his Colonial counterparts)

Playfair's judicious use of astronomy was countered by John Bentley with a Scriptural argument which we now must consider invalid. In 1825, Bentley objected: "By his [= Playfair's] attempt to uphold the antiquity of Hindu books against absolute facts, he thereby supports all those horrid abuses and impositions found in them, under the pretended sanction of antiquity. Nay, his aim goes still deeper, for by the same means he endeavors to overturn the Mosaic account, and sap the very foundation of our religion: for if we are to believe in the antiquity of Hindu books, as he would wish us, then the Mosaic account is all a fable, or a fiction."

So Ghosty.........you are playing into the stupidity of the very Christian fanatics whom you so vehemently fight.


Back-calculation of planetary positions is a highly complex affair requiring knowledge of a number of physical laws, universal constants and actual measurements of densities, diameters and distances. Though Brahminical astronomy was remarkably sophisticated for its time, it could only back-calculate planetary position of the presumed Vedic age with an inaccuracy margin of at least several degrees of arc. With our modern knowledge, it is easy to determine what the actual positions were, and what the results of back-calculations with the Brahminical formulae would have been,


An Example...

Aldebaran was therefore 40' before the point of the vernal equinox, according to the Indian astronomy, in the year 3102 before Christ. ("¦) [Modern astronomy] gives the longitude of that star 13' from the vernal equinox, at the time of the Calyougham, agreeing, within 53', with the determination of the Indian astronomy. This agreement is the more remarkable, that the Brahmins, by their own rules for computing the motion of the fixed stars, could not have assigned this place to Aldebaran for the beginning of Calyougham, had they calculated it from a modern observation. For as they make the motion of the fixed stars too great by more than 3" annually, if they had calculated backward from 1491, they would have placed the fixed stars less advanced by 40 or 50, at their ancient epoch, than they have actually done

That Hindu astronomical lore about ancient times cannot be based on later back-calculation, was also argued by Playfair's contemporary, the French astronomer jean-Sylvain Bailly: "The motions of the stars calculated by the Hindus before some 4500 years vary not even a single minute from the [modem] tables of Cassini and Meyer. The Indian tables give the same annual variation of the moon as that discovered by Tycho Brahe - a variation unknown to the school of Alexandria and also the Arabs."6

Prof. N.S. Rajaram, a mathematician who has worked for NASA, comments: "fabricating astronomical data going back thousands of years calls for knowledge of Newton's Law of Gravitation and the ability to solve differential equations."7 Failing this advanced knowledge, the data in the Brahminical tables must be based on actual observation. Ergo, the Sanskrit-speaking Vedic seers were present in person to record astronomical observations and preserve them for a full 6,000 years: "The observations on which the astronomy of India is founded, were nude more than three thousand years before the Christian era. ("¦) Two other elements of this astronomy, the equation of the sun's centre and the obliquity of the ecliptic ("¦) seem to point to a period still more remote, and to fix the origin of this astronomy 1000 or 1200 years earlier, that is, 4300 years before the Christian era".8

All this at least on the assumption that Playfair's, Bailly's and Rajaram's claims about the Hindu astronomical tables are correct. Disputants may start by proving them factually wrong, but should not enter the dispute arena without a refutation of the astronomers' assertions. It is something of a scandal that Playfair's and Bailly's findings have been lying around for two hundred years while linguists and indologists were publishing speculations on Vedic chronology in stark disregard for the contribution of astronomy.

THE PRECESSION OF THE EQUINOX

. The slowest hand on the clock

The truly strong evidence for a high chronology of the Vedas is the Vedic information about the position of the equinox. The phenomenon of the "precession of the equinoxes" takes the ecliptical constellations (also known as the sidereal Zodiac, i.e. those constellations through which the sun passes)12 slowly past the vernal equinox point, i.e. the intersection of ecliptic and equator, rising due East on the horizon. The whole tour is made in about 25,791 years, the longest cycle manageable for naked-eye observers. If data about the precession are properly recorded, they provide the best and often the only clue to an absolute chronology for ancient events.

If we can read the Vedic and post-Vedic indications properly, they mention constellations on the equinox points which were there from 4,000 BC for the Rg-Veda (Orion, as already pointed out by B.G. Tilak)13 through around 3100 BC for the Atharva-Veda and the core Mahabharata (Aldebaran) down to 2,300 BC for the Sutras and the Shatapatha Brahmana (Pleiades).14

Other references to the constellational position of the solstices or of solar and lunar positions at the beginning of the monsoon confirm this chronology. Thus, the Kaushitaki Brahmana puts the winter solstice at the new moon of the sidereal month of Magha (i.e. the Mahashivaratri festival), which now falls 70 days later: this points to a date in the first half of the 3rd millennium BC. The same processional movement of the twelve months of the Hindu calendar (which are tied to the constellations) vis-a-vis the meterological seasons, is what allowed Hermann Jacobi to fix the date of the Rg-Veda to the 5th-4th millennium BC.15 Indeed, the regular references to the full moon's position in a constellation at the time of the beginning of the monsoon, which nearly coincides with the summer solstice, provide a secure and unambiguous chronology through the millennial Vedic literature.

The eclipse mentioned in Rig Veda (40 ,5-9) has been back calculated to have occurred exactly on July 26 th 3928 BC


The Stars dont lie Ghosty


CAN YOU GIVE ME ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL TO SUPPORT THE 1500 BC COLONIAL DATING OF THE RIG VEDA?

5
. The author tries to use references of the RV in other later books and makes the absurd claim that such reference was only possible eons after the memory of the original text was gone.


:lol:

Tactic at play


Even so the author concludes that the RV was not a one shot written book, that even though some hymns comes from ancient traditions (not supported) the remainder of the book is certainly much younger. The remaining of the conclusion to kill for, he recognizes that his claims cannot stand criticism however he tries to shift the aim of criticism to other academics in the very popular crackpot form "well if you think I am wrong then you should take it to every specialist of the field X (not me)"
.
:facepalm:


This is not a unchallenged rigorous paper, its bunk and nobody takes it seriously.


Ghostys ultimate .

Is this your explanation of why you are unable to disprove any of this?-----Because, apparently, it is bunk and no scholar has succeeded?

Has it occurred to your bigotry that your inability may be indicative of impossibility?

Most of your assertions are unfounded and your reference to the zodiac is absurd.
Your claim that the 360 comes from mystical symbolism is equally absurd because:
1. Religion isn't math
2. If you knew enough about math you would now that the division in 360 is particularly useful in base 60 calculations (Sumerians used base 60, by your claims Indians base 10). This isn't rocket science.



Things get so boring with you .

Back in 4000 BC, the Rig Veda was all there was .


Is that the best you got ? Religion is not Math? And that is supposed to prove the Rig Veda does not contain the Zodiac?

Awh what a fantastic discovery and display of acumen

Sorry to break it to you that the 360 degrees and the Zodiac are not the only things found in the Vedic Corpus. The Vedas also contain..

1. The Knowledge of Precession of the Equinoxes
2. The first known approximation of Pi , found in the Yajur Veda which gives a value of 25 /8
3. The first appearance and use of the Pythagorean theorem
4. Accurate tropical year of 365.241 days
5. The lunar and solar calenders
6. Ideal calendar of 12 months
7. Decimal system .
8. Zero and concept of Infinity

Ah the list goes much further.........

That the Sumerians used base 60 does not mean the Rig Vedic astronomers could not know of the Zodiac. May be to your logic .



Other than the fact that there is a number 360 and a mention of a wheel, there is nothing mentioning the mathematical utility of using an angular metric of 360,º per revolution.
The relation between it and the mathematical usage of 360,º degrees circle is pulled out of your ass.


So there is the finest display of your close minded, impenitent impropriety.

In your latest failed tactic, you are trying to evaluate a 6000 year old verse with modern terminology.

The words "angle" and "degree" will have to wait.

And your buddies Babylonians adopted it from Indians around 700 BC.Our knowledge of Babylonian astronomy comes from three kinds of texts. In the rst class are: (i) astronomical omens in the style of Enuma Anu Enlil (\when the gods Anu and Enlil") that go back to the second millennium BC in a series of 70 tablets; (ii) the two younger Mul Apin (iii) royal reports on omens from 700 BC onwards

So religion and superstition is Math only in Babylon !

You should also know how the following things went from India to Babylon between 1500 and 800 BC through the Indo Aryan Mittani and Hitties who invaded the middle east after the Indus civilization fell due to the death of the River.

1. The ratio of 3:2 for the longest to the shortest day used after 700 BC.
2. The use of a linear function to determine the length of daylight in
intermediate months.
3. The use of the water-clock.
4. The concept of the tithi as the thirtieth part of the lunar month.
5. The use of two intercalary months in a period of 5 years.
6. The concept of a five-year yuga.
7. Geometry (including the Pythagorean theorem.)
8. the 360divisions of the civil year;
9. the length of the year; and the solar zodiac

All these are found in the much older Vedic texts.The evidence suggests that the Indian ideas of sacri fice, 33 Gods, 12 divisions of the solar year, and the 30 divisions of the lunar month, and the zodiac reached Babylonia around the middle of the rst millennium BC. These new ideas, including the Indian ratio of 3:2 for the longest to shortest day of the year, triggered a new phase of careful observations in Babylonia which were to influence astronomy in a fundamental way

In 1978, Dr. Abraham Seidenberg presented his famous paper on the origin of mathematics. He argued that the birth of geometry and mathematics had a ritual origin. In this paper on the origin of mathematics, Seidenberg concluded: "Old Babylonia (1700 B.C.) got the theorem of Pythagoras from India or that both Old-Babylonia and India got it from a third source. Now the Sanskrit scholars do not give me a date so far back as 1700 B.C. Therefore, I postulate a pre-Old-Babylonian (i.e. pre-1700 B.C.) source of the kind of geometric rituals we see preserved in the Sulva Sutras, or at least for the mathematics involved in these rituals." That was before archeological finds disproved the earlier assumptions of a break in Indian civilization in the second millennium B.C.E.; it was this assumption of the Sanskritists that led Seidenberg to postulate a third earlier source. Now with our new knowledge, Seiden-berg's conclusion of India being the source of the geometric and mathematical knowledge of the ancient world fits in with the new chronology of the texts. According to latest researches of scholars, Baudhayan compiled Sulva Sutras around 3200 B.C.

We are talking of 4000 BC

The rest of mankind was painting themselves blue and running around fires.

Dirgatama , inspite of the difficulties of his primitive age , successfully conceived of the 360 divisions of a circle or the 720 half degrees using the following symbolism

Below is the The 27-fold and 12-fold division of the ecliptic
Image

(RV 1.164.48) Twelve spokes, one wheel, three navels, who can comprehend
this? In this there are 360 spokes put in like pegs which do not get loosened.

This means that the ecliptic, which is the wheel of time, is divided into 360 parts. Each of these parts is what is now known as a degree. The three navels appear to be the three di erent kinds of divisions of it: solar and lunar segments and days.

The division of the circle into four quadrants of 90 degrees each is described
in another hymn: (RV 1.155.6)The division of the wheel of time into 360 parts occurs elsewhere as well. In Satapatha Br. 10.5.4.4, it is stated that \360 regions encircle the sun on all sides."

The division into half a degree is very easy to identify in the sky. The radial size of the sun or moon is slightly more than this angular size, being exactly 60/113 degrees

I can see that it is difficult for you to appreciate him beacuse of your stereotypes . But Science began at the Vedic fire alter.


You argument for greater rigor fails considering the antiquity of the Vedas and the fact that such rigor is not found in any nearly contemporary society including Sumer.


1. Give me a Sumerian description of the 360 divisions older than 4000 BC or atleast 3000 BC

2. Show me how Sumerians were more rigorous.

3. Logically disprove Subash and Frawley of Sidenberg who has shown that the Babylon borrowed from Vedic Mathematics and Astronomy rather than spewing your venom at them.


unless you can do this, your argument fails. Unless Sumerians did it first and they did it better, You loose your original purpose.


Image

In the late texts the ecliptic is divided into 12 zodiacal signs, each of length precisely 30 degrees (us). The rst list of stars which used the signs of the zodiac is dated to about 410 BC.

The zodiacal signs have much overlap with the Indian ones, but they appear from nowhere. We cannot, for example, understand the basis of goat- sh, whereas the goad-headed Prajapati is one of the key stories in Vedic lore. These signs do not belong to the same type. They include furrow, hired hand, and star. They could not have served as the model for the Indian zodiacal names or the Greek ones because of their haphazard nature. On the other hand, they could represent memory of an imperfectly communicated Indian tradition which was adapted into the Babylonian system.

All you have presented is ad hoc numerology. Bunk! Nonsense!


Now this is becoming annoying . The numerology is correct .

The only wrong numerology is the planets. Only five planets were known . Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. (Mangala, Shukra, Budha, Shani, Brihaspati) The moon was also considered one, thus making 7 with the Sun.

Infact the word "Venus" comes from the word " Vena " used at times in the Rig Veda for the planet.

That they did this much using just naked eye observation is appallingly ingenious.
The Surya Siddhanta even gives the diameters of these planets


Both more mystic than rational, and they never address the subject in a direct rational matter. They have not supported their claims than you did. The only thing you managed to prove here is that this form of lunacy isn't unique, something that is not even new to me.


And you are more asinine than rational.

You have proved what Kautilya said once

"You can wash your ass a thousand times. It will still be vile. Even so are some people."
" The mistake is we try to tie the whole world down to our plane of thought and to make our mind the measure of the universe"
Vivekananda


" The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it seems meaningless"
Steven Weinberg
Last edited by Sandracottus on Thu Aug 16, 2012 2:53 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Thu Aug 16, 2012 8:16 am
Master_Ghost_KnightContributorUser avatarPosts: 2466Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:57 pmLocation: Portugal Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

For the sake of my sanity and the fact that I have a life outside the internet keep your post breif and straight to the point. I do not care for the window dressing so don't add any.
I will in no way waste my time to ram everything you spewed here back into the orifice it came trough.
If you want to keep this conversation, pick a couple of your points that you find that best represent your case in order for me to adress it, if you feel that you are at a miss you can allways repost them later. In case you are not willing to do this, then consider myself unconvinced and I will end this conversation.
"I have an irrefutable argument for the existence of...." NO, STOP! You are already wrong!
Thu Aug 16, 2012 9:00 am
WWW
nemesissUser avatarPosts: 1236Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 6:29 pm

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

there is a reason why people hate long stretchy posts, it makes it nearly impossible to follow what the person is trying to get across.

I'm trying to get what Sandracottus is trying to get across, but all i see is a discussion on the history of the Sexagesimal counting system, this might be more fit for the science or the history section.

i'm not a knowledgeable person on the rig veda and base60 so i can't really add much too the discussion.., but from what i easily could find within a few minutes... seeing how much (or little) survived and got scraped together in 10th B.C. it can easily been modified with other facts to make it look authentic, it wouldn't be the first (and the last) time it has been done.

as far as why a circle has 360 degrees, that can and has been explained already and i do not see what difference it would make if the first ones were the babylonians or the sumarians or some other ancient tribe.
Thu Aug 16, 2012 9:29 am
SandracottusUser avatarPosts: 122Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:44 pm Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

nemesiss wrote:there is a reason why people hate long stretchy posts, it makes it nearly impossible to follow what the person is trying to get across.

I'm trying to get what Sandracottus is trying to get across, but all i see is a discussion on the history of the Sexagesimal counting system, this might be more fit for the science or the history section.




I am sorry if the long post is inexpedient . I was merely trying to be comprehensive by presenting all the details.
Yes, this post should go to the history forum. It was my mistake. I hope some mod would be kind enough to do the needful by moving it. But I dare not ask any of them .

My last post intends to establish the following

1. That the Zodiac of 12 divisions and the circle of 360 degrees was invented by the Vedic astronomers.

2. That it was transmitted, along with Geometry, lunar and solar calenders etc to Babylon via the Hittite and Mittani Indo Aryan tribes around 1500 BC

3. To provide conclusive evidence that the Rig Veda is a neolithic creation dating back to 4500--3500 BC.

4. To show that the Vedas are intellectually sophisticated and cannot be rejected as "Religious Mumbo Jumbo" as Ghosty does.


He does not want to accept any of this and so would rather insult me and go away.

i'm not a knowledgeable person on the rig veda and base60 so i can't really add much too the discussion.., but from what i easily could find within a few minutes... seeing how much (or little) survived and got scraped together in 10th B.C. it can easily been modified with other facts to make it look authentic, it wouldn't be the first (and the last) time it has been done.


I dont understand what you are talking about . You cannot reject thousands of years of tradition with a mere theory like this one you gave.

The evidences I provided only backs up an already known Indian tradition which says the Rig Veda was composed much before the Mahabharata war of 3102 BC.

If you say 5000 modern pages equivalent was scraped together in 1000 BC, you must tell me what makes you think so.

The Rig Veda was written down only in the 14 th century AD.

Until then and even today , it was orally transmitted from Teacher to disciples for the past 6000 years.

Even if all the printed copies of the Vedas are burned , there are people in India who can recite them from memory without a single error. So meticulously and scrupulously were they preserved that not a word was lost or added to them.

It is a great wonder of human civilization---it can be rivaled only if modern Egyptians still recited their ancient hymns


as far as why a circle has 360 degrees, that can and has been explained already and i do not see what difference it would make if the first ones were the babylonians or the sumarians or some other ancient tribe.


Do you mean that the study of History is meaningless?That the history forums should be banned?

If it is meaningless, then you may be correct.

But I love history, especially the history of Mathematics and Astronomy . That however does not mean I am proficient in Mathematics or Astronomy. I know only what an 18 year old is expected to know.

Anyway it is much better than learning the body counts of some stupid wars and their dates
" The mistake is we try to tie the whole world down to our plane of thought and to make our mind the measure of the universe"
Vivekananda


" The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it seems meaningless"
Steven Weinberg
Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:06 pm
nemesissUser avatarPosts: 1236Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 6:29 pm

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

Sandracottus wrote:I am sorry if the long post is inexpedient . I was merely trying to be comprehensive by presenting all the details.
Yes, this post should go to the history forum. It was my mistake. I hope some mod would be kind enough to do the needful by moving it. But I dare not ask any of them .



thank you for simplifying the story, it will do great service to this topic as for discussion.
trying to be as inclusive as best as possible, while keeping is short is always a hassle.
in my experience, it's best to give a short summary of the topic and points you want to make with additional links to your sources and if people have questions about a certain topic, you can go into more detail.


Sandracottus wrote:
My last post intends to establish the following

1. That the Zodiac of 12 divisions and the circle of 360 degrees was invented by the Vedic astronomers.

2. That it was transmitted, along with Geometry, lunar and solar calenders etc to Babylon via the Hittite and Mittani Indo Aryan tribes around 1500 BC

3. To provide conclusive evidence that the Rig Veda is a neolithic creation dating back to 4500--3500 BC.

4. To show that the Vedas are intellectually sophisticated and cannot be rejected as "Religious Mumbo Jumbo" as Ghosty does.


He does not want to accept any of this and so would rather insult me and go away.


With point 1 my first question would be, WHICH zodiac are we talking about?
im not a major in history, but as far as i know, almost all civilications see something in the night sky and create tales about the stars, here also on which hemisphere you are influences the outcome.

i think point 2 and 3 are genuine topics of discussion, but have little relevance to the topic.
point 4 is one that i would say, fits with philosophy, but im not sure if it's that easy to seperate the religious parts from the scientific part, if we can call it that and of course what are the grey area's... focusing too much on JUST geomatry doen't help either side... unless it's just geomatry and nothing else.



nemesiss wrote:i'm not a knowledgeable person on the rig veda and base60 so i can't really add much too the discussion.., but from what i easily could find within a few minutes... seeing how much (or little) survived and got scraped together in 10th B.C. it can easily been modified with other facts to make it look authentic, it wouldn't be the first (and the last) time it has been done.


Sandracottus wrote:I dont understand what you are talking about . You cannot reject thousands of years of tradition with a mere theory like this one you gave.

The evidences I provided only backs up an already known Indian tradition which says the Rig Veda was composed much before the Mahabharata war of 3102 BC.

If you say 5000 modern pages equivalent was scraped together in 1000 BC, you must tell me what makes you think so.

The Rig Veda was written down only in the 14 th century AD.
Until then and even today , it was orally transmitted from Teacher to disciples for the past 6000 years.

Even if all the printed copies of the Vedas are burned , there are people in India who can recite them from memory without a single error. So meticulously and scrupulously were they preserved that not a word was lost or added to them.

It is a great wonder of human civilization---it can be rivaled only if modern Egyptians still recited their ancient hymns


This part of the discussion is what could be held in the history section.
i'm not familiar with the rig veda and what it's contributions have been to mankind, but that is something that's worth investigating.
what you just wrote, is where it get's interesting. for a VERY, VERY long time is history, it has been passed down orally. I don't think it's worth having a discussion on how many people can recite it perfectly, but how well it has been passed on. you might be familiar with the telephone game and how a message over a long distance (for example time) can be twisted into something else. the tricky part is to track the authenticity over that period.

As a great human civilization, i doubt it can be denied... perhaps only how great it is/was compaired to other civilizations, and that might be one that be be discussion in history, politics and perhaps it's fit for philosophy.




nemesiss wrote:as far as why a circle has 360 degrees, that can and has been explained already and i do not see what difference it would make if the first ones were the babylonians or the sumarians or some other ancient tribe.


Sandracottus wrote:Do you mean that the study of History is meaningless?That the history forums should be banned?
If it is meaningless, then you may be correct.
But I love history, especially the history of Mathematics and Astronomy . That however does not mean I am proficient in Mathematics or Astronomy. I know only what an 18 year old is expected to know.

Anyway it is much better than learning the body counts of some stupid wars and their dates
[/quote]

i wouldn't say history is meaningless and it certainly should not be banned.
what i tried to say was along the lines, that we have indeed a decent understanding of it's origin.
how much of an impact does knowing it's origin, in a general sense, have on the subject? how will it help our understanding and give us (new) innovations?

im not expecting an answer to the last, because that is pretty hard to quantify, perhaps the one before might... , if the answer is a simple "i do not know(,yet)", i think is perfectly fine.
Last edited by nemesiss on Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:04 pm
)O( Hytegia )O(League LegendUser avatarPosts: 3126Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 10:27 pm Gender: Cake

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

I have an idea.

When stomped down on to actually prove my point in one thread, I make a new one and pretend as if the other one didn't exist.

Hahaaaa~
Some would insinuate that being drunk at 9 in the morning to be signs of serious issues.
Me? I'd insinuate it as signs of no plans and a refrigerator full of Whiskey and Guinness.
Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:07 pm
SandracottusUser avatarPosts: 122Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:44 pm Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

Thank you for your suggestion. It seems much better than what I did.It was pretty exhausting too, creating long posts.

With point 1 my first question would be, WHICH zodiac are we talking about?
im not a major in history, but as far as i know, almost all civilications see something in the night sky and create tales about the stars, here also on which hemisphere you are influences the outcome.



The Zodiac in general. The question is where was it first conceived

In one picture in my post to Ghost, you will observe a comparison of the Western and the Sanskrit one.

The similarities are obvious and it is argued that it is due to common origin , explained through the mediation of the Babylonians .

Please examine my original sources.....

http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifa ... odiac.html


As to the transmission , here is a paper

http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0301078.pdf


I hope you will notice a curious fact here.....

Back in 4000 BC, the spoked wheel had not yet been invented elsewhere.

A spoked wheel is mentioned in many places in Rig Veda. Specifically the five spoked wheel (1.164.13) and the 360-spoked wheel (1.164.48) are mentioned. The spoked wheel has four parts, hubs nābih, fellies pradhaya, spokes shanka, āre or rim. By the time of Yajurveda (Y.V. 16.27) the number and varieties of the manufactured chariots had increased so much that a separate guild of chariot makers was developed. Dr. Kulakarni (1983) writes

"The proficiency in chariot building presupposes a good deal of knowledge of geometry... The fixing of spokes of odd or even numbers require knowledge of dividing the area of the circle into the desired numbers of small parts of equal area, by drawing diameters. This also presupposes the knowledge of dividing a given angle into equal parts".

So much for Ghostys accusation for lack of rigor in the Vedic knowledge of the circle.

This part of the discussion is what could be held in the history section.
i'm not familiar with the rig veda and what it's contributions have been to mankind, but that is something that's worth investigating.
what you just wrote, is where it get's interesting. for a VERY, VERY long time is history, it has been passed down orally. I don't think it's worth having a discussion on how many people can recite it perfectly, but how well it has been passed on. you might be familiar with the telephone game and how a message over a long distance (for example time) can be twisted into something else. the tricky part is to track the authenticity over that period.

As a great human civilization, i doubt it can be denied... perhaps only how great it is/was compaired to other civilizations, and that might be one that be be discussion in history, politics and perhaps it's fit for philosophy.



There is an Ashrama near my house where they teach children . It takes over 15 years atleast.
I wouldn't dare though.

I usually escape nationalistic feelings.......but this cultural continuity defeats all my rationality....

Imagine ! .........a five thousand year old hymn today available in Youtube



Asatoma Satgamaya
Tamasoma Jyotirgamaya
Mrityorma Amritam Gamaya

Sarve vabantu Sukhina , sarve santu Niramaya
Sarve Bhadrani Paschantu, maa kaschit dukhe bhav bhavet

oṃ dyauḥ śāntirantarikṣaṁ śāntiḥ |

pṛthivī śāntir āpaḥ śāntiroṣadhayaḥ śāntiḥ |

vanaspatayaḥ śāntirviśvedevāḥ śāntir-brahma śāntiḥ |

sarvam śāntiḥ śāntireva śāntiḥ sāmā śāntiredhiḥ |

oṃ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ ||

The translation of the above music reads thus

Lead me from the false to the truth, from darkness to light, from death to immortality

O Lord of peace! May there be peace in space
Peace in the atmosphere
May the oceans be peaceful unto us
May the vegetation be peaceful unto us.
May the Earth be peaceful unto us
May all the learned and enlightened bestow peace upon us.
May the Vedas and the entire universe be peaceful unto us
May my desire calm down into peace
May my anger calm down
May there be Peace within peace.
May that all embracing peace remain eternally with us.


Yajur Veda 37. 17

Image
" The mistake is we try to tie the whole world down to our plane of thought and to make our mind the measure of the universe"
Vivekananda


" The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it seems meaningless"
Steven Weinberg
Thu Aug 16, 2012 4:13 pm
SandracottusUser avatarPosts: 122Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:44 pm Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

)O( Hytegia )O( wrote:I have an idea.

When stomped down on to actually prove my point in one thread, I make a new one and pretend as if the other one didn't exist.

Hahaaaa~



The bottom line is ---- No one, including yourself, gave any justification for the "Independent rediscovery" . That being the case for months now, and it being obvious that such a thing wouldn't come , It was only proper to stop.

If you invalidate the 22 arguments I gave for the transmission or if you provide any justification at all for the I R , I will surely plunge right back.

Or, its just plain pointless. The topic failed in its objective of disproving the transmission.
" The mistake is we try to tie the whole world down to our plane of thought and to make our mind the measure of the universe"
Vivekananda


" The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it seems meaningless"
Steven Weinberg
Thu Aug 16, 2012 4:40 pm
Master_Ghost_KnightContributorUser avatarPosts: 2466Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:57 pmLocation: Portugal Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

Sandracottus wrote:1. That the Zodiac of 12 divisions and the circle of 360 degrees was invented by the Vedic astronomers.

You mean when you said this?
Sandracottus wrote:(RV 1.164.48) Twelve spokes, one wheel, three navels, who can comprehend
this? In this there are 360 spokes put in like pegs which do not get loosened.
This means that the ecliptic, which is the wheel of time, is divided into 360 parts

Or this?
Sandracottus wrote:The division of the circle into four quadrants of 90 degrees each is described
in another hymn: (RV 1.155.6)The division of the wheel of time into 360 parts occurs elsewhere as well.

Let's do something that you probably never done, instead of letting other crackpots tell you what is in the book, let's go actually read what is in the book.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv01155.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv01164.htm
Does it look like a suggestion to use angular metric of a 360 units per revolution?
NO!

Sandracottus wrote:2. That it was transmitted, along with Geometry, lunar and solar calenders etc to Babylon via the Hittite and Mittani Indo Aryan tribes around 1500 BC

I don't know what is it with you and the Babylonians. When I said Sumerians I really did mean the Sumerians, which are a different civilization even if one would eventually conquer the other, which is a civilization that predates 2000BC, it even predates the time spans you wrongfully attribute to the Rig Vedas. Now how can you pull off the claim that they borrowed it from India even when they already had it way before the dates you claim for the Vedic sources? If there was something stolen, would that mean that Indians were the ones doing the stealing from the Sumerians?
But what do I know. I am just a colonialist trying to claim European superiority by attributing this to regions that got nothing to do with Europe.

Sandracottus wrote:3. To provide conclusive evidence that the Rig Veda is a neolithic creation dating back to 4500--3500 BC.

I'm sorry but your "conclusive" evidence were laughable at best.

Sandracottus wrote:4. To show that the Vedas are intellectually sophisticated and cannot be rejected as "Religious Mumbo Jumbo" as Ghosty does.

It is religious mumbo jumbo. Just read the damn thing.
Here, read it for free: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/

Sandracottus wrote:I dont understand what you are talking about . You cannot reject thousands of years of tradition with a mere theory like this one you gave.

More like tradition of Indian plagiarism that is for sure.

Sandracottus wrote:Even if all the printed copies of the Vedas are burned , there are people in India who can recite them from memory without a single error. So meticulously and scrupulously were they preserved that not a word was lost or added to them.

That is just ridiculous. There are people making identical claims for the Bible and the Quran, but when you look into it, it just does not stand up. It is not even possible if for nothing else but the fact that the language has radically changed since then. Not even your sources believe that.
How can I interpret this egregious statement if for nothing else but religious dogma that it is? I bet you follow the Vedic religion.

Sandracottus wrote:But I love history, especially the history of Mathematics and Astronomy . That however does not mean I am proficient in Mathematics or Astronomy. I know only what an 18 year old is expected to know.

And that is probably your biggest problem. Some crackpot feeds you an ill-conceived story and you are none the wiser. You simply don't know what they are talking about. But I do, this is one of the things I do best. Those baloney authors generally get away with their nonsense because their general audience doesn't have a clue. But you try to spew their nonsense back to me you certainly cannot get away with it. Because when you say stuff like "the attic system couldn't handle precise fractional calculations, but the decimal place value system can" you are not talking to a guy that has never worked in any other system than the decimal, you are talking to a guy whose job involves finding clever tricks to perform precise calculations because the decimal place system is simply not precise enough. When you claim that "Indians had empirical mathematical proof", the first thing that crosses my mind is that "this guys has absolutely no concept of what proof in mathematics is". When you claim that the Taylor series were invented by the Indians centuries ago and you claim Raju as an indisputable source, know that I actually know what a Taylor series is and that when I read Raju's paper I know that he doesn't know. When you bring numerology bullshit, I know precisely what it is all about.
Your blind sight in this area enabled you to simply be fooled by these crackpots.
I know that people don't like being told that they were fooled, and don't think that I am trying to call you a fool. It happens that people get mislead and I hope you don't have any resentment to realize that.
You are still very young, and believe me when I say that you are still very naà¯ve (special when you deal in such absolutes as "So meticulously and scrupulously were they preserved that not a word was lost or added to them" ), unfortunately I also know that you won't realize this until a couple of years in the future. When you look back and this and feel somewhat embarrassed by that, I hope that you take it as a lesson for life.
"I have an irrefutable argument for the existence of...." NO, STOP! You are already wrong!
Thu Aug 16, 2012 4:45 pm
WWW
SandracottusUser avatarPosts: 122Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:44 pm Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

Let's do something that you probably never done, instead of letting other crackpots tell you what is in the book, let's go actually read what is in the book.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv01155.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv01164.htm
Does it look like a suggestion to use angular metric of a 360 units per revolution?
NO!


Listen Ghost...

I am not letting this post get lost too......You can stop attacking the Scholars I read.Its not making any impression for they come without any backing

More and more insults at Scholars whose views you dont agree with is not befitting and I wont bother if you stick to that.


They are certainly not crackpots . They are distinguished scholars. Your stupidity and bigotry is not going to change that.

The Sacred text website page you provided also contains all the verses Frawley translated----Every one of them.Please show otherwise. Your audience is not stupid.

Remove the poetry and you get the clear verses Frawley and Subash provided


Unlike you and me scholars like Frawley and Kazanas just like most notable historians take the pains to make their own translation of every text.

There is nothing wrong with their WORD FOR WORD translation

For your information, Griffiths translation is much inferior in comparison as it is 200 years old.Griffith was a poet who used Brahmin scholars and a dictionary to help himself translate the Rig Veda.

There is simply no comparison between a poet and a Historian.No historian today quotes Griffiths translation (except maybe Witzel, the only real crackpot who doesn't know sanskrit.)

Even the Sacred text website you quoted is sufficient to show the Zodiac



I'm sorry but your "conclusive" evidence were laughable at best.


You laugh at Archaeology which showed that Rig Veda is neolithic
You laugh at Geology which showed that the Rig Veda describes an environment which totally vanished by 2000 BC
You laugh at astronomy which showed that Vedic Aryans recorded eclipses and the stellar constellations between 4500 and 3500 BC
You laugh at Genetics which refuses to admit any entry of humans into India between 2000 and 1000 BC
You laugh at Linguistics which showed that Vedic Sanskrit is the most archaic Indo European language


You remind me of Prof Michael Witzel the neo Nazi Christian fanatic who has become an object of entertainment for the Scholarly sphere

http://www.scribd.com/doc/17192089/Dossier-on-Witzel
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17161525/knowwitzel


Even his laughs are dying out now.

Funny that you still have hope.


It is religious mumbo jumbo. Just read the damn thing.
Here, read it for free: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/


Afraid of poetry Ghosty ?
Too bad.
Dull people should not try poetry

Thats why Frawley gave you a clear translation in prose form.

That is just ridiculous. There are people making identical claims for the Bible and the Quran, but when you look into it, it just does not stand up. It is not even possible if for nothing else but the fact that the language has radically changed since then. Not even your sources believe that.


There is a story in Panchatantra about monkeys where a king and the minister went for a trip. They saw a lot of monkeys in a place. Every monkey was doing some monkey act, throwing stones, jumping, fighting each other, making noises etc. But there sat a monkey in one remote corner who was sitting in lotus position with eyes closed. The king said to the minister, "Look! This monkey looks like a saint. How peacefully is he sitting in meditation. Let us go and seek his blessings." The minister replied, "O King! Don't be duped by these acts of monkeys. Even this pretense of meditation by a monkey is a monkey-act. Lets move ahead." The king refused, went to the monkey and bowed in front of him. Suddenly the monkey jumped, snatched the crown of the king, and ran away!


Unlike the Koran and Bible--written and rewritten over and over , the Vedas were most meticulously transmitted that the meaning of many verses are unclear now.

Classical music was invented just to help memorize the Veda

Maxmuller announces in Origin of Religion (p 131): The texts of the Veda have been handed down to us with such accuracy that there is hardly a various reading in the proper sense of the word or even an uncertain accent in the whole of the Rig-Veda.

Maxmuller in Rigveda Vol 1, p XXX: As far we are able to judge at present, we can hardly speak of various readings in the Vedic hymns in the usual sense of that word. Various readings to be gathered from a collection of different manuscripts now accessible to us there are NONE.

Macdonell in A History of Sanskrit Literature (p 50): Extraordinary precautions soon began to be taken to guard the canonical text. Thus fixed against the possibility of any change or loss the result has been its preservation with a faithfulness unique in literary history.

Keigi in Rigveda (p 22): Since that time, nearly 3000 years ago, it (the text of the Vedas) has suffered no changes whatsoever, with a care such that the history of other literatures has nothing similar to compare with it.

Abinash Chandra Dass in Rigvedic India (p 5): These hymns, however, were not committed to writing on papyrus, palm-leaves or baked clay-bricks, but to human memory carefully cultivated for the purpose and were handed down from generation to generation without the loss of even a single word or syllable.

Should we say more? Except that we don't know the cure for paranoia.


Agniveer says :

This confusion comes in minds of those for whom study of a scripture only means becoming a Haafiz who could mug up and narrate the verses like a parrot. While mugging up is often useful and at times very necessary to preserve the Vedas, it is a very special course for very specific minds. For most of us, spending 12 years reading Physics will not mean spending time mugging the books. Further you don't need to spend 12 years to mug up each Veda! Something like Yajurveda has less than 2000 mantras that can be completed in less than a year if mugging is all that has to be done.

In reality, even when you are mastering one particular Veda, you must study other Vedas as well and gain a reasonable proficiency in them.


How can I interpret this egregious statement if for nothing else but religious dogma that it is? I bet you follow the Vedic religion.



Primitive poetry. Primitive gods and goddesses . Dumb rituals .

If this is your idea of the Vedic Religion. Then NO.

I do not follow it.

But if it is a series of steps in which human belief evolves into progressively higher stages, where finally, at the ultimate stage , the concept of "God and soul" vanish, leaving behind nothing but the witnessing consciousness , transcending both Atheism and Theism , yeilding the sublimest philosophy ever conceived by the human mind........

Then yes, I follow the Vedic way of life. I follow Vedanta Philosophy. The Vedic religion. The Layman may try to see Polytheism or Monotheism or Atheism in the Veda.

You are not yet ready to understand what I am saying. Your mentality is not ready.



Sandracottus wrote:But I love history, especially the history of Mathematics and Astronomy . That however does not mean I am proficient in Mathematics or Astronomy. I know only what an 18 year old is expected to know.


When you claim that the Taylor series were invented by the Indians centuries ago and you claim Raju as an indisputable source, know that I actually know what a Taylor series is and that when I read Raju's paper I know that he doesn't know. When you bring numerology bullshit, I know precisely what it is all about.
Your blind sight in this area enabled you to simply be fooled by these crackpots.


I dont have to "Claim" a well established and acknowledged fact . Dont run in circles.

If you believe Raju is a crackpot and that he does not know the Taylor series, please take it up with him. His web page is open for discussion.

The Taylor series was discovered by Nilakantha around 1444 AD. Yes, the same Nilakantha whose flawed planetary model was taken up by Tycho Brache.


i have studied Rajus arguments and the counterarguments raised by Whiteside and a few others . They all failed.


Only 2 counter arguments have so far come up

1. That Calculus developed nearly contemporaneously in India and Europe.( By Whiteside)

2. That there are no sudden jumps in Calculus in Europe ( Stedall 2005)

And neither you nor anyone else thought of these two----though they failed anyway .

So as of now, no one has disproved the Transmission nor has anyone given any reason for the "independent rediscovery" without formal proof.


That being the case , I stand with C.K Raju. And he is no crackpot. Dont forget what Atiyah did .

A crackpot is better than his tail


Because when you say stuff like "the attic system couldn't handle precise fractional calculations, but the decimal place value system can" you are not talking to a guy that has never worked in any other system than the decimal, you are talking to a guy whose job involves finding clever tricks to perform precise calculations because the decimal place system is simply not precise enough. When you claim that "Indians had empirical mathematical proof", the first thing that crosses my mind is that "this guys has absolutely no concept of what proof in mathematics is"


Not again. You can stop trying to make the attic look conspicuous . It does not have any notable merits, atleast not enough to make us want to bring it back. About fractions, you still haven't provided the little thing I asked for---that the peculiar numerals you used predate 800 AD. Because the original Greek was worse than the attic and they couldn't even think of a number like 0. 000000304 with an alphabetic system.

You very easily would convert it to 304/ 1000000000 and use it to solve fractions the way you showed me .
But that requires the place value system.


Again, please just give me what I asked and I will totally run out of rejoinders.


Albert Einstein once said: "A theory must not contradict empirical facts."

I have blown my larynx explaining the recognition of Empirical proofs in Mathematics.All Vedic philosophies recognize the Pratyaksha or the apparent as the immediate source of knowledge.

Your rejection of it stems from an uppish Eurocentrism which follows the Christian belief that Mathematics is "perfect and metaphysical"

You also believe that European epistemology is superior .

That would have been the case if Mathematics and Astronomy were invented in Europe. It was clearly not.



I know that people don't like being told that they were fooled, and don't think that I am trying to call you a fool. It happens that people get mislead and I hope you don't have any resentment to realize that.
You are still very young, and believe me when I say that you are still very naà¯ve (special when you deal in such absolutes as "So meticulously and scrupulously were they preserved that not a word was lost or added to them" ), unfortunately I also know that you won't realize this until a couple of years in the future. When you look back and this and feel somewhat embarrassed by that, I hope that you take it as a lesson for life.




Regal words you got there. My hair stands on end

But I'll pass.
" The mistake is we try to tie the whole world down to our plane of thought and to make our mind the measure of the universe"
Vivekananda


" The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it seems meaningless"
Steven Weinberg
Thu Aug 16, 2012 6:08 pm
Master_Ghost_KnightContributorUser avatarPosts: 2466Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:57 pmLocation: Portugal Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

Sandracottus wrote:You can stop attacking the Scholars I read.Its not making any impression for they come without any backing
More and more insults at Scholars whose views you dont agree with is not befitting and I wont bother if you stick to that.

WoW! Stop that and listen to yourself. Your so called "scholars" are what they are. I didn't just assert that they have misrepresented the text in order to claim something that is absurdly not true, I demonstrated it. If you don't like me to call them what they are and continue to remain in ignorance then don't come here.
And your mind is so twisted that you still defend them as if it was appropriate cherry pick verses, remove it of its context, change its meaning in order to say something that it doesn't.
It isn't possible to do better than to actually show you what is in the text, if your attitude isn't unreasonable I don't know what is. If you remain unconvinced after this, I don't know if anything could ever convince you, and in that situation I'm just wasting my time with you.
Sandracottus wrote:You laugh at Archaeology which showed that Rig Veda is neolithic

You have not showed any archaeology evidence other than your say so.
Sandracottus wrote:You laugh at Geology which showed that the Rig Veda describes an environment which totally vanished by 2000 BC

It would be interesting if it was true. Unfortunately you cannot quote a reference of a river in a book and claim it to be any river you want, unless you can demonstrate (not just assert) that the river mentioned in the text is the one you claim (which no one knows to this day) your point is mute.
Sandracottus wrote:You laugh at astronomy which showed that Vedic Aryans recorded eclipses and the stellar constellations between 4500 and 3500 BC

Unless you can show me in the Rig Veda what hymn talks about the careful measurements of the constellations, you might just as well be arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
Sandracottus wrote:You laugh at Genetics which refuses to admit any entry of humans into India between 2000 and 1000 BC
You laugh at Linguistics which showed that Vedic Sanskrit is the most archaic Indo European language

I would care if it meant anything, but unfortunately it doesn't (and it probably isn't true either).

Sandracottus wrote:Unlike the Koran and Bible--written and rewritten over and over , the Vedas were most meticulously transmitted that the meaning of many verses are unclear now

Funny because the exact same thing is claimed for the Quran and the Bible.
However they are not happy to claim this:
Sandracottus wrote:Abinash Chandra Dass in Rigvedic India (p 5): These hymns, however, were not committed to writing on papyrus, palm-leaves or baked clay-bricks, but to human memory carefully cultivated for the purpose and were handed down from generation to generation without the loss of even a single word or syllable.

If they were not written but instead committed to human memory, then the claim that it is without the loss of a single syllable presents itself as a paradox. Because the memory of people is gone once they die. If they have no texts to compare, on what grounds can they claim that it hasn't change a single syllable?
I would like to hear your excuse for that.

Sandracottus wrote:Then yes, I follow the Vedic way of life. I follow Vedanta Philosophy. The Vedic religion.

And how do you think I guessed that?

Sandracottus wrote:If you believe Raju is a crackpot and that he does not know the Taylor series, please take it up with him. His web page is open for discussion.

It is no my life's work to go after every single idiot on the internet and tell them they are stupid. You are the one that came here, you are the one that upheld him, and when you do that then you are the one getting the flack. Or you either man up and recognize his mistakes or stop using him as a source.
"I have an irrefutable argument for the existence of...." NO, STOP! You are already wrong!
Thu Aug 16, 2012 7:35 pm
WWW
)O( Hytegia )O(League LegendUser avatarPosts: 3126Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 10:27 pm Gender: Cake

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

Sandracottus wrote:

The bottom line is ---- No one, including yourself, gave any justification for the "Independent rediscovery" . That being the case for months now, and it being obvious that such a thing wouldn't come , It was only proper to stop.

If you invalidate the 22 arguments I gave for the transmission or if you provide any justification at all for the I R , I will surely plunge right back.

Or, its just plain pointless. The topic failed in its objective of disproving the transmission.


Sandy,
in the FINAL POST on that thread, I explained that the three things required to demonstrate plagiarism - methodology, intent, and means. Why would the Greeks, the grand historians with an irrefutable reputation of keeping cultural diversity in it's own right, "steal" knowledge? The methodology, according to your own words, is "remarkably different" and all you've shown is the possibility - though hell-bent and far-out - of transmission of information.
Once again, it's not like they were walking around with rocket fuel or computers here. It was a basic mathematical principle that any civilization would have eventually came to independent of another. It's like the mastery of fire or the taming of agriculture and animals. The use of tools. Or any thought process derived from observation and interaction with the Universe.
The Norse Pagans thought that the lights in the night sky were small fires burning from far away. But it's not like we're citing them as the ultimate source for stars being burning balls of heat and light, are we?

Yet you'll sit there and rant about intellectual theft of a mathematical principles that any culture could have derived on it's own - on the cited sources that:
1) You think it could have been transmitted somehow.
2) In your own personal opinion as a modern person not having to use numeral systems that the Greeko-Roman numeral system is bulky to you. Ergo they had to have stolen all of their ideas. It's like saying "I can't speak Greek. They must not have written any books either - the language and alphabet is too bulky to write things like the Iliad and the Odyssey. It must have been stolen!"

2 is breaking a basic principle of information and computer programming - that anything done in one language can be performed in a different language given different methods.

So, I'm calling you out. Quit this song-and-dance act. Stop diverting away when you've been put on the spot. You either CAN DIRECTLY SHOW that it was plagiarism, or you CAN NOT.
Some would insinuate that being drunk at 9 in the morning to be signs of serious issues.
Me? I'd insinuate it as signs of no plans and a refrigerator full of Whiskey and Guinness.
Thu Aug 16, 2012 7:53 pm
australopithecusAdministratorUser avatarPosts: 4115Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:27 pmLocation: Snozzle, Kernow Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

I'm seriously considering enforcing a character limit on these posts. If you can't be succinct then start a blog. We don't have the time to wade through essays.
Image
Thu Aug 16, 2012 11:04 pm
SandracottusUser avatarPosts: 122Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:44 pm Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

Master_Ghost_Knight wrote:WoW! Stop that and listen to yourself. Your so called "scholars" are what they are. I didn't just assert that they have misrepresented the text in order to claim something that is absurdly not true, I demonstrated it. If you don't like me to call them what they are and continue to remain in ignorance then don't come here.
.


All you have to do is prove Frawley and Subash wrong and not proclaim them idiots when either you dont understand them or you dont agree with them.I have not seen you raise a single counter argument against them. That simply means you are the crackpot here.

You have not showed any archaeology evidence other than your say so.


Then you need to explain why the Rig Veda does not have many of the items that characterize 1500 BC. Why is there no mention of Iron or Silver? Why no Cotton, cultivated since 3500 BC. Why no fire alters, invented around the same time? What about Bricks and buildings which appears after Bricks were invented around 3500 BC. ?

Writing was invented contemporaneously in India, Egypt and Sumer around 3500 BC. Yet the Rig Veda does not give any clue as to writing.

If it were one or two items , it was purely a coincidence . But here we have a whole lot of stuff clearly found in the later Vedas and later India and totally absent in the Rig

The funny fact it, in the past 200 years, no historian has given any such justification for the 1500 BC dating.Can you pull that off

It would be interesting if it was true. Unfortunately you cannot quote a reference of a river in a book and claim it to be any river you want, unless you can demonstrate (not just assert) that the river mentioned in the text is the one you claim (which no one knows to this day) your point is mute.


I should probably stop with this , considering how you completely ignored everything I said .

The Vedas clearly state that the Saraswathy flows between the Satudri and the Yamuna rivers ----which is exactly where its dried up basin has been discoveredThe Saraswathy was the biggest river there was. Thats exactly what Geology says. Thats exactly what the Vedas asserted.

(RV 10.75.5)Oh Ganga, Yamuna, Sarasvati, Sutudri with Parushni, Marudvridha with Asikni; Arjikiya with Vitasta and Sushnoma hear this praise.

(RV. 2.41.16) best of mothers ... best of rivers ... give us fame, recognizing that we are without fame. Ascertaining the wishes of the great sages the best of rivers(the Sarasvati) incorporated Aruna with her own body; formerly the flow(of the aruna) was hidden. Afterwards (the Sarasvati) inundated the divine aruna wih its own waters

Above you can see the Great rivers listed from East to west starting with the Ganges . This list is in perfect order, as acknowledged by Geologists.And archaeology and Geology comes together here. The Majority of ruined cities lay along the dried up bed of the river

Image

As archaeological explorations and investigations proceeded, it became clear that over 80% of the 2600+ archaeological sites were NOT on the banks of Indus river but on the banks of Vedic River Sarasvati which is also mentioned in a very ancient text, Rigveda in 72 rica-s. The recent excavations in Bhirrana on River Drishadvati in Haryana haveshown continuous settlements dating back to circa 5th millennium BCE
prompting Prof. BB Lal to postulate the possibility of archaeologically identifying Vedic people.


Beat it Ghosty........ There is no denying

1 That the river existed
2 That it stopped reaching the sea by 3000 BC
3. That it dried up by 2000 BC
4. That it is profusely mentioned in the Rig Veda as the best among rivers.


Unless you can show me in the Rig Veda what hymn talks about the careful measurements of the constellations, you might just as well be arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.



I thought you'd get more scared of Poetry. So I avoided direct quotes.Okay...here is one example. One of the oldest recorded Eclipses in the Rig Veda. Or may be the oldest recorded eclipse in human history

All the calculations are provided . Just pick from the contents.


The Total solar Eclipse three days before the autumnal equinox recorded by Atri in the 4 th book of the Rig Veda


http://www.vedicastronomy.net/deltat.htm


The conclusion from the above site is thus :

There is no doubt that Rishi Atri observed and recorded a near total solar eclipse three days before autumnal equinox (Rig Veda 5:40:5 & Sankhyayana Brahmana 24:4). Our eclipse search for Atri's eclipse using modern software tools, shows that thirteen eclipses occur about three days before autumnal equinox, at latitude of 25 degrees N in the period 1000BC to 5000BC. These thirteen occur somewhere on the globe at 25 N. Since there is uncertainty in earth's rotational speed any one of these could be a good candidate for Atri's eclipse. By acceptance of an appropriate delta T model, the choice can be narrowed

If we go by Stephenson's model, only 1131BC and 1522 BC candidates are valid. However, if we accept Meeus's model then only one candidate is 4677 BC would be valid.

The 1131 BC or the 1522 BC dates would vindicate those who proclaim all Veda work was around 1400 BC. However, for those who propound much earlier dates, the 4677 BC candidate is the best candidate for Atri's solar eclipse.

While this document has searched all possible candidates for Atri's eclipse, it has been difficult to precisely identify Atri's eclipse. However, the Author has a bias toward the 4677BC date as Atri's eclipse date based on other astronomical data From Atharvana Veda (19:7), Vedanga Jyotishya and Taittareeya Brahmana texts.




Should we call Atri the father of Astronomy?
:lol: :lol: :lol:

I would care if it meant anything, but unfortunately it doesn't (and it probably isn't true either).


Vedic Sanskrit is the most archaic of all IE languages. The videos I gave show this fact.
And if, Rig Veda is 7000 years old, Sanskrit is mankinds oldest recorded language.

On Genetics, here is a neat paper
http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifa ... ebate.html

Even Wikipedia, which is usually antagonistic towards India, agrees

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R1a1


Funny because the exact same thing is claimed for the Quran and the Bible.
However they are not happy to claim this:



However two things would differ

1. That Philology and Linguistics agree with the coherence and preservation of the Rig Veda. Not a single anomaly has been detected by anyone. It is very clear that the language of the Rig Veda is more Archaic than the Sanskrit of the other Vedas.This would not have been had it seen 6000 years of alterations

This video explains that.




2. The claims for the Bible and Koran are religiously motivated. The people who preserved the Vedas never had any intention of publicizing their actions or propagating their religion. They did it because sincerely loved the Veda . The Muzzies love their Pedophile prophet and they violently propagate their religion. This is evident from the fatwa which declared that Insults at Allah would be forgiven, but not those at Momo

The Rig Veda manuscripts have been selected for inscription in UNESCO's "Memory of the World" Register 2007 precisely for this.

If they were not written but instead committed to human memory, then the claim that it is without the loss of a single syllable presents itself as a paradox. Because the memory of people is gone once they die. If they have no texts to compare, on what grounds can they claim that it hasn't change a single syllable?
I would like to hear your excuse for that.


Fantastic ! The memory dies when you die , eh?. ....Oh I didn't know that .

Thats why they teach disciples .

On the grounds that there are no anachronisms in the Rig veda
On the grounds that the Rig vedic Sanskrit is much more Archaic
On the grounds that Linguistic Science does not disagree with tradition in this matter.

Indian education system was way different from the western until it was replaced in the 19th century.

Life divided into 4 stages or Orders back in Vedic India. It was a boarding school system , back then. Tough and strict life.

It is no my life's work to go after every single idiot on the internet and tell them they are stupid. You are the one that came here, you are the one that upheld him, and when you do that then you are the one getting the flack. Or you either man up and recognize his mistakes or stop using him as a source.


Afraid Ghost ?

You are the one who thinks he is a crack pot. Your refusal to talk to him belies your lack of faith
" The mistake is we try to tie the whole world down to our plane of thought and to make our mind the measure of the universe"
Vivekananda


" The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it seems meaningless"
Steven Weinberg
Last edited by Sandracottus on Fri Aug 17, 2012 5:46 am, edited 2 times in total.
Fri Aug 17, 2012 5:03 am
SandracottusUser avatarPosts: 122Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:44 pm Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

Sandy,
in the FINAL POST on that thread, I explained that the three things required to demonstrate plagiarism - methodology, intent, and means. Why would the Greeks, the grand historians with an irrefutable reputation of keeping cultural diversity in it's own right, "steal" knowledge?


We should define "stealing"

1. Something lost and found ---Not stealing
2. Something taken with acknowledgement--Not stealing
3. Something taken without knowledge of the original source--Not stealing
4. Something Taken and purposefully not acknowledged---Stealing

The Greeks did not steal anything.Not even when they were influenced by Babylon. Neither did the Babylonians who adapted Vedic Astronomy.

It is Eurocentric historians who bestows unnecessary decorations on the Greeks which make them look like thieves.

"Black Athena: Fabrication of ancient Greece" is an authority on this issue . It has not been denied by any historian.

Plato and Aristotle were not aware of the influence of Samkhya and Vedanta on them because they did not know the sources of the particular ideas that permeated their society back then.

Plato and the Upanishads
N Kazanas, Omilos Meleton, Athens: January 2004.
http://www.omilosmeleton.gr/pdf/en/philosophy/PU.pdf


Once again, it's not like they were walking around with rocket fuel or computers here. It was a basic mathematical principle that any civilization would have eventually came to independent of another. It's like the mastery of fire or the taming of agriculture and animals. The use of tools. Or any thought process derived from observation and interaction with the Universe.


The fact that independent rediscovery could happen does not prove that it did happen

Your analogy fails in one respect-----you cant invent the wheel without first inventing tools. There cannot be any sudden jumps . It takes painful time.

We see Europe Jumping from decimal system (which came from India) to Calculus( which had attracted a group of mathematically able Jesuits) IN JUST 30 YEARS

Also necessary to be considered is how they invented Calculus without formal proof in a few decades while it took a 1000 years to do the same in India with proof

Also to be addressed is the fact that Jesuits were indulging in translation activities and they were contacting people like Tycho Brache, Kepler and others in this respect.

Not to mention the Tychonic planetary model . Or Mercator trignometry chart

We have no dearth for means or motivation necessary for acquiring calculus. We also know of the bull of "Christian rediscovery" which persecuted European scientists who revealed their pagan sources.

All this has been discussed. Why do you trouble me again?


Yet you'll sit there and rant about intellectual theft of a mathematical principles that any culture could have derived on it's own - on the cited sources that:
1) You think it could have been transmitted somehow.
2) In your own personal opinion as a modern person not having to use numeral systems that the Greeko-Roman numeral system is bulky to you. Ergo they had to have stolen all of their ideas. It's like saying "I can't speak Greek. They must not have written any books either - the language and alphabet is too bulky to write things like the Iliad and the Odyssey. It must have been stolen!"


I usually love the invention of the wheel. But I absolutely hate circles, running on it atleast.
" The mistake is we try to tie the whole world down to our plane of thought and to make our mind the measure of the universe"
Vivekananda


" The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it seems meaningless"
Steven Weinberg
Fri Aug 17, 2012 5:37 am
Master_Ghost_KnightContributorUser avatarPosts: 2466Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:57 pmLocation: Portugal Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

Sandracottus wrote:All you have to do is prove Frawley and Subash wrong

I did prove them wrong! Are you mentaly impaired or do you just select out of you memory what you don't like?
It is obvious that I wasting my fucking time with you.
"I have an irrefutable argument for the existence of...." NO, STOP! You are already wrong!
Fri Aug 17, 2012 4:55 pm
WWW
massfreePosts: 3Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 10:30 pm Gender: Pinecone

Re: The circle of 360 degrees

I was sent a link to this thread by a close friend, and felt compelled to comment.

First of all to commend Sandracottus for making an effort to present the facts in a clear and thorough manner. It is unfortunate that some other forum members seem to be unwilling to read or think. That is their business.

Although I do not hold Frawley's work in tremendously high regard, I do appreciate the contributions he has made towards DEbunking groundless Colonialist theories regarding the historical and cultural origins of the Veda. Sandracottus has summarized many of these contributions quite well, for those who can be bothered to read.

But there is a deeper symbolic layer to the Veda -- and to the zodiac -- which Frawley systematically neglects. Here is an article by cosmologist Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet which brings the limitations of Frawley's methodology clearly to the fore. http://www.vediccosmology.com/Rigvedacos1.html

It is worth noting that it is not only the circle of 360 degrees which is of Vedic origin, but the symbolism of the zodiacal signs (the friend, the bull, the lion, etc) which is woven into the fabric of the Vedic hymns, and thus not, as is often claimed, of later Sumerian, Babylonian or Greek origin.

Mister Ghost Night wrote:

Let's do something that you probably never done, instead of letting other crackpots tell you what is in the book, let's go actually read what is in the book.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv01155.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv01164.htm
Does it look like a suggestion to use angular metric of a 360 units per revolution?
NO!


No? If you have read the article I referenced above, you will know that the "three strides" referenced in RV.1.155 refer to the three strides of Vishnu and the zodiacal signs Leo, Taurus and Aquarius. Thus the hymn most certainly refers to the Year, via the zodiacal imagery, and the last verse states clearly: "He, like a rounded wheel, hath in swift motion set his ninety racing steeds together with the four." This is a clear and unmistakable references to a division of the Year into 90x4 = 360 units of TIME, since the horse / asva (steeds) is, throughout the Veda, a symbol of the power of Time, or of "propelling force", as Sandracottus/Frawley writes.

Obviously there is no mention in the Veda of "angular metrics". It is generally fruitless to project modern mathematical concepts onto premodern and archaic thought-systems. One has to actually enter into the thought of the Rishi and see as he did, to the extent that one is able to.
Sun Aug 11, 2013 12:03 am
Master_Ghost_KnightContributorUser avatarPosts: 2466Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:57 pmLocation: Portugal Gender: Male

Post Re: The circle of 360 degrees

massfree wrote:
Let's do something that you probably never done, instead of letting other crackpots tell you what is in the book, let's go actually read what is in the book.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv01155.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv01164.htm
Does it look like a suggestion to use angular metric of a 360 units per revolution?
NO!

No? If you have read the article I referenced above, you will know that the "three strides" referenced in RV.1.155 refer to the three strides of Vishnu and the zodiacal signs Leo, Taurus and Aquarius. Thus the hymn most certainly refers to the Year, via the zodiacal imagery, and the last verse states clearly: "He, like a rounded wheel, hath in swift motion set his ninety racing steeds together with the four." This is a clear and unmistakable references to a division of the Year into 90x4 = 360 units of TIME, since the horse / asva (steeds) is, throughout the Veda, a symbol of the power of Time, or of "propelling force", as Sandracottus/Frawley writes.

You seam to have mistaken me by someone who gives a shit about the Zodiac.

massfree wrote:Obviously there is no mention in the Veda of "angular metrics". It is generally fruitless to project modern mathematical concepts onto premodern and archaic thought-systems. One has to actually enter into the thought of the Rishi and see as he did, to the extent that one is able to.

Well... Thankyou for agreeing with me, I guess.
"I have an irrefutable argument for the existence of...." NO, STOP! You are already wrong!
Sun Aug 11, 2013 7:54 am
WWW
Next
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
 [ 26 posts ] 
Return to Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
cron