4 ms·

This is going to test HN's tolerance for myths and pseudo-science, but then it's a Sunday. "It has a self-contained master-key for extending the evaluation to a

by jeswin 13y ago

This is going to test HN's tolerance for myths and pseudo-science, but then it's a Sunday. "It has a self-contained master-key for extending the evaluation to any number of decimal places." is not going to convince many people here. There are many alternate views on the origin of this verse itself. The one I find most believable, is that this is a fairly recent fabrication [1]. There is nothing to suggest that we had this level of accuracy that far back. For instance, how was this arrived at? Methods? None. But much later, _in the 5th century AD_, Aryabatta used a simpler expansion for which we actually have some evidence. Just like most other religious texts, the Vedas don't stand up to modern science and rigor. You'll see plenty of revivalist material on the web; many here in India hold it in high regard. In my view, its lasting significance has been the role in dividing India into castes. From the priests to the serfs, a system that continues to hurt even today. [1]: http://vedicmathmyth.quora.com/The-misconceptions-of-the-poem-gopi-bhagya-madhuvrata http://vedicmathmyth.quora.com/The-misconceptions-of-the-poe...

unmole 13y ago
Hear, hear! Was about to post the same link.
s-topper 13y ago
The verse 'gopi bhagya' basically follows Katapayadi system[0]. Earliest known usage of Katapayadi system was in 683 AD. That verse is from a 1965 book called "Vedic Mathematics" by Bharati Krishna Tirtha Maharaja[1]. The Quora blog you linked has issues with terminologies and timelines of this specific "Vedic Mathematics" book - such as calling these mental calculation techniques and tricks as Vedic even though there are no references to them in Vedas[2]. This is more of a political matter ;) And, it's already pointed out in the article linked by OP[3]. I'm quoting it here: It must be pointed out that these sutras given by Tirtha Maharaja are created by the author himself, as stated in the introduction to his book, "Vedic Mathematics" (published posthumously) and are therefore not actually Vedic. These mathematical sutras are Vedic only in the sense that they are inspired by the Vedas in the mind of one dedicated to the Vedas. Thus the title "Vedic Mathematics" is not correct. [0]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katapayadi_system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katapayadi_system [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_Mathematics_%28book%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_Mathematics_%28book%29 [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharati_Krishna_Tirthaji#Mathematics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharati_Krishna_Tirthaji#Mathem... [3]http://www.vedicsciences.net/articles/vedic-mathematics.html http://www.vedicsciences.net/articles/vedic-mathematics.html
droid5 13y ago
/Just like most other religious texts, the Vedas don't stand up to modern science and rigor/ -- There is no such thing as modern science. Its the same universe that existed billions of years ago and with our "thought process" we are able to understand it better (compared to what was written in the past) and are calling it modern now. Go forward 100 years and look back at current science. What is it called as now ? /dividing india into castes by religion/ -- This is completely humans fault. What Bhagavadgita explained were the variety of things people do to get tired/frustrated in this place and get enlightened. Look at the meaning of division without the caste mirror. You see the same set of things happening everywhere in the world. a) People who are good at protecting others b) People who are good at taking care of the mess created by others c) people who are good at providing things to others c) People who are good at understanding things and sharing the knowledge with society. At some point, this whole thing got misunderstood, misinterpreted and exploited for ones selfishness. We are paying the price now. But, the same things explained still holds true everywhere in the world.
- MichaelGG 13y ago
  > our "thought process" Yes, that's what modern science refers to, the thought processes we use to determine what's true. Going back a while, Aristotle "reasoned" that women had less teeth than men. Such reasoning isn't accepted these days. The same science is what rejects most other religious texts - it does not stand up to current requirements of reason.
  - droid5 13y ago
    "thought process" is what distinguishes humans from others in terms of deciding whats right/wrong, (finding the truth) its not just science. Here is a difference i have observed between science/religion. In religion, we try to reject things rather than try to find true meaning (via thought process or practice). Which is really difficult in this time as "i can go buy pizza in 5 mins" kinda mindset. One more way we use reasoning is "if i didn't experience (via the senses) it doesn't exist". It takes time, really long time for the people (in tech terminology scientists, in religion terminology saints) to understand the universe and give us peace. Both religion/science are true. Religion talks about things which can't be experienced by our senses, but gain peace. While Science talks about the other, where the gain seem to be human advancement (to where ?). This may sound confusing at beginning, as it was to me. But, if we go through the same struggle of finding the truth, we will get it.
aufreak3 13y ago
> "It has a self-contained master-key for extending the evaluation to any number of decimal places." Well, at least if someone would actually say what the freaking "master key" is, it might be intellectually delightful even if historically BS. ... but I can't find any description of what this "master key" is.

by jeswin 13y ago

unmole 13y ago

Hear, hear! Was about to post the same link.

s-topper 13y ago

The verse 'gopi bhagya' basically follows Katapayadi system[0]. Earliest known usage of Katapayadi system was in 683 AD. That verse is from a 1965 book called "Vedic Mathematics" by Bharati Krishna Tirtha Maharaja[1]. The Quora blog you linked has issues with terminologies and timelines of this specific "Vedic Mathematics" book - such as calling these mental calculation techniques and tricks as Vedic even though there are no references to them in Vedas[2]. This is more of a political matter ;) And, it's already pointed out in the article linked by OP[3]. I'm quoting it here: It must be pointed out that these sutras given by Tirtha Maharaja are created by the author himself, as stated in the introduction to his book, "Vedic Mathematics" (published posthumously) and are therefore not actually Vedic. These mathematical sutras are Vedic only in the sense that they are inspired by the Vedas in the mind of one dedicated to the Vedas. Thus the title "Vedic Mathematics" is not correct. [0]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katapayadi_system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katapayadi_system [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_Mathematics_%28book%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_Mathematics_%28book%29 [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharati_Krishna_Tirthaji#Mathematics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharati_Krishna_Tirthaji#Mathem... [3]http://www.vedicsciences.net/articles/vedic-mathematics.html http://www.vedicsciences.net/articles/vedic-mathematics.html

droid5 13y ago

/Just like most other religious texts, the Vedas don't stand up to modern science and rigor/ -- There is no such thing as modern science. Its the same universe that existed billions of years ago and with our "thought process" we are able to understand it better (compared to what was written in the past) and are calling it modern now. Go forward 100 years and look back at current science. What is it called as now ? /dividing india into castes by religion/ -- This is completely humans fault. What Bhagavadgita explained were the variety of things people do to get tired/frustrated in this place and get enlightened. Look at the meaning of division without the caste mirror. You see the same set of things happening everywhere in the world. a) People who are good at protecting others b) People who are good at taking care of the mess created by others c) people who are good at providing things to others c) People who are good at understanding things and sharing the knowledge with society. At some point, this whole thing got misunderstood, misinterpreted and exploited for ones selfishness. We are paying the price now. But, the same things explained still holds true everywhere in the world.

MichaelGG 13y ago
> our "thought process" Yes, that's what modern science refers to, the thought processes we use to determine what's true. Going back a while, Aristotle "reasoned" that women had less teeth than men. Such reasoning isn't accepted these days. The same science is what rejects most other religious texts - it does not stand up to current requirements of reason.
- droid5 13y ago
  "thought process" is what distinguishes humans from others in terms of deciding whats right/wrong, (finding the truth) its not just science. Here is a difference i have observed between science/religion. In religion, we try to reject things rather than try to find true meaning (via thought process or practice). Which is really difficult in this time as "i can go buy pizza in 5 mins" kinda mindset. One more way we use reasoning is "if i didn't experience (via the senses) it doesn't exist". It takes time, really long time for the people (in tech terminology scientists, in religion terminology saints) to understand the universe and give us peace. Both religion/science are true. Religion talks about things which can't be experienced by our senses, but gain peace. While Science talks about the other, where the gain seem to be human advancement (to where ?). This may sound confusing at beginning, as it was to me. But, if we go through the same struggle of finding the truth, we will get it.

aufreak3 13y ago

> "It has a self-contained master-key for extending the evaluation to any number of decimal places." Well, at least if someone would actually say what the freaking "master key" is, it might be intellectually delightful even if historically BS. ... but I can't find any description of what this "master key" is.