[QUOTE=Surya Deva;49348]There is some evidence to suggest that Newton may have been familiar with Kerela school of mathematicians, which may have been transmitted to the West through the Jesuit missionaries. Prior to Newton formulating his laws of motion, the Vaiseshika school had already discovered the basic laws of motion. So Newton cannot be identified as a pioneer of physics in recorded history, when it is clear there were older scientists who had come to the same conclusions. Likewise, with Libnitz, he was not the first to work with binary, but there are older scientists like Pingala who had beat him to it in recorded history.
I use to find Newton and Einstein impressive, but then I realised how wrong they were. Newtonian mechanics is actually false, for it hinges on a model of a deterministic universe where every object is acted on by forces. Then Einstein takes this a step further by introducing inertia frames, but he too proposes a model of a deterministic universe, with the addition of the variables of space-time. They both propose a universe that is objective, real and governed by laws of time and space.
They are both wrong. The universe is not objective, it is not real and it is not governed by laws of time and space. Newton and Einstein have long been superceded by quantum physics. Einstein was wrong to reject the ether, because the ether has been confirmed by quantum physics. He hated quantum physics in fact and derided its predicates that two particles could interact instantaneously outside of time and space as "spooky action"
Today this is a fact and therefore Einstein was wrong.
Western physics relies too much on mathematical formalism and creates entities whose ontological status is debatable: like mass, weight, charge, resistance, power, work, energy, force, atomic number and tries to explain eveything through simple causality with a limited number of variables. In Vedic physics we do not get these errors, if something is unseen and unknown, it is simply called “adrishya” unknown. The existence of magnetism was realised by the Vaiseshika for they explained that a loadstone and a needle attract one another, but the cause of this is adrishya. They did not posit a separate force known as magnetism which is the cause of the attraction. As they understand causality was a complex phenomenon. As we know today in quantum physics, how everything that takes place is in relation with everything else.
The reason I call Kapila the master physicist is that he is the only who truly understand prakriti and how prakriti works and its interactive relationship with purusha. He correctly identified that whatever we call matter is just vibrations of the guna interactions at the substratum which exists in several phases(7*7 vibrational densities) All of the tattvas(waves, forces, electromagnetic energy, atoms, molecules) are just vibrations of the gunas. The correct view of reality is to understand everything as existing as vibrations, a set of frequencies interacting with one another. In order to isolate particular frequencies you create resonance with those frequencies. This is the grande unified field theory that Western physics is yet to realise, again because its full of a multiplicity of these mathematical entities - that do not really exist.[/QUOTE]
Yes, I was familiar with the Kerala schools of Mathematics theory. However, more has to be unearthed to make a strong case against Newton.
I also knew of the discovery of binary numbers by Pingala for a long time.
I know what you mean when you mention the Vaiseshika and the obsessive need to know everything through mathematical formalism. However, being the science student I am, I love to be able to formulate equations to explain and predict the phenomena around me. That is the beauty of physics. That is why I worship these European scientists and all those who preceded them.
Besides, I personally think you done yourself a great disservice by not learning the mathematical formalism. You have very unique approaches on such matters and conceptions of the world around you. Considering your intellect, you would have been able to create equations to match such concepts of yours. You might have even become a great physicist and challenge the established notions. I know your opinions of such Western dogmatism but that is sometimes the best way to rectify something you disagree with: fighting fire with fire.
and I’m am patronizing you