[QUOTE=Nietzsche;55669]No one cares about what idiot Christians think.[/QUOTE]
Ahhhh… I’m not that bothered that you called me an idiot now… you seem to call everyone idiots. Your obviously bitter about how your life turned out. Turn off the computer and go for a run. You’ll feel better once you get the blood pumping around the body and into your brain… and don’t forget the endorphins!!
[QUOTE=The Scales;55682]Baseball owns cricket.[/QUOTE]
i doubt that!! both are great sports but cricket wins easily!! 
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;55659]Oh, those are definitely facts. I have already proven why they are superior. Indian music is far more refined than Western music, based on microtones and very complex arrangement of notes and rhythms. Similarly, Indian poetry, is again based on highly refined structures, such as the use of bandhas where Sanskrit sounds can arranged into geometric patterns to produce highly complex metaphors, such as if you read a Sanskrit poems
And there is no doubt that Indian scientists being ahead of the West. We had all the knowledge that the West has today thousands of years ago: atoms, quantum physics, observer effects, cyclic universe, states of consciousness. Look how sought after our Yoga and Ayurveda is. If the West were not behind, then why are they after our Yoga, Vedanta, Sanskrit and Ayurveda? The answer is simple? Were ahead.
Dont know I entirely agree with you on all of this SD…
Music is about what you put in [B]or[/B] leave out…just because the structure may be complex, doesn’t necessarily follow it will be great…
Again its silly to suggest Indian poetry is superior to the west…it is subjective (and music) and the west certainly has its greats…
The reason the West is embracing what the East has to offer, shows one thing SD…The west opening up to the East…showing an interest and respect for ancient teachings of India… that’s precisely what it means SD…The picture you are preferring to paint is not an accurate one…
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;55700]Nietzsche, you are your own worst enemy 
You claim to be a mortal warrior against eurocentric history and claimed to hate the West, and yet you actually support eurocentric history You praise Western scientists, mathematicans and engineers, you praise capitalism, and so far I have seen you say nothing about the great scientists, mathematicians and engineers in our Hindu civilisation.
You are neither here or there. I think you are confused what side you are batting on
There is nothing unfactual or interpretative about the history I have told you. The Greeks learned from the Hindus, they did not develop their concepts independently. They inherited their philosophy from the Hindus. Even Western scholars have pointed this out.
Some of the things the Greeks borrowed from the Hindus:
5 element theory/ mahabhuttas
Pythagorean theorem/
atoms/ paramanus
3 humours of the body/ tridosha
transmigration of the soul
the teacher-student academy/ gurukul
the senses as an imprisonment of the soul and meditation and platonism/ Vedanta
the 7 days of the week named after planets
These subjects were taught in Indian universities like Taxshilla which attracted Chinese and Greek students. So it is hardly surprisingly how this knowledge was transferred to the Chinese and Greeks.[/QUOTE]
Find me the post where I supported Eurocentric history. Now.
I am actually a mortal warrior against any [race]centric history.
I have praise for all mathematicians and scientists from all cultures. In case you weren’t paying attention, I repeatedly change my avatar into pictures of my most favorite mathematicians and scientists, among which were two Indians and two Muslims. My current avatar is a picture of the Muslim polymath named Al-Buruni.
I already knew about the school at Taxshilla, but you are very wrong in thinking that the Chinese and the Greeks learned everything there was to learn in this university. The Chinese have had a long history of independently developing scientific and mathematical concepts themselves. The small amounts of knowledge exchange that went on throughout history did not have a significant impact on either nation.
As for the Greeks, it is easy to find Mesopotamian and Egyptian influences, with a sprinkling of Indian here and there. Once again, this does not mean the Greeks did not invent anything by themselves. In fact, the greatest flourishing of Greek math and sciences came during periods in which a greater unity among the city-states was noticeable.
I will say this for the final time; I hate capitalism and Western political/economic systems in general, but see no way the world will ever break free of its grasp, unless the world receives a moral shocker. This IS the Kali-Yuga after all.
One more thing; please provide sources for your information. I will cross reference them later.
EDIT: Sorry, didn’t see the sources you pasted. Thanks for the information.
EDIT 2: Very interesting. Thank you for the sources once again.
Music, is playing with sound or the language of the universe. It is about arranging sound in special arrangements to create certain effects. The various raagas for example have direct effects on the environment and seasons. This is of course an advanced science of music. In Western music, it is not sound that is being skillfully used, but human emotion. Western music is about human emotion, which is why there so little use of rhythm and melody in Western music.
Anyway I cannot expect an inferior civilisation to understand the science of music
The reason the West is embracing what the East has to offer, shows one thing SD…The west opening up to the East…showing an interest and respect for ancient teachings of India… that’s precisely what it means SD
It’s got nothing to do with respect. We have something superior to offer, the West understand it is superior, and so they seek it. It is simple supply and demand.
We are a superior civilisation and have many superiors arts and sciences. If that is not true, stop practicing our Yoga and Ayurveda. Nope, you won’t stop, because they are superior to anything you have. You have no choice but to embrace them.
We have many superior arts and sciences which you seek from us: Vedanta, Jyotisha, Vaastu, Bharatnatyam, Sanskrit. We can teach you, but you can teach us nothing.
[QUOTE=YogiAdam;55709]Ahhhh… I’m not that bothered that you called me an idiot now… you seem to call everyone idiots. Your obviously bitter about how your life turned out. Turn off the computer and go for a run. You’ll feel better once you get the blood pumping around the body and into your brain… and don’t forget the endorphins!![/QUOTE]
You are a Christian? Funny, I could have sworn you were an atheist.
The only thing I am bitter about is that I am not as smart as I would like to be. 
Yes, I love running. There is this great track close to where we live. It encompasses a swamp/marsh/forest area and its simply amazing to go out and walk/jog/run/bike on a cloudy day…very peaceful.
I already knew about the school at Taxshilla, but you are very wrong in thinking that the Chinese and the Greeks learned everything there was to learn in this university. The Chinese have had a long history of independently developing scientific and mathematical concepts themselves. The small amounts of knowledge exchange that went on throughout history did not have a significant impact on either nation.
Nope, they do not. Science and maths start off in Greece and China abruptly around 600BCE, which some scholars have called the axial age. Prior to that there is no evidence of any scientific or mathematical culture. In India, however, we have long scientific and mathematical tradition. We passed this one from generation to generation, and then through migrations of Indians around the world this knowledge came into contact with other parts of the world.
As for the Greeks, it is easy to find Mesopotamian and Egyptian influences, with a sprinkling of Indian here and there. Once again, this does not mean the Greeks did not invent anything by themselves. In fact, the greatest flourishing of Greek math and sciences came during periods in which a greater unity among the city-states was noticeable.
You are talking Eurocentric history here. This is the classic Western textbook account of how Greek philosophy started. They deliberately omit the Indians, and exaggerate the Mesopotamians and Egyptian influence, despite the fact that all presocratic and socratic philosophy has similarities with Hindu philosophy and not Mesopomian and Egyptian philosophy. Like I said, we have very clear Hindu precusors to all presocratic philosophy. It has been noted by several scholars and many brave non-eurocentric Western scholars, who have not been afraid to admit that the Greeks inherited philosophy from the Indians.
The reason this has been kept out of Western textbooks despite the fact the evidence is loud and clear, is because Western civilisation traces the origin of their civilisation in Greece with the presocratics. They want to see this as a purely Western origin and see science, rationality and technology as something purely started by them. They will tolerate Egyptian and Babylonian influence, but they will not tolerate Indian influence. They have deliberately kept Indian influence and contact with Greece suppressed. But scholars have shown that India and Greece were long in contact before Alexandra came to India, and they were in exchange via the Persians. Incidentally, presocratic philosophy appears during this period. Prior to that there was no precedent.
In any case, my point is that the Greeks inherited philosophy from the Indians, but then they took whatever they learned in their own unique trajectory and reinterpreted various philosophies they learned. This is why they did not reach the same level of maturity that the Indians did and proposed many wrong ideas. For example they did not know about gravity, the laws of motion, which were perfectly understood by the Vaiseshika darsana.
Greek philosophy exists in only fragments here and there, whose importance has been exaggerated by Europeans. Indian Philosophy exists in well preserved treatises consisting of Upanishads, samhitas and sutras, and commentaries. A fully formed literary tradition.
Do not fall for the the Western propoganda. The Egyptians, Babylonians or the Greeks were no match for Indians. Even modern Europeans were no match for the Indians. They could not match any of Indian philosophical, scientific or technological systems. An as example which was shown earlier, Indians calculated exactly the precession of the equinox, a feat which was not achieived in Europe until 1900. The Greeks certainly did not do this, nor the Egyptians or Babylonians. Heck, even the Europeans were behind the Indians in modern times, then of course the Greeks, Babylonians and Egyptians were behind.
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;55723]Nope, they do not. Science and maths start off in Greece and China abruptly around 600BCE, which some scholars have called the axial age. Prior to that there is no evidence of any scientific or mathematical culture. In India, however, we have long scientific and mathematical tradition. We passed this one from generation to generation, and then through migrations of Indians around the world this knowledge came into contact with other parts of the world.
You are talking Eurocentric history here. This is the classic Western textbook account of how Greek philosophy started. They deliberately omit the Indians, and exaggerate the Mesopotamians and Egyptian influence, despite the fact that all presocratic and socratic philosophy has similarities with Hindu philosophy and not Mesopomian and Egyptian philosophy. Like I said, we have very clear Hindu precusors to all presocratic philosophy. It has been noted by several scholars and many brave non-eurocentric Western scholars, who have not been afraid to admit that the Greeks inherited philosophy from the Indians.
The reason this has been kept out of Western textbooks despite the fact the evidence is loud and clear, is because Western civilisation traces the origin of their civilisation in Greece with the presocratics. They want to see this as a purely Western origin and see science, rationality and technology as something purely started by them. They will tolerate Egyptian and Babylonian influence, but they will not tolerate Indian influence. They have deliberately kept Indian influence and contact with Greece suppressed. But scholars have shown that India and Greece were long in contact before Alexandra came to India, and they were in exchange via the Persians. Incidentally, presocratic philosophy appears during this period. Prior to that there was no precedent.
In any case, my point is that the Greeks inherited philosophy from the Indians, but then they took whatever they learned in their own unique trajectory and reinterpreted various philosophies they learned. This is why they did not reach the same level of maturity that the Indians did and proposed many wrong ideas. For example they did not know about gravity, the laws of motion, which were perfectly understood by the Vaiseshika darsana.
Greek philosophy exists in only fragments here and there, whose importance has been exaggerated by Europeans. Indian Philosophy exists in well preserved treatises consisting of Upanishads, samhitas and sutras, and commentaries. A fully formed literary tradition.
Do not fall for the the Western propoganda. The Egyptians, Babylonians or the Greeks were no match for Indians. Even modern Europeans were no match for the Indians. They could not match any of Indian philosophical, scientific or technological systems. An as example which was shown earlier, Indians calculated exactly the precession of the equinox, a feat which was not achieived in Europe until 1900. The Greeks certainly did not do this, nor the Egyptians or Babylonians. Heck, even the Europeans were behind the Indians in modern times, then of course the Greeks, Babylonians and Egyptians were behind.[/QUOTE]
No. Chinese mathematics began well before then. It is unfortunate that the book burning took place during the Qin Dynasty’s reign.
Very well then.
The Europeans pulled far ahead of any other civilization in mathematics and science from the 18th century and on. I hate to say it, but this is a fact. Other civilizations may have KNOWN about these forces and mathematical principles, but it was the Europeans who finally built upon the work of other civilizations prior to this and developed the mathematics to describe it.
Panini, a grammarian and linguist dated to the 3rd millenium BCE by Indian records, has no comparison in the West. Forget the Greeks, he has no comparison even in modern times. He pretty much anticipates the entire history of linguistics, logic and formal languages right up to the 21st century. A fact admitted by Western linguists. This is the kind of Hindu superiority I am talking about.
The great Hindu scientists anticipate the entire history of the West up until the 21st century. We are not behind in any area whatsoever. The ancient Hindu scientists are still the leading scientists of today in their respective field and Western scientists study them even today.
I have studied both Western philosophy and sciences and Indian philosophy and sciences. It is clear to me as daylight Hindu civilisation is still superior. Hence why the West keep looking back at the Hindus for answers.
Then Neitzsche, I am sorry to say that you are a Western supremist and do not appreciate your own Hindu civilisation and its gems. While, Western scientists themselves appreciate how developed the Hindu sciences are and constantly look at them for inspiration, you as Hindu and Indian do not. This is probably because the only education you ever got was a Western one. By your own admission you don’t know much about your own culture.
Hindu civilisation is vastly superior. The West did not pull ahead of us at all. In fact they adopted our techniques and methods. The Indian metallurgical techniques are used by the West today to manufacture steel and zinc. Indian surgical techniques are used by the West today. Indian Yoga and meditation are used by the West today. Indian logic is used by the West today.
Your knowledge of your own civilisation is disappointing. You know a lot about the West, but little about your own.
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;55726]Panini, a grammarian and linguist dated to the 3rd millenium BCE by Indian records, has no comparison in the West. Forget the Greeks, he has no comparison even in modern times. He pretty much anticipates the entire history of linguistics, logic and formal languages right up to the 21st century. A fact admitted by Western linguists. This is the kind of Hindu superiority I am talking about.
The great Hindu scientists anticipate the entire history of the West up until the 21st century. We are not behind in any area whatsoever. The ancient Hindu scientists are still the leading scientists of today in their respective field and Western scientists study them even today.
I have studied both Western philosophy and sciences and Indian philosophy and sciences. It is clear to me as daylight Hindu civilisation is still superior. Hence why the West keep looking back at the Hindus for answers.[/QUOTE]
Yes, Panini is a given in terms of Linguistics.
However, it is the Europeans who, from the 18th century and onwards, finally managed to create a compartmentalized and structured mathematics (Calculus) and made nearly every Physics/Chemistry/Biology/etc advancement from then on.
Buddy, I am taking college level Calculus, Chemistry, and Physics in High School. I, with my Chemistry book in front of my eyes, am now studying (multitasking :D) for an Nuclear Chemistry test I have tomorrow.
Where is the Indian equivalent of:
Periodic Table, discovery of the Proton/Electron/Nucleus, Atomic Structure (the Quantum mechanical ones), Ions/Ionic Compounds, Organic/Inorganic Chemistry, Stoichiometric Equations, concept of Moles, study of Acid-Base reactions, Precipitation Reactions, Aqueous Solutions, Redox reactions, Concentration (ways of expressing it), Thermochemistry and Thermodynamics, Quantized energy and photon, Atomic orbitals, Quantum numbers, Pauli Exclusion principle, Schr?dinger wave function, Periodic trends, Bonding/Bonding Theories (VSEPR, Molecular Orbitals, Overlapping Orbitals in general), Ideal-Gas/Van-der Waals equation, Kinetic Molecular theory (very important), Molecular Effusion/Diffusion, IMF’s (Phase changes, Ion-Dipole, Dipole-Dipole, London Dispersion, Hydrogen bonding), Modern Materials (Liquid crystals, polymers, Biomaterials, Ceramics, Thin Films), Solution properties (Colligative properties, Colloids, Solubility, Entropy), Chemical Kinetics, Equilibrium (Law of Mass action applications to a wide variety of situations, like Titration and Buffers), Electrochemistry, etc?
Where is the Indian equivalent of:
Kinematics (equations and such), Newtonian mechanics (especially in terms of differentials, force diagrams, vectors), concept of Work and Kinetic/Potential energy, Linear Momentum, Rotational Kinematics/Dynamics (Angular momentum, Torque, Center of Mass especially), Gravitation (yes, but this time with Calculus, Shell theorem, Energy conservation U = -GmM/r, Kepler’s Laws), Oscillatory motion (equating it with circular motion, energy conservation, harmonic motion, simple pendulums U = mgL(1-cos(theta)) and Physical pendulums), Waves and Sound (Harmonic wave functions, Doppler Effect, Superposition/Interference, Standing waves), Fluids (Continuity Equation, Bernoulli’s Equation P + (1/2)§(v)^2 + pgy = Constant, Torricelli’s Theorem, Temperature and Heat (energy transfer, Work, Convection, Radiation, Conduction), Entropy/Thermodynamics (yes, yes Brahmagupta failed in making a perpetual motion mercury wheel but we Indians did not understand WHY in terms of mathematics and conceptualization), Electric charge, Coulomb’s law, Electric Field, Electric Flux and Gauss’s Law, Electric Potential and Electric potential energy, Currents, Circuits, Magnetism (as a field, force, relation to electricity, Solenoids, etc), Optics (equations, refraction, reflection), Relativity (Time dilation delta t/(1 - v^2/c^2)^(1/2), Length contraction, E = mc^2, Relativistic Momentum), Quantum Physics (Blackbody radiation, Planck’s Hypothesis, Photoelectic effect, Mass/momentum of photon, de Broglie hypothesis, Wave-Particle duality, Heisenberg Uncertainty principle), and Nuclear Physics (Radioactivity, Half-Life, radioactive dating, fission/fusion)?
There is none. In terms of Mathematics and Science, the West was light-years ahead of the rest of the world.
Now the trend is reversing. The West is steadily losing its foothold to the East.
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;55727]Then Neitzsche, I am sorry to say that you are a Western supremist and do not appreciate your own Hindu civilisation and its gems. While, Western scientists themselves appreciate how developed the Hindu sciences are and constantly look at them for inspiration, you as Hindu and Indian do not. This is probably because the only education you ever got was a Western one. By your own admission you don’t know much about your own culture.
Hindu civilisation is vastly superior. The West did not pull ahead of us at all. In fact they adopted our techniques and methods. The Indian metallurgical techniques are used by the West today to manufacture steel and zinc. Indian surgical techniques are used by the West today. Indian Yoga and meditation are used by the West today. Indian logic is used by the West today.
Your knowledge of your own civilisation is disappointing. You know a lot about the West, but little about your own.[/QUOTE]
Actually, I have no problem admitting Indians were superior in every respect to the Europeans with respect to math and science until the 18th century came along. This is a historical fact.
However, to say that our traditional systems of perceiving the world through metaphysical/empirical lenses is superior to the mathematical and scientific advancements the Europeans made thereafter, is bunk.
I accord historical credit where its due. Just because I admit that European mathematics and sciences were the best after the 17-18th century, this does not mean I believe that European civilization is superior. [B]There is FAR more to “civilization” than just mathematics and science.[/B]
Other than that, I completely agree with you that Western civilization is inferior, at most-all times throughout history, to our civilization.
I am sorry you simply do not understand your own civilisation or appreciate it. This is why I said in the “Is the West becoming more spiritual” thread that Indians do not want spirituality and have no appreciation for the dharmic culture, but on the other hand Western people do want spirituality and have appreciation for it.
Do you know what is sad, that these white people know more about Vedic culture, civilisation and its history than you do:
I am sorry but it is the white man that is spreading Vedic culture today. Indians could care less. Indians go gaga over Western culture. Just as you do. I told you already, I am more likely to come across a spiritual Westerner, than a spiritual Indian.
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;55734]I am sorry you simply do not understand your own civilisation or appreciate it. This is why I said in the “Is the West becoming more spiritual” thread that Indians do not want spirituality and have no appreciation for the dharmic culture, but on the other hand Western people do want spirituality and have appreciation for it.
Do you know what is sad, that these white people know more about Vedic culture, civilisation and its history than you do:
I am sorry but it is the white man that is spreading Vedic culture today. Indians could care less. Indians go gaga over Western culture. Just as you do. I told you already, I am more likely to come across a spiritual Westerner, than a spiritual Indian.[/QUOTE]
I watched these videos a long time ago. How is this related to my point that the Europeans were more mathematically/scientifically advanced than anyone else after the 18th century?
I already said that except for math and science, European civilization is inferior to Dharmic ones.
Stop making strawmans. How does my appreciation for mathematics and science, a common heritage of all civilizations, make me not spiritual?
Lets break this down:
Ancient times: India, China, Mesopotamia, Babylonia were the best at maths and sciences. Speculation regarding which was the best still continues today.
Classical Period: India, Greece, China: Best in math and science, again the same speculation
1st millenium - Middle Ages: Muslim world. They burrowed from India, Greece, and China and vastly improved upon their math and science. They were the best ones in math and science at this time.
Reniassance - Modern times - Europeans. Burrowed math and science from civilizations prior to this and vastly improved upon it.
In each time period, there was a “superior” nation/country/civilization with the best math and science. To give credit to the Europeans where its due is no big deal.
Once again, just because the Europeans had the best math and science in their time period, that does not mean they had a better civilization overall. I agree that their civilization is no civilization at all, considering the way they leeched of off the rest of the world to finance their “superiority.”
Where is the Indian equivalent of the Periodic Table, discovery of the Proton/Electron/Nucleus, Atomic Structure (the Quantum mechanical ones), Ions/Ionic Compounds, Organic/Inorganic Chemistry, Stoichiometric Equations, concept of Moles, study of Acid-Base reactions, Precipitation Reactions, Aqueous Solutions, Redox reactions, Concentration (ways of expressing it), Thermochemistry and Thermodynamics, Quantized energy and photon, Atomic orbitals, Quantum numbers, Pauli Exclusion principle, Schr?dinger wave function, Periodic trends, Bonding/Bonding Theories (VSEPR, Molecular Orbitals, Overlapping Orbitals in general), Ideal-Gas/Van-der Waals equation, Kinetic Molecular theory (very important), Molecular Effusion/Diffusion, IMF’s (Phase changes, Ion-Dipole, Dipole-Dipole, London Dispersion, Hydrogen bonding), Modern Materials (Liquid crystals, polymers, Biomaterials, Ceramics, Thin Films), Solution properties (Colligative properties, Colloids, Solubility, Entropy), Chemical Kinetics, Equilibrium (Law of Mass action applications to a wide variety of situations, like Titration and Buffers), Electrochemistry, etc?
Kinematics (equations and such), Newtonian mechanics (especially in terms of differentials, force diagrams, vectors), concept of Work and Kinetic/Potential energy, Linear Momentum, Rotational Kinematics/Dynamics (Angular momentum, Torque, Center of Mass especially), Gravitation (yes, but this time with Calculus, Shell theorem, Energy conservation U = -GmM/r, Kepler’s Laws), Oscillatory motion (equating it with circular motion, energy conservation, harmonic motion, simple pendulums U = mgL(1-cos(theta)) and Physical pendulums), Waves and Sound (Harmonic wave functions, Doppler Effect, Superposition/Interference, Standing waves), Fluids (Continuity Equation, Bernoulli’s Equation P + (1/2)§(v)^2 + pgy = Constant, Torricelli’s Theorem, Temperature and Heat (energy transfer, Work, Convection, Radiation, Conduction), Entropy/Thermodynamics (yes, yes Brahmagupta failed in making a perpetual motion mercury wheel but we Indians did not understand WHY in terms of mathematics and conceptualization), Electric charge, Coulomb’s law, Electric Field, Electric Flux and Gauss’s Law, Electric Potential and Electric potential energy, Currents, Circuits, Magnetism (as a field, force, relation to electricity, Solenoids, etc), Optics (equations, refraction, reflection), Relativity (Time dilation delta t/(1 - v^2/c^2)^(1/2), Length contraction, E = mc^2, Relativistic Momentum), Quantum Physics (Blackbody radiation, Planck’s Hypothesis, Photoelectic effect, Mass/momentum of photon, de Broglie hypothesis, Wave-Particle duality, Heisenberg Uncertainty principle), and Nuclear Physics (Radioactivity, Half-Life, radioactive dating, fission/fusion)?
This is meaningless BS. The reason such mathematical formalism is not found in the Hindu sciences is because there is no such thing as a quantity of something, whatever exists is a just a sensory qualia. Hence the Hindu universe is only made up of 5 elements - because there are only 5 qualia which make up our empirical universe - seeing, touching, tasting, hearing and smelling. All this BS of protons, electrons, neutrons, photons is veritable nonsense. The entire universe emanates from the same infinite quantum field(moolaprakriti) and returns to it. You cannot measure it.
What have we discovered in quantum physics? We cannot measure the quantum. So all this BS of mathematical equations, length, width, height, charge we use to measure the world as if it is a quantity is meaningless. It is now known that whatever we measure only exists insofar as there is an observer. The observer decides how long a piece of a string is. As we have discovered there is no time and space. If there is no time and space what good are these equations and measurements? This is why Hindu science did not bother with this rubbish.
They treated the universe exactly as it is - a sensory world existing along a spectrum of consciousness states. A world that is purely constructed by the mind - i.e., a cognitive reality. In that case all that was needed was descriptions of what exists, not formulas. So in Hindu science we can describe why an object is falling by describing what is acting on the object, gravity causes objects to fall(Vaiseshika sutra) this practical knowledge then helps us build bridges etc which the ancient Hindus did. We also knew about sound and how sound bounces of objects, and used this practical knowledge for acoustical engineering.
We knew about atoms and how atoms combine under heat and we used this practical knowledge for all kinds of chemical purposes like fermenting wines, making dyes, medicines etc. We did not have to deal with equations and stuff, except in matters like predicting eclipses etc - again purely practical purposes and we gave no proofs. We used binary codes not just the sake of it, we used binary codes for chanting. We use error checking codes to ensure the Vedic chants were properly transmitted. Again, no use of formulas.
Prakriti or matter is not a quantity, it is a projection from consciousness and is governed by the gunas, which causes prakriti to transform and evolve as per the needs of the conscious observer. It is impossible to isolate any single cause of matter, because causes are based on a complex interplay of gunas throughout the universe. So it is impossible to measure.
What matters in Hindu science is not measuring things, but directly experiencing things. Western people have only created models of atoms, Hindus risis have actually seen them. This is a much more superior knowledge.
There is nothing known in science today that the Hindus do not know.
Every country has its day…great civilisations rise and fall…its BRIC turn next
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;55743]This is meaningless BS. The reason such mathematical formalism is not found in the Hindu sciences is because there is no such thing as a quantity of something, whatever exists is a just a sensory qualia. Hence the Hindu universe is only made up of 5 elements - because there are only 5 qualia which make up our empirical universe - seeing, touching, tasting, hearing and smelling. All this BS of protons, electrons, neutrons, photons is veritable nonsense. The entire universe emanates from the same infinite quantum field(moolaprakriti) and returns to it. You cannot measure it.
What have we discovered in quantum physics? We cannot measure the quantum. So all this BS of mathematical equations, length, width, height, charge we use to measure the world as if it is a quantity is meaningless. It is now known that whatever we measure only exists insofar as there is an observer. The observer decides how long a piece of a string is. As we have discovered there is no time and space. If there is no time and space what good are these equations and measurements? This is why Hindu science did not bother with this rubbish.
These treated the universe exactly as it is - a sensory world existing along a spectrum of consciousness states. A world that is purely constructed by the mind - i.e., a cognitive reality. In that case all that was needed was descriptions of what exists, not formulas. So in Hindu science we can describe why an object is falling by describing what is acting on the object, gravity causes objects to fall(Vaiseshika sutra) this practical knowledge then helps us build bridges etc which the ancient Hindus did. We also knew about sound and how sound bounces of objects, and used this practical knowledge for acoustical engineering.
We knew about atoms and how atoms combine under heat and we used this practical knowledge for all kinds of chemical purposes like fermenting wines, making dyes, medicines etc. We did not have to deal with equations and stuff, except in matters like predicting eclipses etc - again purely practical purposes and we gave no proofs. We used binary codes not just the sake of it, we used binary codes for chanting. We use error checking codes to ensure the Vedic chants were properly transmitted. Again, no use of formulas.
Prakriti or matter is not a quantity, it is a projection from consciousness and is governed by the gunas, which causes prakriti to transform and evolve as per the needs of the conscious observer. It is impossible to isolate any single cause of matter, because causes are based on a complex interplay of gunas throughout the universe. So it is impossible to measure.
What matters in Hindu science is not measuring things, but directly experiencing things. Western people have only created models of atoms, Hindus risis have actually seen them.
There is nothing known in science today that the Hindus do not know.[/QUOTE]
##SD has drawn out some interesting points here Nietzcshe.
@neitzsche
You asked sd what the indian equivalents of modern physics and relatively modern mathematics were. The infinity foundation’s rajiv malhotra has coauthored The very book that not only covers the history of science and engineering in ancient india but also puts into context the politics and implications of their interaction with arab and european civilizations.
Another thing i would like to suggest is that all basis for knowledge acquisition and dissemination is what in philosophy is called a categorical framework. This is what determines the perspective of an individual or group vis-a-vis phenomena. It is this categorical framework that sets up the rules of both observation and nomenclature, which is the basis of science (a framework to categorize and give meaning to phenomena that we observe and experience) and marhematics (the language of representing this framework).
Now this might come as a surprise but not every civilization follows the same set of frameworks and as a result the science and math, in fact even the objectives of the “sciences and math” can be separated by huge and often insurmountable chasms.
Western science and Indian science are sort of like that. Even though on the surface their Re simil!arities and one (western science) has heavily borrowed from the othef (indian science) their core objectives were significantly different. As a result the knowledge generated by each are also significantly different. When I have more time, i will try to elaborate on this matter.
Interesting indeed Dwai, especially about the categorical framework. I specialised in philosophy of science, and indeed there is a difference in knowledge and representation of knowledge. In the Western tradition physical knowledge is represented in the form of mathematical equations, this is part of the reason why I did not go the physics route, because it was meaningless to me. In the Hindu tradition knowledge is represented by language.
What Neitzsche is not understanding that using mathematical formalism is not the only way to represent knowledge and not every culture in the universe would represent it that way. The Hindus indeed had the same knowledge, but they did not use either the methods or the mathematical formalism that Western science does. Western science primarily uses empiricism, literally measuring things, and then representing that data using mathematical formulas. In contrast, Hindu science primarily uses rationalism, making observations and drawing inferences, and then finally validating those inferences through direct experience.
What Neitzsche is not understanding that the Hindu scientific method and the Western scientific method give the same knowledge. In the Vaiseshika darsana it is explained why an objects such as an arrow falls, it says it sails forward through the reproduction of the initial momentum, and then due to gravity acting against the arrow, the arrows starts to lose its momentum energy and fall. Just because the Hindus have not used equations like f=ma, v^2 = u^2 + 2as or s = ut + 1/2at^2 to represent the same or not made any measurements, that this is a shortcoming.
The Samkhya texts talk about how purusha through the act of observation collapses the original superpositioned state of prakriti, causing prakriti to manifest in time and space as matter. The knowledge is identical to quantum mechanics, just because the Hindus have not made any measurements or used Schrodingers equations to represent the same, Neitzsche does not recognise it.
The Vaiseshika sutras talk about how atoms combine first to form binary atoms, then tertiary atoms, and after a while these atoms start to become visible to us as a mote in a beam of light. Again this knowledge is identical to particle physics. But just because the Hindus have not taken measurements and created periodic tables, Neitzsche does not recognise it.
The problem here is a narrow mind that expects all knowledge to be expressed as a formula, otherwise they will not recognise it, despite the fact the knowledge is identical.
[QUOTE=core789;55747]Don’t jump on my posts AGAIN , YOU HEAR ME KARENG and say disparaging negative things about me because i’m bound to reply missus.[/QUOTE]
Don’t showcase your mental instability for the Internet to see, you hear me? Now get the hell out of here.