I have made it more than crystal clear why you are a damn racist
No, you haven't. If it was crystal clear why is it not clear to High Wolf who condemned you for your allegations of repeatedly saying I was a racist.
You have failed to produce any evidence to show I am racist. Cough it up, or shut up.
How come your culture is supreme? I mean the Indian one of course, you know, that country you've been to on a few occasions, Mr. Reject-everything-Western-but-live-in-Britain-voluntarily. Please explain.
Already answered, because of our culture. We worship knowledge and our scriptures are called the books of knowledge. The course of history of a given culture is based on its foundational ethos. Our foundational ethos was knowledge, so went onto to develop a highly scientific culture.
That's how this strain of debate in this thread started, you stating that ancient Indian science would be far ahead western science.
It is not would be far ahead. It is far ahead 
Admitted by Western scientists themselves.
Now you have confirmed we had nanomedicine
As an example of a great and important accomplishment of western science I gave finding all the elements as an example. Again, it was simply because I had watched a documentary recently. It's one of many possible examples, Newtonian physics is another one, the theory of relativity is another one (thought up by a single westerner while he was working in a patent office), quantum mechanics is another one and there are many more. Hubble for example (the person) found out about the nature of the universe in reference to the existence of galaxies. In biology, we have Mendel (monk, laying the foundations of genetics in his monastery's garden), Darwin (sailed around the globe and found out about natural selection), and then Watson and Cricks. Etc. etc., I still could go on and on, electricity, astronomy, neurology, etc. etc. Any of these example would be fine to prove my point, which, sorry, audience, I have to point out over and over again, because you are an unfair debater who plays tricks 25/7:
I congratulate all these luminaries in Western science. Like I said earlier, they could probably all beat me in a game of chess. However, how do they compare to our luminaries? Quite poorly.
Hubble discovered the universe was expanding by measuring the red shift. Pat on the back for Western civilisation. We explained thousands of years that not only is it expanding, we also know that in the future it will contract again and return to the point of singualrity it began in and then process will repeat again ad infinitum. We call these cycles of the universe known as kalpas and have estimated that each cycle is 311 trillion years long.
This is known as the cycle of evolution and involution. The cause for each of these cycles is when the fundamental forces(gunas) come out of balance.
The Samkhya system is based on Satkaryavada. According to Satkaryavada, the effect pre-exists in the cause. Cause and effect are seen as different temporal aspects of the same thing – the effect lies latent in the cause which in turn seeds the next effect.
More specifically, Samkhya system follows the Prakriti-Parinama Vada. Parinama denotes that the effect is a real transformation of the cause. The cause under consideration here is Prakriti or more precisely Mula-Prakriti (Primordial Matter). The Samkhya system is therefore an exponent of an evolutionary theory of matter beginning with primordial matter. In evolution, Prakriti is transformed and differentiated into multiplicity of objects. Evolution is followed by dissolution. In dissolution the physical existence, all the worldly objects mingle back into Prakriti, which now remains as the undifferentiated, primordial substance. This is how the cycles of evolution and dissolution follow each other.
Most of the Samkhyan cosmology is concerned with the unfolding of the prakriti principle; or more precisely mulaprakriti or unmanifest root-nature (equivalent to the Greek concept of Hyle or formless matter). Mulaprakriti is described as "unmanifest" (avyakta), "uncreated" or "unmade" (avikriti), and "the chief one" (pradhana) [ Gerald J. Larson, Classical Samkhya, pp.160-1, (Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1979)]. It is the original primordial root-nature from which everything else arises through a process of self-unfolding, triggered through the proximity of the purusha or centre of consciousness. All things, and all subsequent tattwas or evolutes, are contained within Mulaprakriti, but in a subtle or unmanifest form. Here then we have a theory of creation that begins not with the Absolute Reality itself (as in all the monistic emanationist cosmologies), but with the principle of Unmanifest "Nature". Because of that, it is probably more correct to understand the Samkhyan theory of creation in terms of an evolution or unfolding rather than an emanation.
Mulaprakriti itself contains or is made up of three primary qualities, the three constituents or strands, called gunas. In the unmanifest Mulaprakriti these exist in a state of equilibrium and balance, and so there is no manifestation. When the gunas are disturbed however through the presence of the purusha the equilibrium is destroyed, and creation, both gross and subtle, comes about. Here we have a parallel with the Chinese Yin-Yang cosmology and the emergence of the universe through the manifestation of the polar opposites of Yin and Yang from the originally unmanifest Tao.
The creation hoiwever is not simple but involves a series of 23 fuurther tattwas, the later ones being derived from or unfolding out of the earlier ones. The basic series is as follows:
From prakrti emerges mahat ("the great one"), also called buddhi. This is the subtlest form of mental activity, and the source of will and the unconscious. From buddhi evolves ahamkara, the "I-maker", which is the source of the sense of ego or individual identity. From ahamkara there is a four-fold unfolding into mind (manas), sense organs (jnanendriyas), the organs of action (karmendriyas), and the subtle elements (tanmatras). Of these the mind and senses are predominantly sattva, the organs of action rajas, and the subtle elements tamas. These latter are the source from which evolve the five gross elements of the material world.
http://www.kheper.net/topics/Samkhya/Samkhya.htm
The Process of Evolution and Involution
The Sankhya evolution of elements is based on the principle that matter is not destroyed. It undergoes changes both during creation and destruction. According to Sankhya theory, matter undergoes evolution, dissolution and quiescence. There is no such thing as total destruction. In destruction, the effect is involved into its cause- that is all. The creation and dissolution
takes place in cycles. Every real effect has a real cause behind it. The effect pre-exists in its cause in a potential state. In dissolution the gunas are in a balanced state.
When Purusha comes in proximity to Prakruti, its equilibrium is disturbed called Vikruti. And evolution begins with different elements. Prakruti is the root of the universe. Prakruti is the cause of everything material including time and space.
Like this, Sankhya divides universe in 25 principles.
The Purusha is neither a production, nor is it productive. According to the Sankhya, when a Jiva can understand these elements, he will be emancipated from material bondage, which is the ultimate purpose. During dissolution of the world, the products return by a reverse movement into the preceding stages of development, and ultimately into Prakruti. Earth merges in water, water in fire, fire in air, air in space; space in Ahamkara (egoism); Ahamkara in Mahat (intellect) and Mahat in Prakruti.
http://www.sanatandharma.org/page3.html
Mendel laid the foundation for genetics by making observations in his garden of inherited plant charactertics. Pat on the back for Western civilisation. We explained thousands of years ago that constitution of the body of a child is inherited by its parents, this can include disorders as well, and yes we also mentioned genes and chromosomes.
Congenital diseases & Ayurveda (Genetics)
Ayurveda had a deep insight into the origin of congenital diseases. It is evident from the following line from a book called Sushruta Samhita (sutra sthana. 24/4)
“Tatra adibalapravritta ye Shukrashonita doshanvayah, Kustarshaprabrutayah, tc api dvividhah"
- Matrujah Pitrujahscha.
Adibalapravritta diseases a groups of illnesses which are attributed to defects inherent in either the shukra (the male reproductive element) and shonita (the female reproductive element) which form the primary factors of being.
Examples are skin disease like vitiligo (leucoderma) , arshas, (Haemarrhoides), meha (diabetes) etc. Even in Charaka Samhita which is regarded as one of the oldest texts in Ayurveda, there is a references about genes. He called it Bijabhagavayava, meaning bija (meaning seed indicating) male sperm & female ovum bijabhaga indicating chromosomes. Bijabhagavayava indicating genes. If parents have certain diseases by the imbalance of vata pitta or kaphas then it is reflected in the bijabhagavayava, and hence can cause illness of the offspring.
Hence ayurveda advises cleansing of the male & female body before planning to have a child and to take rejuvenation therapy to restore health which prevents the appearence of genetic disorders.
In a nutshell, a healthy sperm and ovum gives rise to an healthy progeny. According to an Ayurvedic principle there is a balance of Vata, Pitta & Kapha within the body of each and every individual. It's proportion (Qualitatively and Quantitatively) is fixed at the time of birth i.e. its Tara and Tama bhava. On the % of Vata, Pitta & Kapha Prakriti (Sharir & Manas) of an individual is formed. All these factors play an important role in forming ones immunity.
Acharya Charaka ( Ch.In. 1/5) has described 6 varieties of Prakriti in individuals. From which the first twp i.e. "Jatiprasakta" & "Kulaprasakta" can light our view.
"Jatiprasakta" - in some races there is tendency for hypersensitivity e.g. a "Bhanushali" race of Jamnagar is highly sensitive to certain drugs which are commonly used.
"Kulaprasakta" i.e. Family disposition. This can be related with chromosomal abnormalities. There is genetic inheritance, influencing the future generation.
The above explanations may be enough to throw light on the role of heredity in the manifestation of allergic diseases.
http://www.boloji.net/ayurveda/av066.htm
- The contributions of Charaka in genetics are worth exploring. Genetic engineering to change the sex of the fetus has also been described. The microscopic structures like genes; chromosomes; DNA and RNA have all been described.
What factors other than genes are responsible for unique characteristics have also been expounded. Least explored section in Ayurveda known as Arista lakshana and shareera sthana have statements, which are based on genetics. Charaka has explained many procedures like panchakarma, rasayana, sadvrtha etc, which undoubtedly transform the genes to behave beneficially. Charaka states that Alzheimer's is passed on to the off spring by the father's genes.
http://integrativehealthcareinstitute.org/journal/articles/charak-club-2.html
Equally is Newtonian physics not at all wrong, again I have already told you when we discussed last year, that it's validity has borders and it is indeed a border case of relativistic mechanics. Yet it is not wrong or outdated, as you imply.
In that case Aristotlian mechanics is a border case of Newtonian mechanics. All we need to do is take gravity out of the equation Just like you want me to take space-time and energy out of the equation. Newtonian mechanics is wrong, the world does not at all behave as the Newtonian paradigm says it behaves as.
A very clear fact today is quantum entanglement where action at a distance is taking placed, been demonstrated by experiments conducted all around the world, which completely violated the Newtonian view which assumes a world of space with multiple and real objects suspended within it separate from everything else. Like I said relativistic effects are happening even in objects travelling at normal speeds, but they are so neglible, we can ignore them. This does not change the fact that they are taking place, however minute they are. Simiarly, we know today that quantum effects are happening all the time like discontinuity in what appears to be motion. At the perceptual level this is not apparent, but at the scientific level we know this is going on. Every moment reality literally is flashing in and out of the quantum field. We don't see it, but that is exactly what is happening.
Get this into your head: the reality that we see is nothing like the reality as it is. You cannot factor out consciousness which leads to the world as we see it.
CONSCIOUSNESS + FIELD = REALITY AS IT APPEARS
If you get this simple equation you will experience a mini enlightenment
See. That's my point. Your large speech about... whatnot, is fully irrelevant. It is of no relevance for what I am proving here. In a bunch of cases, I don't opose it. I do opose what you say about the relevance and accuracy of the periodic table of elements.
Already told you, it's wrong. We don't use it anymore in modern physics. We use the standard model. The standard model of 4 fundamental forces can account for all visible matter in the universe except waves.
We have a 4 element theory now in classical physics. The 5th element that explains waves is quantum mechanics. So far they cannot be unified - but when they do we will have a 5 element theory - just like the Vedic theory (You're backwards, hasn't the penny dropped yet)
But - again - I have to disagree with your "clearly stated" stuff. Nothing is clear in your citations whatsoever. We can find some ancient philosophical texts that have some vague ideas and that can be interpreted as modern findings of science. Like for example that system that categorizes the physical world according to the five senses. It is an interpretation that it would have anything to do with for example the four forces of the standard-model. If Indian science would be so advanced, it would be as clear in it's expression as for example Panini is clear in describing Sanskrit or as Indian mathematicians are clear in describing mathematics. It wouldn't be vague at all, it would be on the spot and crystal clear and it would come with the necessary mathematics to describe it, and not some "oh I meditated and all become clear" or "I drank Soma and finally understood it all". But the clearest scientific statements you have are on a very basic level, that does not even compete with Newton, as it's has no formalism:
I am citing not from any scripture, but the formal rational schools known as the darsanas, each of which have their teachings summarized in sutras. There is nothing vague about them, they are clearly stated.
1.1.9 A substance and quality will only originate other substances of the same class
2.1.6. Fluidity is the result of heat(or energy) conjunction, and is common to water, wax, lac, ghee etc
2.1.8 The fluidity of tin, gold, silver, iron, lead when conjoined with heat, become like water atoms
2.2.2 Heat is the property of the light element
5.2.5 The suns rays cause the evaporation of water atoms by conjunction with air atoms
5.2.6. Through the impress of the impulse(by the suns rays) the sun conjoins the water atoms with the air
5.2.7 The freezing and thawing of a substance is due to conjunction of(and absence of) heat
5.2.11 The cause of the sound of thunder is the conjunction of the water atoms with the air atoms to form a cloud and then the disjunction in the cloud
1.1.7 The common actions are throwing upwards, throwing donwards/falling, expansion, contraction and moving
1.1.17 The definition of an action is which causes conjunction and disjunction to a substance or object
1.1. 14 Every action is opposed by an equal reaction (Third law of Newtons)
1.1.20 Action is the common cause of conjunction(holding things together) disjunction(breaking things apart) and motion/momentum
1.1.23 Any substance is in fact constituted by parent substances(parent atoms, molecules)
1.1.30 Conjunction and disjunctions of any entity require the application of action(any kind of energy can be considered an action)
5.1.7 In the the absence of conjunction an object falls due to gravity
5.1.8 No upward or sidewards movements takes place without a strong application of action
5.1.9 The motion of an object is directly proportional to the action applied
5.1.14 Action takes place on grass due to conjunction with wind
5.1.15 The movement of the needle from the magnet is caused by an invisible action
5.1.16 Particular non-simultaneous conjunctions are the cause of the diversity of an arrows actions
of the action, and in like manner the next and the next
5.1.17 The action of the arrow is from the initial momentum energy(provided by the bow) and second action is through self-reproduction of the action, and in like manner the next and the next
5.1.18 Falling results from gravity causing loss of its self-production(i.e., its momentum energy) In modern language: the horizontal component of the arrow reduces, and the vertical component of gravity increases - causing it to lose its momentum and fall.
If you can speak English there would no problem understanding what these sutras are saying. You can find all of Newton's laws of motion here, particularly in these sutras:
5.1.17 is saying Newton's first law that an object either remains at rest or continues in a straight line unless a force is applied
5.1.9 is saying Newton's second law that the accelerlation of an object is directly proportional to the force acting ot
1.1.14 is saying Newton's third law that every action has an equal and opposite reaction
5.1.16 and 5.1.18 are talking about horizontal and vertical components of forces
It is very clear the Vaiseshika darsana understood Newtonian mechanics very well. I have only cited the sutras here. There is nothing vague, scriptural or philosophical here. This is based on direct observation and valid inferences.
The Vaiseshika school had very well developed theories of causality, atoms and physical reality and used very technical descriptions and precise taxomies. The master categories are substances, qualities, actions, difference, generality, inherence. These categories are used to explain the entire phenomenal universe.
This is without doubt great stuff for 600BC, if it is from 600BC - I did not find this text online, can you provide a link please? Still it is merely observation and not at all a scientific theory like for example the corresponding Newtonian formulae.
We don't do formulas and mathematical equations in our tradition. We prefer to explain things using language. I already explained this point earlier to Neitzche. Both of you are narrow minded on this subject. What is so great about mathematical formalism anyway? It is just another way of expressing what can be expressed in language. I don't care how knowledge is expressed, as long as it is clear the knowledge is there.
Also, it is wrong in some spots, for example is the ascent of water not caused by wind as well as a liquid does not necessarily need a sunray to vaporize, it needs heat, that can as well come from a fire.
I posted both the sutra and the commentary within the Vaiseshika school. The sutra is giving the example of the sea where the conjunction of the sun's rays with waters in the sea cause the water to vapourize, and the vapour then rises due to the air. It says it it is the same process that goes on when water evaporates when heated. It later says the vapour condenses to form the clouds and then via disjunction in the cloud there is the rolling of thunder and then rain. In fact the Vaiseshika were not the first to assert the hydrological cycle, but this fact has long been known in the Vedas. The Vaiseshika even state, "This is also asserted on authority of Vedas"
Also are there no "aqueas"-atoms. I guess "aqueas" means water? My dictionary does not have it, I go with aqua. Water is a molecule and each consists of three atoms. Not to mention that these atoms are not atoms, because there are smaller elements of matter than atoms - beat you with your own stupid rethorics. However, the atoms as well don't "solidfy", when water freezes, the water-molecules are bound stronger to each other and they are not non-solid before. This is not described as well, how come.
Aqaueas atoms is describing the type of atom being observed. As in the Vaiseshika classification system there are 4 types of primary atoms: solid earthy atoms, liquid watery atoms, light, heat atoms and finally force atoms. It describes here that the difference between the solid state of water and the liquid state of water is owing to fluidity caused by heat energy i.e, the solid state is where the water atoms have less fluidity and water is where the atoms have more fluidity, and air even greater fluidity.
I also wouldn't know what a "binary atomic aggregate" should refer to. What's binary there? Water consists of three atoms per molecule. In ice, I think each water-molecule is connected to four other water-molecules, see
You fail to understand what is meant by "binary aggregate". The Vaiseshika say atoms of each type aggregate first as binary atoms, then as teritary atoms etc(Like Dalton said atoms combine) The usage here is to show how the atoms in the water aggregate to form a solid(ice) and as solid is the next level up it also called "binary aggregate" It then says that by the means of the application of heat, the atoms gain fluidity destroying the binary aggregate and reordering the atoms.
This is a very blatant description of kinetic energy and the changes in states of matter as a result of more or less kinetic energy. I challenge you to find this knowledge anywhere else in the world prior to the 18th century.
Sure does heat cause ice to melt and water to vaporize. Sure must something cause stuff to fall down, sure stuff ain't falling down when it's lying on some surface. Sure is it the string of a bow that causes the arrow to fly. This is, sorry, piffling trifles compared to Newtonian, not to mention 19th and 20th century science. For it's time: Good stuff, no doubt, though. But ahead of current science? Sorry, no.
You are misrepresenting what is being said. I will correct them: Yes, it is common sense that heat caues ice to melt, but this is caused by the fact that atoms of the ice are in an atomic structure with low kinetic energy, gets disordered by the application of heat leading to high kinetic energy is not. Nor is to obvious that the sun's rays is what causes the seas water to evaporate to form clouds. This same knowledge was not rediscovered until the 18th century.
Yes it is obvious that something causes things to fall. But it is not obvious that there is an invisible force called gravity which acts down on objects. It is not obvious that objects will travel continously forever at constant velocity through self-reproduction of the initial force applied, unless a force is applied. It is not obvious that every action will be opposed by equal and opposite force. This same knowledge was not rediscovered until the 17th century.
If this knowledge is so trivial then simply show me the knowledge before it was rediscovered in modern times by your people. I will remind you that right up until the 16th century you were still using Aristotle's mechanics.
wonder what you're ing at. Noone said that science and technology are identical, it's just misleading the stupid in the audience again. What's been said is, that scientific knowledge and findings lead to technology. It's the case. And - as far as I can judge it - Indian technology is on the level of Indian science. The visible science, you know, not the one found in meditation, some vague ideas, something that states "there are atoms".
Again you are misrepresenting what is being said. These texts do not just say "there are atoms" they describe the various types of atoms, how atoms combine to form atomic aggregates, how atomic aggregates are broken by applying heat-force, the states of matter. There is nothing vague here. It is clearly stated. It is a well known school and loads of literature exists on it.
You are deliberately behaving like an ignoramus(I guess it comes natural to you) It is easy to misrepresent what is being said to create strawmans you can tear down - but harder to deal with actual arguments being made.
Show some more honour next time, otherwise consider our discussion over.
If you read the Vaiseshika sutras, there are at most 60 sutras per book and each book is divided into two sections. When students use to study Vaiseshika they would study only 1-2 sutras a day. Obviously there existed commentaries(some are extant) but the elaboration would be done orally - rather than in a written textbook. The main emphasis was on through the medium of language to get the concepts across.
Quantum mechanics now says they don’t even exist until we observe and find them in a location. Prior to that they are just pure probability - potential, but not existent. Now, this understanding I can indeed find you a parallel in Indian science with Samkhya. Samkhya says that all mater exists as pure potentiality within moolprakriti, until the observer collapses prakriti and causes matter to appear as massive in time and space. Indeed this follows a whole causal chain of manifestation beginning from the level of pure process at the guna level and ending with what you see to be a flow of electrons.
