| Author | Message | ||
     Vjavasi Side Hero Username: Vjavasi Post Number: 3050 Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 75.131.192.17 Rating: N/A |
yuu mean a history major should deal with history of science and mathematics....he is talking about histrory of his discipline....he also contributed to it | ||
| Jujung Junior Artist Username: Jujung Post Number: 79 Registered: 02-2010 Posted From: 76.98.126.13 Rating: |
Similarly, we do not care about Newton's other obsessions because those are not his fields of expertise.. and so is the case with C K Raju. I somewhere read this: Law of Indian Expertise (LIE). The law says that an Indian who has achieved distinction in one area is immediately considered an expert in all others. The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us.- Paul Valery | ||
| Vjavasi Side Hero Username: Vjavasi Post Number: 3049 Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 75.131.192.17 Rating: N/A |
newton was also obsessed with religion, history and many other things...actually he envied christ as the only son of god...the authot is also an accomplished person in math and science | ||
| Jujung Junior Artist Username: Jujung Post Number: 78 Registered: 02-2010 Posted From: 76.98.126.13 Rating: N/A |
If he is a true scientist, he should work on his science and reveal any new insights in science.. obsessing about history is not a physicists' or mathematicians' job.. otherwise, it would just be seen as "attention-seeking".. poincare etc were all great geniuses and acknowledged as such by the time a relatively unknown einstein came into the picture.. so it's very unlikely that such a guy could steal from well-established famous guys and still gain wide acceptance and recognition.. Wikipedia has a good "neutral" historical perspective on this: "although in his philosophical writings Poincaré rejected the ideas of absolute space and time, in his physical papers he continued to refer to an (undetectable) aether. He also continued (1900b, 1904, 1906, 1908b) to describe coordinates and phenomena as local/apparent (for moving observers) and true/real (for observers at rest in the aether).[23][52] So with a few exceptions[53][54][55] most historians of science argue that Poincaré did not invent what is now called special relativity, although it is admitted that Poincaré anticipated much of Einstein's methods and vocabulary.[56][57][58][59][60][61]" The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us.- Paul Valery | ||
| Stig Side Hero Username: Stig Post Number: 4288 Registered: 01-2010 Posted From: 74.105.123.107 Rating: N/A |
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/mp/2003/09/18/stories/200 3091800260100.htm Pichha comedy chestunnnadu !! rofl !! ------------- Only seven people have looked The Stig straight in the eyes. They are all dead now !! | ||
| Vjavasi Side Hero Username: Vjavasi Post Number: 3037 Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 192.127.94.7 Rating: N/A |
Einestien took math required for special & general relativity from other kadha...naaku general relativity math antha idea ledhu...special relativity maatram lorenz trasformations main.....eeyana ithe ekamga poincare paper publish chesaadu relativity meedha nai cheptunnadu...credit motham einestien hijack chesaadu antunnadu | ||
| Cocanada Moderator Username: Cocanada Post Number: 22618 Registered: 01-2008 Rating: |
ikkade kotha twist ichadu Newton was a good friend of Church. And only Church had access to documents stolen from India He also used the word "plagiarist" | ||
| Mental_sachinodu Side Hero Username: Mental_sachinodu Post Number: 3864 Registered: 10-2008 Posted From: 63.161.147.10 Rating: N/A |
dheeni lo newton ni thittataniki emundhi bro, western world now openly acknowledges that Calculus was used indian Math, before newton, but it does not mean newton actually copied indian math. Indian math had different symbols, and definitions were mostly in sanskrith. the world of appearances may or may not be real, or both may and may not be real - or may be indescribable; or may be real and indescribable, or unreal and indescribable; or in the end may be read and unreal and indescribable - its all Syadvada | ||
| Cocanada Moderator Username: Cocanada Post Number: 22617 Registered: 01-2008 Rating: |
Maa univ ki ochinappudu Newton ni banda bootulu tittadu CK Raju Anniti kante highlight ante Newton was not born on Christmas as everybody thinks. Because of discrepancy in western calendar, it appears he was born on Dec 25 Also, he spoke about Calculus was invented in India and was exported to europe in 17th century Calculus was invented by an indian scientist called Madhava | ||
| Mental_sachinodu Side Hero Username: Mental_sachinodu Post Number: 3863 Registered: 10-2008 Posted From: 63.161.147.10 Rating: N/A |
vjavasi bro, ee topic meedha chalaane, godavalu ayyayi, academic circles lo, but now no one bothers, as Poincare himself never bothered about it. we will never know the truth anipisthundhi naaku ayithe, actually, there were some rumors that Einstein's wife once acknowledged that theory of special relativity was not entirely Einstein's work, but it was mostly a rumor without substantial proof to it. the world of appearances may or may not be real, or both may and may not be real - or may be indescribable; or may be real and indescribable, or unreal and indescribable; or in the end may be read and unreal and indescribable - its all Syadvada | ||
| Vjavasi Side Hero Username: Vjavasi Post Number: 3034 Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 192.127.94.7 Rating: N/A |
calling M_S, Der, frodo and other math people...ee article meedha opinion cheppandi...eeyana website lo manchi information vundhi.... | ||
| Vjavasi Side Hero Username: Vjavasi Post Number: 3021 Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 75.131.192.17 Rating: N/A |
http://ckraju.net/misc/Einstein.html Einstein: from icon to con-man People have often misunderstood what I have said about Einstein, so here is a brief clarification. Background 1.Henri Poincaré had developed the theory of relativity by 1904. This was before Einstein's 1905 paper on relativity. 2.Einstein had read Poincare's work on relativity up to 1902. It is on record that it kept him "breathless with excitement for weeks". 3.Einstein denied reading Poincare's 1904 paper. Our belief in Einstein's greatness depends critically upon whether or not we believe him on this point. 4.Sir Edumund Whittaker disbelieved Einstein. Why? Because Einstein in 1905 used the terms used in Poincare's 1904 paper, but not earlier. I pointed out that Einstein used a peculiar term, used for the first and last time in Lorentz's 1904 paper, which too Einstein denied reading. So, there is circumstantial evidence that Einstein had seen the 1904 papers of Poincare and Lorentz. So why should we believe Einstein? Should we believe Einstein? It was in this context that I pointed out that it was not as if Einstein was a person of such high moral character that he never told a lie. My point was NOT that Einstein had one or more children out of wedlock. I do not regard that as immoral, and I specifically stated that "Children are not illegitimate, though parents or the social order may be." My point was that Einstein lied lifelong about his first "illegitimate" child Lieserl. He never saw her face. He did this cruel and unpardonable thing to his own child, just so that society should think well of him. My point was that a man who could do this could tell a hundred lies about what papers he had read or not read. Should we give Einstein benefit of doubt? It is strange that the story of the greatest scientific genius of all time can be defended only on grounds of this principle of criminal law. But benefit of doubt does not apply: that is a principle of criminal law meant to save living human beings from judicial mistakes. In history we must do justice. This point about Einstein's character was only meant for laypersons. For people with some knowledge, I have a much stronger point from Einstein's mistake, given below. Hawking on Einstein Stephen Hawking says that "Einstein invented general relativity single handed". Even this is incorrect. The equations of general relativity were first obtained by David Hilbert, the greatest mathematician of the time after Poincare. However, Hilbert made the mistake of sending the equations in a letter to Einstein. At that time Einstein was lecturing and using the wrong equations. Quickly, within 5 days after receiving Hilbert's letter, Einstein claimed to have "independently rediscovered" the very same equations of general relativity! Einstein did not solve the equations either. The three famous tests of relativity used the solution obtained by Schwarzschild. In fact, Einstein had a poor grasp of the mathematics of 4-dimensional geometry. He asked his friend Marcel Grossman to help him. So, all the work in general relativity too was also done by others, Einstein single-handedly got the credit! As a former patent clerk, Einstein's real expertise was in the art of grabbing social credit! Hilbert on Einstein Why do people continue to believe a story contrary to all facts? Because people reisist change. How? They accumulate hypotheses to "save the story". It is a "theorem" of the philosophy of science that any story, howsoever fantastic and contrary to fact, can be saved for any length of time by accumulating sufficiently many hypotheses. Hilbert's gullibility is a classic case in the point. Hilbert quickly understood Einstein's ignorance. He stated, "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen knows more about 4-dimensional geometry than Einstein". He understood that Einstein was also utterly ignorant about the philosophy of time and space. Hilbert asked the obvious question: how could this ignorant man have come up with such a profound theory as special relativity? However, Hilbert found a clever answer. He opined that it was just because of his ignorance that Einstein could be so original! "Do you know why Einstein said the most original and profound things about space and time in our generation? Because he learned nothing at all about the philosophy and mathematics of time and space." If an acute person like Hilbert, a Western thinker of the first rank, could be so gullible and fall prey to the phenomenon of "saving the story", what can one expect from lesser mortals? Thorne on Einstein Kip Thorne says (about special relativity) "Lorentz, Poincare waffled". Thorne is partly right. Lorentz did "waffle". He believed in the Heaviside-Lorentz contraction, he believed in "local time", he believed in "aether". But this is what Poincare said in his 1904 paper. "From all these results...would arise an entirely new mechanics, which would be, above all, characterized by this fact, that no velocity could surpass that of light1, any more than any temperature can fall below absolute zero. [Original footnote: 1. Because bodies would oppose an increasing inertia to the causes which would tend to accelerate their motion; and this inertia would become infinite when one approached the velocity of light.]" [Emphasis mine][1] Poincare compared the speed of light to absolute zero---a conceptually impassable barrier. The rest of relativity follows (and Poincare derived and so named the Lorentz transform in 1905). Some waffling this! Poincare's 1905 paper (the mathematical one, not the English translation of the 1904 paper) too appeared in print before Einstein submitted his paper. That would have given Einstein some 3 weeks instead of the 5 weeks in which he claimed to have invented special relativity. Pais on Poincare Pais in his biography of Einstein claims that Poincare needed an additional hypothesis. This is pure bunkum. Pais aims at the gullible who do not check things out. He wants to help them to "save the story". The dead giveaway is that Pais misquotes and misrepresents Poincare, who is far more lucid and thorough than Einstein. The Indian Nyaya Sutra recognizes such misrepresentations of the opponent's position as one of the 22 sure ways of losing the argument. Raju on Einstein Longitudinal mass First a small point in support of Whittaker. Whittaker had said that before 1904 Poincare used the term "principle of relative motion", and shifted to "principle of relativity" only in 1904. This is a bit subtle, and I looked for more matches. I found "longitudinal mass". Lorentz uses it in quotation marks, because it is obviously such a strange notion. Einstein boldly used it just like that---as if it were long-established terminology! Later he said he had not seen the paper by Lorentz. Epistemic testMy major point comes from my "epistemic test". As a teacher I often have had to check whether a student has cheated. A good way to do this is to test the student's understanding of what he claims to have authored. Lack of understanding is proof of copying, and conceptual mistakes are proof of lack of understanding. Later I applied this test systematically to claims of "independent rediscovery" in history. Einstein's mistakeEinstein's special relativity paper was titled "On the electrodynamics of moving bodies". But Einstein considered just one moving body, while Poincare thought also of the two body problem. Later in life Einstein tried to solve the many body problem (in general relativity). Where Poincare had immediately understood the mathematical implications, here is the mathematical mistake Einstein made, even thirty years later.[2] (The reference to Einstein is hidden under the rubric "many other authors" whose papers are cited along with Einstein's in the endnote.) On my "epistemic test", Einstein's conceptual mistake is proof that he copied from Poincare. Solution of 2-body problem of electrodynamics Here is how I later solved the two body problem of electrodynamics. The paper also clarifies a confusing point due to which physicists remained unclear in the matter for so long. •An account of Einstein's mistake for the layperson is here.[3] •An account of how long it took for my opinions about Einstein to change is here. The two meanings of aether Another way to understand Einstein's mistake is that he did not fully reject "aether". The word "aether" has two meanings: (1) as an absolute reference frame and (2) as a device to provide "contact" between distant bodies. Poincare rejected aether in both senses, Einstein only in the first sense.[4] On science and authority Today most people go by the authority of science, not by personal knowledge or any "scientific method". This is just the same as yesterday when they went by the authority of religion. Therefore the make similar blunders. "Thus, the new standard of truth is this: if it is published by an important person in a respectable journal it must be true or, at any rate, very likely true...The most pathetic example of this standard of truth is the grievous mathematical error3 in a paper published by Einstein4 in the Annals of Mathematics, in 1938, on the relativistic many-body problem, which exposes his fundamental lack of understanding of the special theory of relativity relative to Poincaré. "...As a clerk in the patent office, Einstein understood the subtler legalities of this process: that one may copy ideas if one does not copy the expression verbatim. A more recent example of this sort is Bill Gates, one of the richest men of all time, who legally won the claim of having innovated the windowing software that, despite its bugs, bears a striking resemblance to the earlier software of Apple Macintosh. The relative unimportance of the creative process is emphasized by the fact that no one has heard of the person who initially thought up the point-and-click concept behind the windowing software." •From C. K. Raju, "Mathematics and Culture" reprinted in Philosophy of Mathematics Education 11(1999) |
