Subject: Re: [HM] Indian astronomy and mathematics
From: Milo Gardner (milo.gardner@24stex.com)
Date: Thu Feb 17 2000 - 18:08:02 EST
Dear HM listmembers:
This post is intended to respond to two-three Indian Math
and Astronomy posts. I see three related points seem important
to cover, in the following manner:
1. Kim's request for citations to the JHA clarifying the
Pingree- Neugebauer debate is provided by the JTHFA,
another journal, as I read my CSUS index. I hope that
this clarification is sufficient.
2. Dinesh's point concerning units of degree measurement
is correct. His 1/6th of a degree is my 10-15 minutes.
My confusion came from discussing star clocks, as Dinesh
has not directly covered Maybe solar and sidereal star clocks
can be covered, as made very accurate with the introduction
of water clocks around 1,500 BC.
3. My historical point of view stresses math and ancient astronomy,
read from ancient texts, and devises, using cryptanalytics and
Occam's Razor. Outdated suggestions from the 1920's, as marked by
Neugebauer, DE Smith and many others, have clearly not been challenged
in the professional journal, as a wider reading of ancient sources
seem to demand. The days of Greeks being the greatest should be
over. Let the ancient texts and devises speak for themselves,
across the liberal - conservative spectrum.
In addition, it should be noted that my skills have been applied
to mathematical astronomy from several points of view, two being
solar and sidereal star clocks, as well as solar, sidereal and
lunar calendars.
As a related baseline example, comparing East with West, the March
April 2000 issue of Archaeology details Incan calendars, as reported
by R. Tom Zuinema, U of Ill (Urbana- Champaigne), links three pre-
Columbian Incan calendars:
1. 365 day solar
2. 29.53 synodic lunar
3. 27.32 sidereal lunar (the period marking the moon's
return to a specific constellation
as confirmed by:
1. an eight day week,
2. 41 weeks, or
3. 328 lunar sidereal year
4. 37 days added, referenced to Pleides, from 5/3 - 6/9
(using our modern calendar), marking the maize planting
season, creating the solar calendar)
and other points covered in the Archaeology article.
My baseline data is intended to show that Mesoamerican astronomy
was relatively more accurate, linking 260, 360, 365 1/4, plus
maybe an in reported sidereal calendar or two, showing that the
West's astronomy was very good, and may not have needed water clocks,
as India seemed to have needed.
Specifically, returning to the Vedic discussion, the grammar issues
are far beyond my skills. Dinesh's 27 lunar mansions could very well
be a sidereal lunar month. Noting the error of .32 a major correction
was required.
Where and when did the corrections arrive? That is the central
issue here, right? To paraphrase,
1. Where several classes of calendars linked, creating
daily, monthly and annual accuracies, comparable to
say, Mesoamericans or South Americans?
2. Were daily solar and sidereal star clocks in use, observing the
average 3 min. 56 sec. daily variance, at 30 degree's latitude?
and like Vedic mathematical textual data, from which time periods,
implying what?
The introduction of water clocks was a major event, as I see the
use of solar and sidereal time, in the ANE.
Regards to all,
Milo Gardner
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Feb 17 2000 - 19:18:18 EST