Thread by @JoeAgneya

Brazen double standards of the western historian

Otto Neugebauer(1899–1990) is regarded as the foremost historian of science. His guiding principle is this-Unlike soft sciences, it is UNLIKELY that complicated mathematical models can be replicated by two cultures independently.

His student is the famous David Pingree. This man's life mission was the subordination of the Siddhanta tradition of India under the purported primacy of the Greek. His conclusions & fantasies are rampantly circulated as mainstream history,even among Indians. How does he do this?

1. Use Neugebauer's law to argue that the similarities between the Ptolemaic and Siddhanta astronomy is because of flow of knowledge.

2. Use this as 'proof' of Greek primacy.

3. Claim that Aryabhatta and Varahamihira learned astronomy & trigonometry from Hipparchus & Ptolemy!

But nowhere does he demonstrate-

-The existence of an unbroken Greek manuscript tradition predating the Siddhantas
-The mechanism of transfer. Did Greeks come here or Indians go there? Most such references(Diophantus, Pythagorus, Neoplatonists) depict Greeks learning from India!

There are so many names to show for the flow of knowledge between India, China, Tibet and even Jesuits. We largely know who took what manuscript where(Gautama Siddha, Dromtom, Matteo Ricci etc). Indic texts even acknowledge Greek astrology. But where is the flow of astronomy?

Why is Diophantus(200-280 CE) acknowledging Algebra as Indian? We have a surviving Bakshali manuscript showing definite evidence of Algebra in the 1st century. Where are the equivalent manuscripts proving the antiquity of Ptolemy, Hipparchus & Archimedes?

https://twitter.com/Musashi_Nair/status/1343108734814310400?s=20

Now the double standards:

Let us accept Neugebauer's law. It is definite proof of Greek primacy in Trigonometry & astronomy!

Now ask the European to apply Neugebauer's law on 17th century Europe. Why does HIGHLY COMPLICATED 16th century Indian calculus reappear in Europe? How?

The alternate model:

Vedic tradition, along with Mesopotamian & Egyptian, is one of the original three. By 1300 BCE, Lagadha had a substantial mass of astronomical knowledge. By 850 BCE, the Chinese are using the 28 Nakshatra Zodiac called "Hsiu". Earlier they used 23.

800 BCE- Mulapin tablets show Babylonian constellations completely different from Vedic & younger

By 200BCE-200CE, the earliest Siddhanta gave the geocentric model, epicycles, table of Sines & Versines.

Ptolemy's Syntaxis- a highly corrupted text is *claimed* to be from 140 CE.

Many references show Sassanian Interest in Indic scientific manuscripts. Early versions of Siddhanta texts would have been present in Gundeshapur library, which was looted & transplanted to Alexandria. This is how the use of epicycles, Algebra & trigonometry accreted into Greek.

Yesterday I saw many people insulting CK Raju for his vehement rejection of Euclid's historicity.

You either understand these double standards. Or you don't. If you don't, you should. If you do and still don't question it, you are behaving like an unwitting soypoy.