Let me try one more time. Why Americans are so much self absorbed happy with their bacon, chips and football world cupsAnurag wrote:So no locomotive to go from south to north, just ride the bullock cart?Sushupti wrote:^^^ because there was no need for it in India.
while some take trouble to migrate even in tankers?. Its like asking why 1917 revolution happened only in Russia.First, RenaissanceAnurag wrote:So my question is, why didn't industrial revolution take place in India or any other part of Asia, why England only?
Indians had extensive literature for centuries--sanjaykumar wrote:<snip>
The pertinent question is why have not Indians established the scholarship to contribute to the historical narrative?
<snip>
I do predict that there will be some papers, eventually, by men named Norwood or Inglewood but not Nitesh Mahanarainswamy.
kerala had one of the earliest christians for centuries- they were not converters.The Jesuits sought out and recorded everything, they were active in coastal Kerala. They transmitted their findings to Rome. The Vatican maintains extensive records, some of which may be accessed by the pious and perhaps those only aspiring to piety (hehe). Yet there are no publications reporting any results, confirmatory or oherwise.
India had extensive trade with middle east for centuries.India was the richest country for over 15 centuries. However birth of islam spoiled a lot of things for India. trade route was lost, invasions after invasions occurred in India through north west. Islam forbades science, music and culture.sanjaykumar wrote:Unfortunately, discovery of the Kerala school of mathematics and the miraculous appearance of calculus remains an incomplete story, one more of suggestion mixed with hope.
<snip>
with time, India will be rise again. No question of it. There has been increasing numbers of Indians in scientific circles since independence. it is rising if you check chahcha uncle.I do predict that there will be some papers, eventually, by men named Norwood or Inglewood but not Nitesh Mahanarainswamy
Why David Cameron is doing business with India's 'modern-day Nero'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... endra-modi
India of last few centuries had lot of invasions/fights between warring kingdoms as usual. Hower there were some changes peculiar to Indian conditions as prevalent then.sanjaykumar wrote:I meant why has not Mohan Mahamallu set sail over the sea for the Holy See to see what the Vatican archives hold.
it is a lack of curiosity?
we were the greatest, so it is irrelevant.
-it is a lack of resources?
no funding agency to scam.
-it is a lack of propriety?
with so many poor people, and your second in law cousins are not doing so well, so it is irreverent.
of their aquisition of UK company Autonomy? There seems to several financial irregularities by Autonomy and their Auditors Deloitte UK and KPMG.
your posts always end up in negativism.sanjaykumar wrote:<snip>
What I am not hopeful of is that it will be an Indian to challenge the superiority-of-the-European paradigm.
One teenager made offensive comments about a murdered child on Twitter. Another young man wrote on Facebook that British soldiers should "go to hell." A third posted a picture of a burning paper poppy, symbol of remembrance of war dead.
All were arrested, two convicted, and one jailed — and they're not the only ones. In Britain, hundreds of people are prosecuted each year for posts, tweets, texts and emails deemed menacing, indecent, offensive or obscene, and the number is growing as our online lives expand.
Vikram, You're missing the question at hand. Did India's output remain constant as a figure (not %) of the world GDP before the british arrival in India. That's the only question I have put forward. People seem to be jumping all over as if I'm trying to put India down against the British.VikramS wrote:Anurag:
Do you ever wonder why a business model which shipped raw materials from India to the UK, and then shipped them back to India thrived against locally built products? Or why the British did not build the factories in India? Or why Indians could not build the factories themselves? What were the restrictions on trade and capital formation and investment on Indians vs the British? Which group of people could trade in a particular commodity or good and which did not. Or did the license raj have pre-partition roots or did Nehru just think it up over night?
Do ponder about these issues.
Thank you brihaspati garu for posting the link, while searching for the author Dr. C.K.Raju I found his sitebrihaspati wrote:There is also a certain Dr. C.K. Raju
http://www.indianscience.org/essays/31- ... lculus.PDF
Not many guesses as to why it will not be a very popular one with any of the editorial boards of "peer reviewed" journals.
It is not often realised how much the world is indebted to India for mathematics.
The PM has declared 2012 as the National Year of Mathematics. The terrible irony in this ought to be widely known.
First, we need some history. Europeans learnt basic arithmetic (algorithms for addition, multiplication, division, square roots, etc.) from India. Indian arithmetic was famous for its efficiency: it travelled to Baghdad, where al Khwarizmi wrote a book Hisab al Hind in the 9th c. Europeans called this technique Algorismus (after al Khwarizmi’s Latinised name). Florentine merchants understood that superior arithmetic gives a comparative advantage in commerce. Europeans eventually accepted the algorismus, rejecting as inferior the primitive abacus they earlier used.
Earlier European ignorance of arithmetic is also reflected in their crude calendar. The year and months are based on the solar and lunar cycles, both of which involve fractions of days. But precise fractions cannot be readily written in Roman numerals. So, Europeans could not articulate the correct lengths of the month and the year. Instead, they pandered to the vanity of Roman emperors by adding extra days to July and August to honour Julius and Augustus Caesar. These days were pinched from February. The result is a thoroughly unscientific calendar with months of 28, 29, 30 and 31 days, unrelated to the cycle of the moon after which the month is named. Because Romans knew only a few simple fractions (like ¼) they wrongly stated the length of the (tropical) year as 365¼ days. This was hopeless even by contemporary standards: the 3rd c. Surya Siddhanta in India and the 5th c. Aryabhata both give far more precise fractions for the length of the (sidereal) year.
This inferior Roman calendar became the Christian religious calendar, used to fix the date of Easter, then the key Christian festival, which depends upon the full moon. Because of the wrong length of the year, the dates of Easter kept slipping on the Christian calendar. The church repeatedly tried to reform the calendar, but failed. The church then had full control over Alexandria, so these failures prove that the Alexandrian Greeks then lacked good knowledge of astronomy, notwithstanding the tall Western claims made on their behalf today. Those claims are based on the book called Almagest, which, like any scientific text, is accretive. Though it gives a better length of the (tropical) year, even that inaccurate later-day figure was never incorporated in the Roman calendar. The sixth-century calendar reforms by Dionysius Exiguus only retrospectively fixed the zero point of this calendar, which later somehow got related to the birth of Jesus due to the use of the terms AD and BC.
In contrast, the Indian calendar had critical practical applications. It was in this connection that calculus was invented in the 5th c. by Aryabhata, a low caste mathematician from Patna. Aryabhata used the calculus to calculate sine values accurate to five decimal places. This tradition was carried forward by the Aryabhata school in Kerala, which involved the highest caste Namboodri Brahmins, transcending north-south and caste differences. Over the next thousand years they calculated trigonometric values accurate to the 9th decimal place. Why did Indians need this phenomenal precision? What social need did it fulfil? The simple answer is this: the Indian economy depended on rain-fed agriculture. That required a good calendar to synchronise agricultural operations with the rainy season. Constructing such a calendar, which could tell the rainy season, required accurate astronomical models and accurate trigonometric values. The other source of wealth in India was overseas trade, which too required accurate trigonometric values for navigation.
In the 16th c., the European navigation problem was the key scientific challenge facing Europe. Its solution needed accurate trigonometric values. Hence, calculus texts of the Aryabhata school in Kerala were translated and imported into Europe by Jesuits based in Cochin. Europeans then found it difficult to fix even latitude at sea, because their calendar gave the wrong date of equinox. Matteo Ricci, who was in India, provided inputs to his teacher Christoph Clavius who authored the Gregorian calendar reform of 1582. Common Europeans were still uncomfortable with fractions, so that reform corrected the length of the year, not by stating it as an accurate fraction, but by an ad hoc system of leap years! It also cut out ten whole days which had piled up due to the error in the Christian calendar. Though Clavius published (in his name) trigonometric tables based on the Indian values, accurate to the 9th decimal place, he did not know even the elementary trigonometry required to determine the size of the earth! That was accurately known in India from before Aryabhata, and Caliph al Mamun had confirmed it by direct measurement in the 9th c. Columbus, however, underestimated the size of the earth bringing it down to 40% of the correct Indo-Arabic figure, to facilitate funding for his project of sailing west to go east. Consequently, Europeans then could not determine longitude at sea either - a problem they solved only in the late 18th c.
Westerners consistently wrote history to glorify themselves and belittle non-Christians, so they never acknowledged learning calculus from India. For centuries, the calculus was attributed to Newton and Leibniz. This false history was a source of political power: it was used by the Whig historian Macaulay to assert Western superiority and institute Western education in India, facilitating colonisation.
Naturally, the Western-educated learn the Gregorian calendar and the ADBC superstition. Most Western 'educated' Indians cannot even name the months on the Indian calendar. Since Indian festivals are fixed by the Indian calendar, but move on the Gregorian calendar, this invites cultural alienation — few know how to fix the date of Diwali, for example. The most tragic contemporary consequences are in agriculture, for the Gregorian calendar has no concept of a rainy season, like Sawan and Bhadon on the Indian calendar. Several times in the last decade, the monsoons were delayed on the Gregorian calendar. False anticipation of drought was followed by floods in 2003, 2004 and 2009. But the rains arrived in time on the Indian calendar. So, was the monsoon delayed or is the calendar wrong? Anyway, the poorer farmers were ruined because they credulously believed the 'experts' (often seed-salesmen) and mistimed operations.
It is, therefore, ironic that the 'National Year of Mathematics' is a year on the Western calendar. This rubs salt in the wounds of farmer suicides and helps to impoverish the Indian peasant, whether or not that is the intention. In the National Year of Mathematics, India ought to have celebrated the achievements of Indian mathematicians in calculus, which have only recently been highlighted by this author. But this is not even mentioned in our school texts which misspell Aryabhata’s name as Aryabhatta, changing his caste. Incidentally, Aryabhata’s technique of solving differential equations remains useful even for high-tech purposes, such as sending a man to the moon. The National Year of Mathematics should at least have been a year on the Indian calendar, and not the Gregorian year 2012.
We ape the West only because we uncritically believed false Western history which depicts us as inferior. That false history enabled the colonial capture of the mind, which craves Western approval. Despite the recent exposure of that false history, if we still choose the unscientific Western calendar over the practical Indian one, that suggests a dangerous agenda of recolonisation.
Hari Seldon wrote:psy-ops are usually sly-ops. But not when the UK's ruspected Gaunduan noosepaper has taken up cudgels against an enemy of the people (of the book), it seems.....
Excellent write-up here:The Guardian peddles complete lies in scurrilous attack on Modi
The lies listed are a Hu's Hu of fake libooral propagandu - sample some delicacies please..>> The writer in para 7 mentions that official figures of those killed in the “pogrom” is around 1,000 while “independent researchers” put it around 2,000. Now I can understand that The Guardian might want to distrust Indian news sources as unworthy (former colony of Britain, etc), so here is a link from BBC : http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4543177.stm.Yup yup...can suzanne errand_dirty roy's "ripped open pregnant foetesus be far behind....>> Para 8 of the article is the most stunning piece of lie I have ever seen in a mainstream paper. The writer mentions the Godhra train carnage, which preceded the riots, and in which 59 innocent Hindu pilgrims were brutally burnt alive by a mob of Muslims. However, the writer states: “it has since been suggested that it may have been an accident.” There have been attempts in India too to peddle this line – that the train carnage was accidental. That somehow the pilgrims decided to commit mass suicide. But that line is vintage 2006. This is 2012. That line now stands discredited. Why? Because in 2011, an Indian court held 31 Muslims guilty of pre-planned conspiracy to kill the Hindu pilgrims. Here is a BBC news report (again BBC, just to make it more believable) on the same: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12534127>> Para 9 of the article peddles another lie shredded by investigations: “Pregnant Muslim women had their bellies slit open with knives, and the foetuses pulled out.” This is an urban myth that was spun by the cottage industry which survives on anti-Modi and anti-Gujarat propaganda. The SIT, which investigated the case, has concluded that this allegation is false. The doctor who conducted the post-mortem on the women in question has given testimony on oath that the allegations are patently false. A court has given verdict on this and other related cases, commonly known as the Naroda Patiya case, on August 31 2012. The court accepted the argument that this allegation is fabricated. All human rights activists, who have for a decade campaigned against Modi, celebrated the judgement in this case. Yet, this despicable lie finds place in The Guardian.
>> In para 12, the writer uses the phrase “A modern-day Nero” for Modi and attributes it to the Supreme Court. The same phrase is also used in the headline of the piece. Can The Guardian quote any order by the Supreme Court of India where this phrase is used for Modi?Oh, BTW, lest you browntrodden yindutvawadi trolls accuse the (christine) fair and (mis) balanced Gaunduan of bias and all, hey, they actually have a Editorial code of ethics. No kiddin'...>> Para 12 has also this sentence: “A court-appointed senior lawyer recommended that the Chief Minister be prosecuted for hate-mongering.” As mentioned earlier, the Supreme Court of India appointed a SIT to investigate some specific 2002 riots cases including allegations against Modi. The SIT was given Code of Criminal Procedure powers, a first in Indian jurisprudence, considering the extraordinary nature of the riots and the allegations. Such powers are only available to regular police force and not to special investigating teams. This case was made an exception. The court also appointed a senior lawyer to assist the court as an adviser. The SIT, after detailed investigations over a number of years, concluded that the allegations against Modi were without any substance whatsoever. The senior lawyer, who was acting merely in an advisory capacity, agreed with almost all of the SIT findings but suggested that Modi be prosecuted nonetheless on ‘moral grounds’. The Supreme Court gave the final authority, on whether to prosecute or not, to the SIT, since it was the SIT which had legal remit while the lawyer was merely an adviser. The SIT, after considering all aspects, including the lawyer’s opinion, decided finally that no case existed against Modi. The writer mentions the lawyers opinion but not the only legally valid opinion — in this case that of the SIT.
Read it all at Niti central and laugh long and loud at increasingly visible desperation of the Gaunduan types over the diminishing returns yielded by their bully pulpits nowadays....LOL!
The roots of such gushing depends on a selective highlighting of the so-called 17th-18th century "British moralist" school, and none whatsoever based on a complete reading of their works - or if read, on highly selective editing of their works to suit a particular political and moral agenda to prove that sort of "humanism" actually ever lay behind the British "moralists". Here is a sample of what the hagiographers go for :This video records Nobel laureate Amartya Sen’s somewhat rambling lecture, wherein he discusses a few themes in Hume’s ethical work which he deems relevant today. Specifically, Sen wants to advocate for Hume’s argument that society’s globalization tends to expand its moral sensitivities. We hear that Hume was among the first to argue that a society’s mores were a function of its culture rather than physical circumstances. Hume was also an early critic of then-nascent British imperialism, arguing that it demeaned the conquerers as much as the conquered.
Many of the Humean insights to which Sen refers seem so obviously true today as to be unworthy of further discussion. But perhaps that says as much of Hume’s foresight and intellectual victory as the tepid nature of Sen’s summary. To be honest, I couldn’t tease out any great insights from the lecture, but I’ll let Sen’s intellectual cred justify the post, and anyway it may prove interesting to those trying to assess Hume’s contributions, if not his continued relevance.
-Daniel Horne
However, what is typcially suppressed belongs to cases like that in 1753, when Hume wrote an essay, “Of National Characters,” with the footnote:It is universally acknowledged that there is a great uniformity among the actions of men, in all nations and ages, and that human nature remains still the same, in its principles and operations. The same motives always produce the same actions: the same events follow the same causes. Ambition, avarice, self-love, vanity, friendship, generosity, public spirit: these passions, mixed in various degrees, and distributed through society, have been, from the beginning of the world, and still are, the source of all the actions and enterprises, which have ever been observed among mankind. Would you know the sentiments, inclinations, and course of life of the Greeks and Romans? Study well the temper and actions of the French and English. - David Hume
When Sen and others speak of Hume's contention about globalization "increasing" human sensitivity to moral/ethical questions - and that he was against "imperialism" because it "demeans" conquerors too - a real reading of Hume would have shown that Hume was taking it in the context of the non-white supposed capacity to corrupt the morally ascendant "white". This "insight" of Hume has been turned around by non-British cultural origin intellects - from their own respective tradidtions of the "liberal" model to claaim that British "moralism" has something similar in "humanism" terms.I am apt to suspect the negroes and in general all the other species of men (for there are four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction betwixt these breeds of men. Not to mention our colonies, there are Negroe slaves dispersed all over Europe, of which none ever discovered any symptoms of ingenuity; tho’ low people, without education, will start up amongst us, and distinguish themselves in every profession. In Jamaica indeed they talk of one negroe as a man of parts and learning; but ‘tis likely he is admired for very slender accomplishments, like a parrot, who speaks a few words plainly.
There is a British saying (I don't know whether it s a modern one or old) "British are not happy unless they are miserable"Neela wrote:They want to feel miserable at and drag the rest with them.