Read on Twitter
(ii). "oh we invented Algebra. It is Halal"
Ad-homniem & Red-herring at best.
This bigoted comment exposes typical sanghi attitude of @BharadwajSpeaks here who's biased & nit-picking in his thread.
al-Khwarizmi laid the foundation of Algebra at rudimentary level which is very
Ad-homniem & Red-herring at best.
This bigoted comment exposes typical sanghi attitude of @BharadwajSpeaks here who's biased & nit-picking in his thread.
al-Khwarizmi laid the foundation of Algebra at rudimentary level which is very
crucial & provided a systematic approach to solutions, not just difficult equations mentioned by his Predecessors.
The word 'halal' is unnecessary here as we're not talking of practical life but a science to understand the world & mechanism of it.
Further analysis by him is
The word 'halal' is unnecessary here as we're not talking of practical life but a science to understand the world & mechanism of it.
Further analysis by him is
unfounded.
6.(i). "Visited India"
There is no evidence that al-Khwarizmi visited India in any historical records.
@BharadwajSpeaks fabricated this statement in order to support his so-called plagiarism claim.
It's more probable that the work https://twitter.com/BharadwajSpeaks/status/1343146273814167552?s=20
6.(i). "Visited India"
There is no evidence that al-Khwarizmi visited India in any historical records.
@BharadwajSpeaks fabricated this statement in order to support his so-called plagiarism claim.
It's more probable that the work https://twitter.com/BharadwajSpeaks/status/1343146273814167552?s=20
was gifted by Indian traders to al-Ma'mun.
(ii). "His book is a plagiarism from Indian Mathematics"
Unfounded claim with no evidence. In fact, the Indians had no rules like the ''restoration'' & ''reduction" unlike al-Khwarizmi as Cajori mentioned
(ii). "His book is a plagiarism from Indian Mathematics"
Unfounded claim with no evidence. In fact, the Indians had no rules like the ''restoration'' & ''reduction" unlike al-Khwarizmi as Cajori mentioned
7. "the derivation of PI given in his book 'al-Jabr"'
The derivation of π(pi) is irrelevant to Algebra but @BharadwajSpeaks
brought it in his thread to discard al-Khwarizmi by 'changing goalposts'.
Firstly, pi has a long history before Aryabhatta. https://twitter.com/BharadwajSpeaks/status/1343148153168531456?s=20
The derivation of π(pi) is irrelevant to Algebra but @BharadwajSpeaks
brought it in his thread to discard al-Khwarizmi by 'changing goalposts'.
Firstly, pi has a long history before Aryabhatta. https://twitter.com/BharadwajSpeaks/status/1343148153168531456?s=20
Both Egyptians & Mesopotamians have derived the value of pi close to 3.125 or 3.162
In the Egyptian Rhind Papyrus, which is dated about 1650 BC, there is good evidence for 3.16 as value of pi.
Secondly, Archimedes derived the value of pi by purely geometrical means
In the Egyptian Rhind Papyrus, which is dated about 1650 BC, there is good evidence for 3.16 as value of pi.
Secondly, Archimedes derived the value of pi by purely geometrical means
Thirdly, Ptolemy came up with 3.1416 & Zu Chongzhi with 355/113 before Aryabhatta.
Now, when it comes to Aryabhatta, he mentioned his calculation & value in Aryabhatiyam - gaṇitapāda 10 - as given below
But this is just one method as this is what al-Khwarizmi mentioned.
Now, when it comes to Aryabhatta, he mentioned his calculation & value in Aryabhatiyam - gaṇitapāda 10 - as given below
But this is just one method as this is what al-Khwarizmi mentioned.
So the source used by @BharadwajSpeaks exactly mentioned just 1 method as can be understood from the words, "the other method is used by astronomers among them"...
So al-Khwarizmi considered Aryabhatta as an Astronomer & not even Mathematician.
The other 2 values given by him
So al-Khwarizmi considered Aryabhatta as an Astronomer & not even Mathematician.
The other 2 values given by him
are Ö10(~3.1622), 3 1/7.
The first value was given by Zhang Heng & the second was by Archimedes but Banu Musa considered Archimedes’ method to be incomplete & not arriving at the truth. As mentioned by Suter, Banu Musa method was different from Archimedes.
So this is all on pi.
The first value was given by Zhang Heng & the second was by Archimedes but Banu Musa considered Archimedes’ method to be incomplete & not arriving at the truth. As mentioned by Suter, Banu Musa method was different from Archimedes.
So this is all on pi.
8.(i). "heavily plagiarised from Indian Mathematicians"
Still there is no evidence that al-Khwarizmi plagiarized from Indian Mathematicians.
The most we can say is that he developed his own approach by studying it though we don't see it in al-Jabr. https://twitter.com/BharadwajSpeaks/status/1343149266022195201?s=20
Still there is no evidence that al-Khwarizmi plagiarized from Indian Mathematicians.
The most we can say is that he developed his own approach by studying it though we don't see it in al-Jabr. https://twitter.com/BharadwajSpeaks/status/1343149266022195201?s=20
(ii). Henry only translated Brahmasphutasiddhānta in whose chapter 18, we witness that Brahmagupta gave solution to linear equation & 2 solutions to quadratic equation. But al-Khwarizmi solved 6 different kinds of equations with a straight forward & elementary exposition of the
solution of equations,especially that of 2nd degree which is different from Diophantus & Brahmagupta works as mentioned by Boyer
If al-Khawarizmi plagiarized it all from Indians then why he didn't make use of syncopation or of negative numbers?!
Moreover, the Brahmagupta work
If al-Khawarizmi plagiarized it all from Indians then why he didn't make use of syncopation or of negative numbers?!
Moreover, the Brahmagupta work
seems to be influenced by Diophantus bcz he used some of the same examples of Diophantus. For al-Khwarizmi, he didn't seem to be aware of Diophantus work as mentioned by Boyer.
9. @BharadwajSpeaks used the same screenshot to highlight the point of Henry https://twitter.com/BharadwajSpeaks/status/1343150578940092417?s=20
9. @BharadwajSpeaks used the same screenshot to highlight the point of Henry https://twitter.com/BharadwajSpeaks/status/1343150578940092417?s=20
that al-Khwarizmi plagiarized it from Hindus, despite the fact that the name "Hindus" didn't come in application until 12th cen. & the name itself was given by Persian Aryans or was derived from old Persian.
Still as mentioned above, it's unlikely that Henry has studied
Still as mentioned above, it's unlikely that Henry has studied
al-Khawarizmi work to make such conclusion. Also, there is nothing elementary in Indian mathematics as opposed to al-Khwarizmi.
10.(i). "came to the same conclusion after diligent research"
Interestingly Cossali couldn't decide whether al-Khwarizmi https://twitter.com/BharadwajSpeaks/status/1343153229920522240?s=20
10.(i). "came to the same conclusion after diligent research"
Interestingly Cossali couldn't decide whether al-Khwarizmi https://twitter.com/BharadwajSpeaks/status/1343153229920522240?s=20
took Algebra from Greeks or Indians.
But other scholars don't agree with Cossali like Sarton, Gandz, Boyer, Cajori, Rashed etc.
Sarton(image 1) Rashed(image 2)
Gandz(image 3)- who wrote the work, "The sources of al-Khwarizmi algebra".
Cossali despite doing diligent research
But other scholars don't agree with Cossali like Sarton, Gandz, Boyer, Cajori, Rashed etc.
Sarton(image 1) Rashed(image 2)
Gandz(image 3)- who wrote the work, "The sources of al-Khwarizmi algebra".
Cossali despite doing diligent research
failed to explain the differences in Diophantus, Brahmagupta & al-Khwarizmi works.
(ii). "skilled in Indian tongue and fond of Indian matters"
How come al-Khwarizmi was fond of Indian matters yet didn't travel there even once!!!
The proficiency in Sanskrit still doesn't
(ii). "skilled in Indian tongue and fond of Indian matters"
How come al-Khwarizmi was fond of Indian matters yet didn't travel there even once!!!
The proficiency in Sanskrit still doesn't
give the idea of plagiarism when there are glaring distinctions.
10.This is quite intriguing that Cossali made a comment like that with no evidence whatsoever.
Other historians of mathematics & those who wrote works in this regard found it very different https://twitter.com/BharadwajSpeaks/status/1343153852279791618?s=20
10.This is quite intriguing that Cossali made a comment like that with no evidence whatsoever.
Other historians of mathematics & those who wrote works in this regard found it very different https://twitter.com/BharadwajSpeaks/status/1343153852279791618?s=20
For ex- Rashed said that al-Jabr concerns the theory of linear & quadratic equations with a single unknown & the elementary arithmetic of relative binomials & trinomials...That is,the elementary & foundational pillar was given by al-Khawarizmi which isn't observed in other works.
My CONCLUSIONS:---
1. As mentioned during the whole thread, there is no evidence of plagiarism by al-Khwarizmi, rather Brahmagupta copied some same examples as of Diophantus & Aryabhatta didn't contributed much.
But al-Khwarizmi did build the elementary level of Algebra.
1. As mentioned during the whole thread, there is no evidence of plagiarism by al-Khwarizmi, rather Brahmagupta copied some same examples as of Diophantus & Aryabhatta didn't contributed much.
But al-Khwarizmi did build the elementary level of Algebra.
2. The appreciations showered by sanghis & others on @BharadwajSpeaks thread despite having intellectual dishonesty, ignorance & persistent red-herring with biased understanding suggest us how anti-intellectualism & ignorance are prevalent in India & we're still blinded by hate
& prejudice of others. He for sure is an Islamophobic bigot.
3. Lastly, in my humble opinion, we'd stop calling Islamic Mathematics or Islamic medicine etc. Islam wasn't revealed to guide us in Science but rather opens our intellects & hearts to pursue it to comprehend the
3. Lastly, in my humble opinion, we'd stop calling Islamic Mathematics or Islamic medicine etc. Islam wasn't revealed to guide us in Science but rather opens our intellects & hearts to pursue it to comprehend the
magnificent & unbelievable complex creations of God.
We'd separate the purpose of religion of Islam from the utility of Science.
Though, we can use mathematical arguments to prove existence of God...
END!!!!
We'd separate the purpose of religion of Islam from the utility of Science.
Though, we can use mathematical arguments to prove existence of God...
END!!!!
This is a thoroughly researched refutation on al-Khwarizmi which took me 2 days to finish. Give it a read & RT...
@tequieremos @Schandillia @Syaahkaar @YusufTw33ts @Abomination_Jk @AafreenShaa
@elmir_khan @Ruthless_Cold
@Obaidullahkalim
@Cometics_ @monerief
@SaniaAhmad1111
@tequieremos @Schandillia @Syaahkaar @YusufTw33ts @Abomination_Jk @AafreenShaa
@elmir_khan @Ruthless_Cold
@Obaidullahkalim
@Cometics_ @monerief
@SaniaAhmad1111
A thorough examination of al-Khwarizmi work & if he's a plagiarist
@UrbanXpat @IamKarwan @Mermaid___tales @SitaraMThomas
@nazmaaman @BanjaraThoughts
@AyishaMuhamad @M__Syed
@NoorainAhmed1 @subiism @MogalAadil
@Dellhiiite_
@nnigarkhanam @asifahmedapt @BasKhamaKha_
@UrbanXpat @IamKarwan @Mermaid___tales @SitaraMThomas
@nazmaaman @BanjaraThoughts
@AyishaMuhamad @M__Syed
@NoorainAhmed1 @subiism @MogalAadil
@Dellhiiite_
@nnigarkhanam @asifahmedapt @BasKhamaKha_
