yuktibhasa and tantrasangraha

Rashmun wrote:He clearly says that the results in YB are not original results. Further, he refers to a Sanskrit translation of YB but there also exists a Sanskrit commentary on YB.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:He clearly says that the results in YB are not original results. Further, he refers to a Sanskrit translation of YB but there also exists a Sanskrit commentary on YB.

he says the TS only gives certain indications and in fact doesn't deal with infinite series at all. are we watching the same video? he says the TS is more of an astronomical text. around the 3.47 mark he clearly says per se it doesn't deal with infinite series.

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:He clearly says that the results in YB are not original results. Further, he refers to a Sanskrit translation of YB but there also exists a Sanskrit commentary on YB.

he says the TS only gives certain indications and in fact doesn't deal with infinite series at all. are we watching the same video? he says the TS is more of an astronomical text. around the 3.47 mark he clearly says per se it doesn't deal with infinite series.

Watch carefully to what he says from 2:45 to 3:00.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:He clearly says that the results in YB are not original results. Further, he refers to a Sanskrit translation of YB but there also exists a Sanskrit commentary on YB.

he says the TS only gives certain indications and in fact doesn't deal with infinite series at all. are we watching the same video? he says the TS is more of an astronomical text. around the 3.47 mark he clearly says per se it doesn't deal with infinite series.

Watch carefully to what he says from 2:45 to 3:00.

i watched the entire video carefully. he first explains the connection between the TS and YB. it's the differences between the two towards the second half that interest me more, because the connection between the two texts is well established; in fact jyashtadeva has acknowledged that right in the beginning. in that regard there is no new information that is revealed in this video. the question is why are you ignoring what he says later in the video which is germane to the questions at hand?

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:He clearly says that the results in YB are not original results. Further, he refers to a Sanskrit translation of YB but there also exists a Sanskrit commentary on YB.

he says the TS only gives certain indications and in fact doesn't deal with infinite series at all. are we watching the same video? he says the TS is more of an astronomical text. around the 3.47 mark he clearly says per se it doesn't deal with infinite series.

Watch carefully to what he says from 2:45 to 3:00.

i watched the entire video carefully. he first explains the connection between the TS and YB. it's the differences between the two towards the second half that interest me more, because the connection between the two texts is well established; in fact jyashtadeva has acknowledged that right in the beginning. in that regard there is no new information that is revealed in this video. the question is why are you ignoring what he says later in the video which is germane to the questions at hand?

From 2:45 to 3:00 he says that the results in YB have been gleaned from other texts.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

he says the TS only gives certain indications and in fact doesn't deal with infinite series at all. are we watching the same video? he says the TS is more of an astronomical text. around the 3.47 mark he clearly says per se it doesn't deal with infinite series.

Watch carefully to what he says from 2:45 to 3:00.

i watched the entire video carefully. he first explains the connection between the TS and YB. it's the differences between the two towards the second half that interest me more, because the connection between the two texts is well established; in fact jyashtadeva has acknowledged that right in the beginning. in that regard there is no new information that is revealed in this video. the question is why are you ignoring what he says later in the video which is germane to the questions at hand?

From 2:45 to 3:00 he says that the results in YB have been gleaned from other texts.

whatever. as always, the integrity you bring to a discussion is questionable and leaves a poor taste. you really need to look in the mirror and ask yourself some questions. i am done with this unless some startling new information is brought forth by you (doubt it) or someone else. i'll let you wallow in your own agenda cesspool. good luck with all that.

my final thoughts on this -- regardless of what language they penned their results and commentary in, these were malayali minds at work. no question about it.

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Watch carefully to what he says from 2:45 to 3:00.

i watched the entire video carefully. he first explains the connection between the TS and YB. it's the differences between the two towards the second half that interest me more, because the connection between the two texts is well established; in fact jyashtadeva has acknowledged that right in the beginning. in that regard there is no new information that is revealed in this video. the question is why are you ignoring what he says later in the video which is germane to the questions at hand?

From 2:45 to 3:00 he says that the results in YB have been gleaned from other texts.

whatever. as always, the integrity you bring to a discussion is questionable and leaves a poor taste. you really need to look in the mirror and ask yourself some questions. i am done with this unless some startling new information is brought forth by you (doubt it) or someone else. i'll let you wallow in your own agenda cesspool. good luck with all that.

my final thoughts on this -- regardless of what language they penned their results and commentary in, these were malayali minds at work. no question about it.

Sorry my mistake. You need to watch the video from 1:45 to 2:00.

Chapter 2 (Sphuta-prakaranam (On true planets)): Computation of risings, and arcs, construction of a circle of diameter equal to the side of a given square, computation of the circumference without the use of square and roots, sum of series, sum of the series of natural numbers, of squares of numbers, of cubes of numbers, processes relating to Rsines and arcs, computation of the arc of a given Rsine, computation of the circumference of a circle, derivation of Rsines for given Rversed sine and arc, computation of Rsine and arcs, accurate computation of the 24 ordained Rsines, sectional Rsines and Rsine differences, sum of Rsine differences, summation of Rsine differences, computation of the arc of an Rsine according to Madhava, computation of Rsine and Rversed sine at desired point without the aid of the ordained Rsines, rules relating to triangles, rules relating to cyclic quadrilaterals, rules relating to the hypotenuse of a quadrilateral, computation of the diameter from the area of the cyclic quadrilateral, surface area of a sphere, computation of the desired Rsine, the ascensional difference, sun's daily motion in minutes of arc, application of ascensional difference to true planets,....

As per the old Indian tradition of starting off new chapters with elementary content, the first four chapters of the Yuktibhasa contain elementary mathematics, such as division, proof of Pythagorean theorem, square root determination, etc.[8] The radical ideas are not discussed until the sixth chapter on circumference of a circle. Yuktibhasa contains the derivation and proof of the power series for inverse tangent, discovered by Madhava.[2] In the text, Jyesthadeva describes Madhava's series in the following manner....