Jump to content

Talk:Madhava of Sangamagrama

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Imagetoimageless (talk | contribs) at 09:29, 21 August 2020. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Citation Needed

Please provide a citation for Madhava being "considered the father of mathematical analysis" . . . I know of no printed sources that make a reasonable claim of this . . . the father of analysis as we know them today are more likely to be consider Karl Weierstraß, as he was interested in the basis of the Calculus . . . before his time, there were no clear definitions regarding the fundamentals of calculus, and thus theorems could not be properly proven. Madhava in contrast, like many before him, merely introduced the idea of infinity to certain classes of functions, like many after him would do before analysis was put on a firm footing. Arundhati bakshi 18:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Mathematical analysis and it's talk page for more detail (and a printed source for the claim). Also see [1] highlighting all pioneers in analysis - it considers Madhava the founder of mathematical analysis in contrast with Weierstrass as father of modern analysis. Weierstrass' page also says the same. --Pranathi 00:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Put on Kerala School

Hi, I put these questions on the Kerala school.

Could we get some cleanup on the maths stuff?


  • Infinite series expansions of functions.
Ok. How? By Taylor series? Fourier series?
  • The power series.
Power series of what?
  • The Taylor series.
Taylor series of what? There are 4 or 5 trigonmetric functions listed below.
  • Trigonometric series.
...
  • Rational approximations of infinite series.
...
  • Taylor series of the sine and cosine functions (Madhava-Newton power series).
Ok. Wouldn't that fall above?
  • Taylor series of the tangent function.
Likewise
Likewise?
  • Second-order Taylor series approximations of the sine and cosine functions.
What's the 2nd order Taylor series? If the "1st order" is just sin(x) ~ x, then the second order would be sin(x) ~ x + x^3/3!.
  • Third-order Taylor series approximation of the sine function.
So that would be sin(x) ~ x + x^3/3! + x^5/5! ?
  • Power series of π (usually attributed to Leibniz).
Which one? π = 4/1 - 4/3 + 4/5 - ...
  • Power series of π/4 (Euler's series).
Which one? Does this mean Leibniz above?
What radius?
What diameter?
What circumference?
  • Power series of angle θ (equivalent to the Gregory series).
??? What does this mean?
Ok. As solutions to quadratics? Cubics?
As solutions to ...
Which transcendental number?
Ok...
  • Correctly computed the value of π to 11 decimal places, the most accurate value of π after almost a thousand years.
Ok...
  • Sine tables to 12 decimal places of accuracy and cosine tables to 9 decimal places of accuracy, which would remain the most accurate upto the 17th century.
Ok...
  • A procedure to determine the positions of the Moon every 36 minutes.
Ok...
  • Methods to estimate the motions of the planets.
Ok
Including the fundamental theorem of calculus? Which rules? Integration of polynomials?
  • Term by term integration.
Ok
  • Laying the foundations for the development of calculus, which was then further developed by his successors at the Kerala School.
...

Thanks! --M a s 01:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious Thing

Okay in the article, the expansion for pi/4 is a direct result of the Madhava-Gregory series(theta=pi, n=1), but the article points to some expansion of the arctangent as the source. Is this a mistake?

Disputed

None of the questions under Put on Kerala School have been answered.

To give an example, the article claims that Madhava invented the fundamental ideas of:

  1. Infinite series expansions of functions.
  2. Power series.
  3. Taylor series.
  4. Maclaurin series.
  5. Trigonometric series

First question, were these expansions really infinite as claimed? Further, for some functions he gave what looks like the first terms of a Taylor or Maclaurin series of that function. That is a nice accomplishment. But the fundamental idea of a Maclaurin or Taylor series consists of giving the rule how to develop a function into a series. No evidence that he knew this is given. -- Zz 17:56, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tag removed

Just added a number of facts, such as the location of Sangramagrama, the uncertainty regarding which of the results are specifically attributable to Madhava (including a sketch of some of the arguments), ensuring that the reader is aware of the degree of doubt on this matter.

Removed many of the indirect references (e.g. several instances of the Mactutor pages) with journal articles. Merged the "bibliography" section into references (though some people may disagree, I feel this is cleaner - you get a sense of what the text does; if we need to repeat the citations in a bibliography, it should have annotations).

Also added a citation for integration along with the original malayalam text.

As for the disputed facts, I think among the examples given, with citations to various texts, we have many examples of these three :

  1. Infinite series expansions of functions (mostly trig functions)
  2. Power series : all are power series expansions
  3. Trigonometric series : many involve the trig functions in the expansion

The following two however appear to be unlikely:

  1. Taylor series.
  2. Maclaurin series.

Since these express functions as powers of the derivative for a general function, it is unclear that the understanding of higher-order derivatives was sufficiently understood. While derivatives are being computed, it is not clear whether power series of derivatives were used. Unless other facts come to light, I am removing reference to these two. mukerjee (talk) 17:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Transmission to Europe

I have no expertise in this matter, but the section This is due to wrong understanding of the authors concerned. It was almost impossible for the Jesuits in the sixteenth century, who are experts with the eminence of Mādhavan or his disciples, to study Sanskrit and Malayalam and to transmit them to European Mathematicians, instead of they themselves claiming the credit for the discovery. is very unclear. Who is misunderstanding whom? What is impossible? Were the Jesuits able to understand Mādhavan but unable to transmit them? Were they experts in Sanskrit and Malayam or not? Can anyone offer something to clarify it? Moreover, it reads to me like original research. Perhaps it would be clearer to say acknowledge priority in discovery of the relevant work to Mādhavan etc. but to state that there was no actual evidence that this knowledge was transmitted to the West; therefore the question of tranmission to Europe is simply unresolvable without more evidence. Rob Burbidge (talk) 09:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I asked pretty much the same questions when reading those sentences. They make almost no sense. There are quite a few grammar issues (and shaky claims) in the current article. The part you pointed out is just the worst of it. 24.220.188.43 (talk) 14:53, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
At 2019-12-08 there is the sentence "... uncertain ... whether any of these ideas were transmitted to the West, ... calculus was developed completely independently by Isaac Newton and Leibniz." If transmission is uncertain then transmission is possible. In that case Newton or Leibniz could have benefited and the sentence is inconsistent. And incidentally, "it" is unnecessary in most sentences. Many sentences can be rewritten in a simpler form without "it". For example: "Transmission of these ideas to the West is uncertain." Regards, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 15:13, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of "we"

I added a tone tag, because the article uses the plural third person ("we") very frequently, e.g. "We find Madhava's work on the value of π cited in..." This is not in keeping with the style guidelines. I'd fix it myself, but I'm supposed to be working instead of reading about approximations of Pi, let alone repairing a Wikipedia article! :D --13.12.254.95 (talk) 16:04, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling of Sangamagrama

Currently,[2] and since the very beginning,[3] the title of this article is: Mādhava of
Sañgamāgrama

However, if you’d like to spell Sangamagrama with diaereses diacritics, the correct spelling would be
Saṅgamagrāma

ñ vs. ṅ is relatively unimportant (though inaccurate), but -māgrama is simply wrong and confusing when it’s actually -magrāma. Since the title is wrongly spelled, we’re going to have to move this article sooner or later, to simply “Madhava of Sangamagrama” or maybe “Mādhava of Saṅgamagrāma” or...??? Any suggestions? —Gyopi (talk) 11:46, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comments: There are typos in the current title. One can see the rigorous transliteration Saṅgamagrāma in the first line of page 101 of On an Untapped Source of Medieval Keralese Mathematics, or by searching Mādhava Saṅgamagrāma on books.google.com. The spelling in the current title Sañgamāgrama is simply wrong.(*1) If the name of the place is transliterated rigorously, the title will be Mādhava of Saṅgamagrāma.

However, the new title of the article should be Madhava of Sangamagrama without diacritics, in accordance with WP:TITLE: “Titles are those that readers are likely to look for.... Such titles usually convey what the subject is actually called in English... Titles usually use names and terms that are precise enough to unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but not overly precise.” If you look at a similar page, the page title for Āryabhaṭa is Aryabhata without diacritics as well, Nīlakaṇṭha Sōmayāji is Nilakantha Somayaji, and Kēraḷa is Kerala. The page Madhava of Sangamagrama already exists as a redirect to this article, and I can't simply move Mādhava of Sañgamāgrama to Madhava of Sangamagrama. I'll request the move to Madhava of Sangamagrama unless someone says otherwise.

(*1) If you check Malayalam alphabet, it's not difficult to tell that the original spelling സംഗമഗ്രാമ reads Sa(ṁ)GaMaGRāMa; except the reason why (ṁ) is transliterated as ṅ before g is a bit complicated (explained in ISO 15919). Similarly, if you check Devanagari, संगमग्राम reads Sa(ṁ)GaMaGRāMa. —Gyopi (talk) 03:03, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's possible to move this article to Madhava of Sangamagrama if I use Template:Db-move first. But then, the move should be non-controversial or consensual. So please say now if you don't like this move. Thanks! I mean, the typos are obvious and there's nothing to talk about, but there might be someone who prefers the rigorous title Mādhava of Saṅgamagrāma... — Gyopi (talk) 03:20, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Additional verification:

  • Bag, A. K. (1980), Indian Literature on Mathematics During 1400–1800 A.D. (PDF), Indian Journal of History of Science 15 (1): 80. “Mādhava (c. 1400) of Saṅgamagrāma near Cochin was a well-known scholar in astronomy and mathematics.”
  • Shirali, Shailesh A (1997), Nīlakaṇṭha, Euler and π (PDF), Resonance: 33. “In the text Yuktibhāsā, the series is credited to Mādhava of Sangamagrāma (1350–1410), who lived almost a full century before Nīlakaṇṭha.”

So I’m moving this now. — Gyopi (talk) 03:30, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Picture needed.

No picture provided nor can i find one on the web. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srathi00 (talk • contribs) 14:26, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry didnt see this section Imagetoimageless (talk) 09:29, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is probably important to have known paintings of this particular mathematician. This image was commissioned from the mathematicians city.

The sphere, arched integral (tree) on the left of sphere to show his contribution to mathematics is all encapsulated in this image. A lot of detail in the painting pertains to the era. There are no other known genuine image with such detail other than this. This mathematicians contribution has already been diminished. An image is essential to understanding the person, era and conscious simplicity. Ultimately this only improves the page.

The image is shown without breaking open license, adhering to Wikipedia policy etc... While thanking previous editors, wouldn't you agree the page require a further contribution, constant improvement Imagetoimageless (talk) 09:29, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism

Much of this article is taken word for word from this biography, particularly the section on infinite series. HGilbert (talk) 12:14, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation is a serious problem and we should definitely remove instances of it; thanks for bringing it up. But I cannot actually find any sentences taken word-for-word from the MacTutor site (except the phrase "Madhava gave three forms of Rn which improved the approximation", which is fairly generic, and explicitly cited with the MacTutor site as reference). Also, this article is much longer than the MacTutor biography, so I don't think it's possible that most of this article is taken from there. Could you give examples, or simply remove whatever you think is copied, and then we can reinstate them from proper sources? Shreevatsa (talk) 16:50, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is one sentence copied. Others are:

  • "The most convincing is that they come as the first three convergents of a continued fraction which can itself be derived from the standard Indian approximation to π namely 62832/20000."
  • "Madhava also gave a most accurate table of sines, defined in terms of the values of the half-sine chords for twenty-four arcs drawn at equal intervals in a quarter of a given circle." HGilbert (talk) 17:28, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed or rewritten those. There isn't anything more, as far as I can tell. Shreevatsa (talk) 20:40, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Madhava of Sangamagrama. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:56, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Madhava of Sangamagrama. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:18, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Madhava of Sangamagrama. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:27, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image requirement

It is probably important to have known paintings of this particular mathematician. This image was commissioned from the mathematicians city.

The sphere, arched integral (tree) on the left of sphere to show his contribution to mathematics is all encapsulated in this image. A lot of detail in the painting pertains to the era. There are no other known genuine image with such detail other than this. This mathematicians contribution has already been diminished. An image is essential to understanding the person, era and conscious simplicity. Ultimately this only improves the page.

The image is shown without breaking open license, adhering to Wikipedia policy etc... While thanking previous editors, wouldn't you agree the page require a further contribution, constant improvement. Imagetoimageless (talk) 09:26, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Madhava_of_Sangamagrama&oldid=974144168"