Western propoganda
phobos_anomaly
<snip>
> Mr Ozman has gone to great lengths to show the group,how bigoted and
> evil muslims are.
<snip>
Mr Ozman obviously has a troll shaped chip on his shoulder. For example, he
said in his thread "Britian - Seeds of civil war in place" [1] :
'Let me also ask you why the BBC and the British establishment
dishonestly report history ? Like this week the BBC had discussed the
origins of the decimal system and numerals but said they were Arabic
numerals. This is just an example of the outright lies your country
indulges in.'
The above was enough to convince me he was a nut with nothing
useful/accurate to say.
<snip>
> This is a sure sign of how easily the west creates
> a new enemy of freedom. First ,the communists and now its the turn of
> the muslims. How do you think Roman Catholics were viewed during
> Inquisition,by anyone who wasn't a follower of their faith?Then the
> persecution of the Catholics in England by Protestants. The list could
> go on and on, the real terror comes from those who seek to control and
> gain from the masses.
<snip>
Absolutely - couldn't have put it better myself. Pity more people can't see
through the spin.
Welcome to the group BTW.
phobos
[1] Message ID : a4vhss$7ra$1...@merki.connect.com.au
arache
> Mr Ozman obviously has a troll shaped chip on his shoulder. For example,
he
> said in his thread "Britian - Seeds of civil war in place" [1] :
>
> 'Let me also ask you why the BBC and the British establishment
> dishonestly report history ? Like this week the BBC had discussed the
> origins of the decimal system and numerals but said they were Arabic
> numerals. This is just an example of the outright lies your country
> indulges in.'
>
> The above was enough to convince me he was a nut with nothing
> useful/accurate to say.
Do you think he has the same difficulty in recognising the source of Roman
numerals?
You're right about this single nugget being very revealing but not in the
way Ozman may have wished.
cheers,
altheim
"arache" <arac...@zoom.co.uk> wrote:
> SNiP
> > Mr Ozman obviously has a troll shaped chip on his shoulder. For example,
> > he said in his thread "Britian - Seeds of civil war in place" [1] :
> >
> > 'Let me also ask you why the BBC and the British establishment
> > dishonestly report history ? Like this week the BBC had discussed the
> > origins of the decimal system and numerals but said they were Arabic
> > numerals. This is just an example of the outright lies your country
> > indulges in.'
> >
> > The above was enough to convince me he was a nut with nothing
> > useful/accurate to say.
>
> Do you think he has the same difficulty in recognising the source of
> Roman numerals?
I learned, as you folks obviously have, that the numerals
we use in the west are Arabic in origin yet I can't say I ever
saw any proof, evidence or reason for this claim - I simply
took it for granted it must be so. For all I know, Mr Ozman
might be right; perhaps he knows something I don't. An
explantation would be appreciated.
As for Ozman having " a troll shaped chip on his shoulder"
I should like to point out that trolls post for the sole purpose
of causing mayhem and distress without necessarily believing
themselves what they say. My impression of Mr Ozman is that
he *does* believe what he writes and that any annoyance he
causes is an unfortunate but inevitable consequence. You
shouldn't go calling someone a troll just because you disagree
with what he has to say.
My 2p...
--
altheim
Peter Duncanson
<altnos...@freeuk.com> wrote:
>
>"arache" <arac...@zoom.co.uk> wrote:
>> SNiP
>> > Mr Ozman obviously has a troll shaped chip on his shoulder. For example,
>> > he said in his thread "Britian - Seeds of civil war in place" [1] :
>> >
>> > 'Let me also ask you why the BBC and the British establishment
>> > dishonestly report history ? Like this week the BBC had discussed the
>> > origins of the decimal system and numerals but said they were Arabic
>> > numerals. This is just an example of the outright lies your country
>> > indulges in.'
>> >
>> > The above was enough to convince me he was a nut with nothing
>> > useful/accurate to say.
>>
>> Do you think he has the same difficulty in recognising the source of
>> Roman numerals?
>
>I learned, as you folks obviously have, that the numerals
>we use in the west are Arabic in origin yet I can't say I ever
>saw any proof, evidence or reason for this claim - I simply
>took it for granted it must be so. For all I know, Mr Ozman
>might be right; perhaps he knows something I don't. An
>explantation would be appreciated.
>
The numerals we use today are modifications of numerals from
way, way, back. Numerals and calculating systems underwent major
development in India. The Arabs adopted them, and they were
eventually used in Western Europe. It would seem bizarre today,
but in Europe the ability to do 'simple arithmetic' was at one
time restricted to a very few specialists.
There is a book titled "The Universal History of Numbers from
prehistory to the invention of the computer" by Georges Ifrah (a
Frenchman) - 600 large pages.
The book describes various prehistoric numeral systems and the
way they developed. Then it gets closer to something we would
recognise in
Chapter 23 - The Final Stage of Numerical Notation (
Chapter 24 - Part I Indian Civilisation: the Cradle of Modern
Numerals
Chapter 24 - Part II Dictionary of the Numeral Symbols of Indian
Civilisation (71 pages - the Indians devised names for a very
large number of numbers, up to 10 to the power of 119)
Chapter 25 Indian Numerals and Calculation in the Islamic World
Chapter 26 The Slow Progress of Indo-Arabic Numerals in Western
Europe
--
Peter D.
UK
The Happy Hippy
> I learned, as you folks obviously have, that the numerals
> we use in the west are Arabic in origin yet I can't say I ever
> saw any proof, evidence or reason for this claim - I simply
> took it for granted it must be so.
We have a society which is encouraged to believe everything it is told,
which runs from back when we were told 'the truth' by school teachers and is
continued in some people's blind belief that everything someone in authority
says must be true.
That's why so many do believe that Saddam has got nuclear weapons, and that
something 'terminal' must be done about. No hard evidence needed.
Most people are stunned when they discover that basic rules taught at
school, which they have relied upon for years as being absolutely true and
complete are far from that, but they are then on the first step towards
enlightenment -
Leap years are those where the year is divisible by 4 with no remainder -
not wholly true.
I before E except after C - not true.
The New Millenium started on the 1st of January 2000 - wrong.
phobos_anomaly
>
> As for Ozman having " a troll shaped chip on his shoulder"
> I should like to point out that trolls post for the sole purpose
> of causing mayhem and distress without necessarily believing
> themselves what they say.
OK.
> My impression of Mr Ozman is that
> he *does* believe what he writes and that any annoyance he
> causes is an unfortunate but inevitable consequence. You
> shouldn't go calling someone a troll just because you disagree
> with what he has to say.
>
Fair enough. Although of course I didn't say he was a troll, just that he
had a troll shaped chip ;)
I killfiled him anyway, so I guess its all academic.
Regards
phobos
Jeff Coles
"altheim" <altnos...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:103052208...@iapetus.uk.clara.net...
>
> "arache" <arac...@zoom.co.uk> wrote:
> > SNiP
> > >
> > > 'Let me also ask you why the BBC and the British establishment
> > > dishonestly report history ? Like this week the BBC had discussed
the
> > > origins of the decimal system and numerals but said they were
Arabic
> > > numerals. This is just an example of the outright lies your country
> > > indulges in.'
> > >
> >
> > Roman numerals?
>
> I learned, as you folks obviously have, that the numerals
> we use in the west are Arabic in origin yet I can't say I ever
> saw any proof, evidence or reason for this claim - I simply
> took it for granted it must be so. For all I know, Mr Ozman
> might be right; perhaps he knows something I don't. An
> explantation would be appreciated.
As I see it, one has to trust the writings of historians, for in most cases
they write out of shear interest and thirst for knowledge at how we have
arrived at this point in time. As for "not seeing the proof" have you
actually looked for it? What proof can you offer that man has visited the
moon? What proof can you offer that the world is spherical and that we orbit
the sun and not the sun orbit the earth? To prove these things you would
have to travel to the moon or circumnavigate the world yourself, then who
would believe YOU had actually done this without actually doing it for
themselves?
One has to accept their reasonings and if you don't, prove them otherwise,
by reason and logic.
Governments, on the other hand..............................
David Buttery
2002:
<snip>
> The New Millenium started on the 1st of January 2000 - wrong.
Especially as it's "millennium". ;-)
--
Idiotic deep-linking restrictions: http://www.dontlink.com
(not my site)
The GPL Scrapyard: http://www.btinternet.com/~gplscrapyard
(this *is* my site: deep-linking welcome!)
The Happy Hippy
> "The Happy Hippy" wrote ...
> > The New Millenium started on the 1st of January 2000 - wrong.
>
> Especially as it's "millennium". ;-)
Bugger ! - After all those times I've criticised people for spelling it
wrong :-{
I guess my spelling checker is broken. Perhaps my ISP is corrupting
messages. I suspect your PC has a virus ... Okay; I'll put myself in the
cupboard under the stairs for an hour :-)
athomik
news:VR2b9.377$aM6....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
> We have a society which is encouraged to believe everything it is told,
> which runs from back when we were told 'the truth' by school teachers and
is
> continued in some people's blind belief that everything someone in
authority
> says must be true.
>
> That's why so many do believe that Saddam has got nuclear weapons, and
that
> something 'terminal' must be done about. No hard evidence needed.
>
fact that, up to 1998, no evidence of the alleged arsenal of WMD's was
found, and that the country had serious sanctions imposed on it.
If it takes countries, who are free to do as they wish, under no sanctions
and with a well established industrial and research infrastructure, many
years to aquire nuclear capability, how does Bush explain a country with
very limited imports, in ecocomic chaos, and which has shown in the past,
that despite it's militaristic regime and ambitions it can put a decent army
together, aquiring any significant nuclear capability? Or is Bush merely
talking about a few 'misplaced' ex-Soviet suitcase bombs? If the latter is
the case, isn't Bush's plan analogous to killing a fly with a Gatling gun
(and destroying his annoying neighbour's house in the process)?
--
athomik
Jeffrey Goldberg
in <akgi57$1ikqhv$1...@ID-122120.news.dfncis.de>:
> > Mr Ozman obviously has a troll shaped chip on his shoulder.
I did suspect, but I was taking him at his word to see if there'd be a
reasonable response.
> > For example, he
> > said in his thread "Britian - Seeds of civil war in place" [1] :
> >
> > 'Let me also ask you why the BBC and the British establishment
> > dishonestly report history ? Like this week the BBC had discussed the
> > origins of the decimal system and numerals but said they were Arabic
> > numerals. This is just an example of the outright lies your country
> > indulges in.'
> >
> > The above was enough to convince me he was a nut with nothing
> > useful/accurate to say.
>
> Do you think he has the same difficulty in recognising the source of Roman
> numerals?
Actually there is some legitimate dispute about the origins of Arabic
numerals. It is certainly the case that Europeans got the system from the
Arabs. Fibonicci was the major (though not first) European mathematician
to advocate Arabic numbering. But many historians think that the system
originated among the Hindis and were imported from India by the Arabs.
-j
--
Jeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/
Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice
I rarely read top-posted, over-quoting or HTML postings.
Jeffrey Goldberg
in <vmkvmus36r8lhgdnt...@4ax.com>:
> Jeffrey Goldberg <{$news}$@goldmark.org> wrote:
> }Actually there is some legitimate dispute about the origins of Arabic
> }numerals. It is certainly the case that Europeans got the system from the
> }Arabs. Fibonicci was the major (though not first) European mathematician
> }to advocate Arabic numbering. But many historians think that the system
> }originated among the Hindis and were imported from India by the Arabs.
>
> I thought the major advance was the discovery or rediscovery of the
> concept of zero.
Yes and no. The crucial invention is that position within the written
number has a consistent and coherent meaning. That is the one's place, the
ten's place, the hundred's place, etc. A zero digit is needed for that.
But it is the semantics of the place based representation that is the
advantage. It means that algorithms based directly on the representations
(like "long division") become easy.
In Arabic, which reads right from left, the right most digit is the
one's place assending toward the left (as in English). The actual arabic
digits are deceptively similar to the ones we use, but can be really
misleading.
phobos_anomaly
>}Actually there is some legitimate dispute about the origins of Arabic
>}numerals. It is certainly the case that Europeans got the system from
>the }Arabs. Fibonicci was the major (though not first) European
>mathematician }to advocate Arabic numbering. But many historians think
>that the system }originated among the Hindis and were imported from
>India by the Arabs.
>
> I thought the major advance was the discovery or rediscovery of the
> concept of zero.
>
Theres an interesting overview of Arab maths here:
http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Arabic_mathematics.html
Of Indian/Arabic numerals, it says:
The numerals used were taken over from India, but there was not a
standard set of symbols ... al-Uqlidisi (born 920) showed how to
modify the methods for pen and paper use. Al-Baghdadi also contributed
to improvements in the decimal system.
The other main Arab contribution to maths appears to be in algebra. They
were also good at astronomy (hence the number of stars with the Al-
prefix), optics and cryptanalysis.
Regards
phobos
gandalf
"Jeffrey Goldberg" <{$news}$@goldmark.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.020830...@lehel.goldmark.private...
> The actual arabic
> digits are deceptively similar to the ones we use, but can be really
> misleading.
>
-------------
Misleading!. You try picking the bones out of their speed signs. There is no
resemblance at all. They use a square(ish) dot for a zero and bunch of
different squiggles for what precedes it.
If you drive in the Gulf, don't kid yourself that the signs make sense or
are in any way similar to our representation of numbers. (Just spotting the
dot is tough enough, deciphering the squiggle is near impossible) In the end
we learn by simple recognition of a pattern. Or we go to jail. Tolerance for
foreigners is near zero.
(pays to watch out for camels as well)
Jeffrey Goldberg
in <akorjm$1kisu4$1...@ID-139810.news.dfncis.de>:
> > The actual arabic digits are deceptively similar to the ones we use,
> > but can be really misleading.
> Misleading!. You try picking the bones out of their speed
> signs. There is no resemblance at all. They use a square(ish) dot for a
> zero and bunch of different squiggles for what precedes it.
One squiggle looks like a "5". It's not. The thing three does look like
a "3" on its side, and thing that looks like a "7" is a nine (or it that
the other way 'round).
> If you drive in the Gulf, don't kid yourself that the signs make sense or
> are in any way similar to our representation of numbers. (Just spotting the
> dot is tough enough, deciphering the squiggle is near impossible) In the end
> we learn by simple recognition of a pattern. Or we go to jail. Tolerance for
> foreigners is near zero.
That's the little circle or dot isn't it? The thing that looks like a "0"
is five, I think.
Bill in Frankfurt
"Jeffrey Goldberg" <{$news}$@goldmark.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.020830...@lehel.goldmark.private...
On a slightly different tack,but still with numbers... It had always puzzled
me that in China they speak two main languages which are very different and
the speaker of Mandarin cannot understand the other (I guess Pekingese but
that sounds like a dog I had once). However, and this is what always seemed
like a miracle to me - they could understand each others language if they
wrote it down. Both languages are exactly the same in the written form. I
mean, this seems really weird.
Then I realised one day that we do the same. I don't know the Serbo-Croatian
for "165" for instance. But if the guy writes it down I know it straight
away.
Just a thought.
Bill in Frankfurt
Carl Price
"Bill in Frankfurt" <bi...@waymaster.de> wrote in message
news:akptiq$jpm$03$1...@news.t-online.com...
No doubt if I am wrong someoene will let me know.
Jeffrey Goldberg
in <akptiq$jpm$03$1...@news.t-online.com>:
> On a slightly different tack,but still with numbers... It had always puzzled
> me that in China they speak two main languages which are very different and
> the speaker of Mandarin cannot understand the other (I guess Pekingese but
> that sounds like a dog I had once).
Cantonese is the name of the other. The languages are mutually
unintelligable, but they are related.
> However, and this is what always seemed like a miracle to me - they
> could understand each others language if they wrote it down. Both
> languages are exactly the same in the written form. I mean, this seems
> really weird.
Both Mandarin and Cantonese are "isolating" languages. That is, they have
almost no suffixes and prefixes on words. No "forms of words". That
enables a writing system that is largely word based. A particular glyph
will represent a word instead of a sound. Thus, the symbol of "center" (a
rectangle with a vertical stroke through it) will mean "center" in both
Mandarin and Cantonese (also in Japanese which imported the Chinese
writing system into a language it which it is massively inappropriate).
> Then I realised one day that we do the same. I don't know the Serbo-Croatian
> for "165" for instance. But if the guy writes it down I know it straight
> away.
Yes. That is basically it.
Jeffrey Goldberg
in <akq959$nnu$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>:
[entire qouted message was here]
> I think the other language is Cantonese , that's if you were interested.
> No doubt if I am wrong someoene will let me know.
You are rigth about that. But I would like to advise you on your posting
style and format. Please see
http://www.usenet.org.uk/ukpost.html
Also, see my .sig
Neil Ozman
nuerals, etc.... they are Indian/Hindu. The real bigots are people like
yourself who are unable to face up to the truth and propagate myths and
lies!
Also note I do not really care too much about acts of terrorism on the west
by Muslims because you are not too concerned. History has been rewritten and
ignorance has been spread and you are a product of that ignorance.!
phobos_anomaly <phoenix_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns927794ECBD0...@130.133.1.4...
> "Carl Price" <ca...@price1598.fsworld.co.uk> wrote on 27 Aug 2002 :
>
> <snip>
> > Mr Ozman has gone to great lengths to show the group,how bigoted and
> > evil muslims are.
> <snip>
>
>
> Mr Ozman obviously has a troll shaped chip on his shoulder. For example,
he
> said in his thread "Britian - Seeds of civil war in place" [1] :
>
> 'Let me also ask you why the BBC and the British establishment
> dishonestly report history ? Like this week the BBC had discussed the
> origins of the decimal system and numerals but said they were Arabic
> numerals. This is just an example of the outright lies your country
> indulges in.'
>
> The above was enough to convince me he was a nut with nothing
> useful/accurate to say.
>
>
http://www.gosai.com/chaitanya/saranagati/html/math/math_4.html
Evolution of Arabic (Roman) Numerals from India
A close investigation of the Vedic system of mathematics shows that it was
much more advanced than the mathematical systems of the civilizations of the
Nile or the Euphrates. The Vedic mathematicians had developed the decimal
system of tens, hundreds, thousands, etc. where the remainder from one
column of numbers is carried over to the next. The advantage of this system
of nine number signs and a zero is that it allows for calculations to be
easily made. Further, it has been said that the introduction of zero, or
sunya as the Indians called it, in an operational sense as a definite part
of a number system, marks one of the most important developments in the
entire history of mathematics. The earliest preserved examples of the number
system which is still in use today are found on several stone columns
erected in India by King Ashoka in about 250 B.C.E. [4 ] Similar
inscriptions are found in caves near Poona (100 B.C.E.) and Nasik (200
C.E.). [5] These earliest Indian numerals appear in a script called brahmi.
After 700 C.E. another notation, called by the name "Indian numerals," which
is said to have evolved from the brahmi numerals, assumed common usage,
spreading to Arabia and from there around the world. When Arabic numerals
(the name they had then become known by) came into common use throughout the
Arabian empire, which extended from India to Spain, Europeans called them
"Arabic notations," because they received them from the Arabians. However,
the Arabians themselves called them "Indian figures" (Al-Arqan-Al-Hindu) and
mathematics itself was called "the Indian art" (hindisat).
Evolution of "Arabic numerals" from Brahmi
(250 B.C.E.) to the 16th century.
Mastery of this new mathematics allowed the Muslim mathematicians of Baghdad
to fully utilize the geometrical treatises of Euclid and Archimedes.
Trigonometry flourished there along with astronomy and geography. Later in
history, Carl Friedrich Gauss, the "prince of mathematics," was said to have
lamented that Archimedes in the third century B.C.E. had failed to foresee
the Indian system of numeration; how much more advanced science would have
been.
Prior to these revolutionary discoveries, other world civilizations-the
Egyptians, the Babylonians, the Romans, and the Chinese-all used independent
symbols for each row of counting beads on the abacus, each requiring its own
set of multiplication or addition tables. So cumbersome were these systems
that mathematics was virtually at a standstill. The new number system from
the Indus Valley led a revolution in mathematics by setting it free. By 500
C.E. mathematicians of India had solved problems that baffled the world's
greatest scholars of all time. Aryabhatta, an astronomer mathematician who
flourished at the beginning of the 6th century, introduced sines and versed
sines-a great improvement over the clumsy half-cords of Ptolemy. A.L.
Basham, foremost authority on ancient India, writes in The Wonder That Was
India,
Medieval Indian mathematicians, such as Brahmagupta (seventh century),
Mahavira (ninth century), and Bhaskara (twelfth century), made several
discoveries which in Europe were not known until the Renaissance or later.
They understood the import of positive and negative quantities, evolved
sound systems of extracting square and cube roots, and could solve quadratic
and certain types of indeterminate equations." [6] Mahavira's most
noteworthy contribution is his treatment of fractions for the first time and
his rule for dividing one fraction by another, which did not appear in
Europe until the 16th century. next
Neil Ozman
Number products in even tens (such as the number 20 or 30) leave the first
right hand column empty (void). When expert abacus users had no abacus
available to them, they could remember and visualize the operation of the
abacus so clearly that all they needed to know was the content of each
column in order to develop any multiplication or division. They then
invented symbols for the content of each column to replace drawing a picture
of the number of beads. Having developed symbols to express the content of
each column, they had to invent a symbol for the numberless content of the
empty column -- that symbol came to be known to the Hindus as "sunya", and
sunya later became "sifr" in Arabic; "cifra" in Roman; and finally "cipher"
in English.
Jeffrey Goldberg <{$news}$@goldmark.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.020830...@lehel.goldmark.private...