The discussion centers around an ancient Babylonian clay tablet believed to contain early trigonometric tables that may predate Pythagoras. Participants explore the implications of this finding on historical mathematical achievements and the accuracy of ancient calculations compared to modern methods.
Participants express a mix of admiration for ancient achievements and skepticism about the accuracy claims regarding the tablet. There is no consensus on the implications of the findings or the validity of the comparisons made between ancient and modern mathematics.
Discussions include varying interpretations of the historical significance of the tablet and the mathematical methods employed by ancient civilizations. Some assumptions about the accuracy of ancient calculations versus modern methods remain unresolved.
Readers interested in the history of mathematics, ancient engineering, and the evolution of mathematical concepts may find this discussion particularly engaging.
At least 1,000 years before the Greek mathematician Pythagoras looked at a right angled triangle and worked out that the square of the longest side is always equal to the sum of the squares of the other two, an unknown Babylonian genius took a clay tablet and a reed pen and marked out not just the same theorem, but a series of trigonometry tables which scientists claim are more accurate than any available today.
The 3,700-year-old broken clay tablet survives in the collections of Columbia University, and scientists now believe they have cracked its secrets.
The team from the University of New South Wales in Sydney believe that the four columns and 15 rows of cuneiform – wedge shaped indentations made in the wet clay – represent the world’s oldest and most accurate working trigonometric table, a working tool which could have been used in surveying, and in calculating how to construct temples, palaces and pyramids.
I have modified the link so that it directly points to the article.symbolipoint said:You really think any or most members want to answer a question on an external site about if he/she/they want to follow a link to an article on that site?
Your link was pointing back to Facebook instead of the actual Guardian article.Simon Peach said:symbolipoint; it wasn't a question but an article that may (may) refute Pythagoras as the discoverer of the theorem named after him, and by 1500 years!
Simon Peach said:symbolipoint; it wasn't a question but an article that may (may) refute Pythagoras as the discoverer of the theorem named after him, and by 1500 years!
ThanksDrClaude said:I have modified the link so that it directly points to the article.Your link was pointing back to Facebook instead of the actual Guardian article.
We have billions of digits today. I'm quite sure the table didn't have that accuracy.a series of trigonometry tables which scientists claim are more accurate than any available today.
That doesn't make any sense.with potential modern application because the base 60 used in calculations by the Babylonians permitted many more accurate fractions than the contemporary base 10.