What's Wrong with this article on Stonehenge history?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jedishrfu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    article History
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the historical accuracy of an article claiming that the builders of Stonehenge used the Pythagorean theorem centuries before Pythagoras was born. Participants explore the implications of this assertion and question the validity of the claims made in the article.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Historical
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that Pythagoras lived between 570 BC and 495 BC, and question the article's assertion regarding the use of his theorem by the Stonehenge builders.
  • One participant points out that the concept of right triangles, exemplified by the ratio 5:12:13, was known in ancient Egypt before Pythagoras, suggesting that the theorem itself may not be uniquely attributed to him.
  • Another participant expresses frustration over the lack of evidence regarding the mathematical knowledge of cultures prior to the Greeks, implying that they may have had knowledge of the Pythagorean theorem without documented proof.
  • A participant draws a parallel to ancient physics, stating that many engineering formulas were known before Newton's laws were formalized, indicating a historical continuity of knowledge in mathematics and engineering.
  • One participant humorously suggests that the oldest proof of the theorem can be summarized with the word "See!"

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the historical attribution of mathematical concepts, with some arguing for the recognition of earlier knowledge in ancient cultures while others focus on the claims made in the article. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the accuracy of the article's assertions.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the limitations of historical evidence and the challenges in attributing mathematical discoveries to specific cultures or individuals, highlighting the dependence on available documentation.

Mathematics news on Phys.org
Pythagoras lived between 570 BC and 495 BC. His theorem, a part of Euclidean geometry taught in many high school math classes, states that the hypotenuse of a right triangle (the side opposite the right angle) equals the sum of the squares of the other two sides.

I believe this should say the square of the hypotenuse. Beyond that I'm uncertain of what may be incorrect.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jedishrfu
5:12:13 was known in ancient Egypt long before Pythagoras, and 3:4:5 was known as well. What Pythagoras found was the general pattern. Examples of rectangular triangles are not the Pythagorean theorem.

12:35:37 is more interesting if it can be shown that this was deliberate.
 
mfb said:
5:12:13 was known in ancient Egypt long before Pythagoras, and 3:4:5 was known as well. What Pythagoras found was the general pattern. Examples of rectangular triangles are not the Pythagorean theorem.

12:35:37 is more interesting if it can be shown that this was deliberate.

We regard nearly everything we know to the Greeks (Everything started with the Greeks). In my humble opinion, this is because we have more evidence from the Greeks than any previous culture. Its not like there were no others before them.

Sometimes I get irritated by the fact that we do not know really how much people knew before the Greeks. Maybe they knew Pythagoras theorem but there was no lift evidence for that, who knows, right?!
 
Last edited:
Yes, this is true of Physics as well. There were many formulas known to the ancients that were in common use in engineering that were later derived from Newton's laws. One such formula was the diameter of a torsion catapult rope where the ancients correctly determined that it was proportional the the cube root of the mass to be thrown.

https://books.google.com/books?id=5UohAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA71&lpg=PA71&dq=roman+catapult+cube+root+torsion+formula&source=bl&ots=nxYQnfSzBm&sig=9vUuYQOpfZ76ADFujC7AFA5q6Z8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjTtKL6q-fbAhUPWa0KHW4JDL0Q6AEITDAI#v=onepage&q=roman catapult cube root torsion formula&f=false

http://www.s608324909.websitehome.co.uk/JohnMcCoy/Catapults%20and%20Cube%20Roots.pdf
 
Last edited:
ppict2.gif

The oldest proof - one word: "See!"
 

Attachments

  • ppict2.gif
    ppict2.gif
    4.9 KB · Views: 457
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jedishrfu

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K