and this link to Prof CK Raju’s work,
The Infinitesimal Calculus:
How and Why it Was Imported into Europe by C. K. Raju

The links is – http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/blog/faq/#designer

Here the following is written by the author of the blog-

“Science got started in ancient China; in ancient Egypt and Greece and Rome; and in Islam. But it never went anywhere. In those cultures, it sputtered and coughed and died.
Why?
Because those cultures did not have a theology to support it.”

Since this is mainly a Christian theology site, with a pretty good traffic, I think you should counter this lie with your expertise and exposure in this knowledge. It will give a good exposure to the hidden facts about India’s science legacy, and to an audience which is the most “misinformed”, and will set the record straight.

Didn’t you read Prof.Raju’s “explanation” of “documentary” evidence of elements.
For your benefit. Please read it once more-

“More recently, on the Philomathes list, some people again started talking about this mythical Euclid using the terminology of “Euclid’s division algorithm” found also in many mathematics texts. This lacks elementary commonsense. How could an algorithm have developed with the clumsy Greek notation for numbers? Just try doing even a trivial sum like adding 17 and 23 in Greek numerical notation! So, I again reminded people that there was no evidence that Euclid even existed, and no non-textual evidence that Greeks ever used algorithms (and no evidence from any early texts).

One of the discussants pompously responded that he didn’t care whether or not Euclid existed, and that he was referring to the book with Euclid’s name in front of it, and the algorithm inside it.

I asked for the whereabouts of such a book. Thus, the fact is that Euclid is NOT mentioned in Greek manuscripts of the Elements until the 18th c. which mention only Theon (an opponent of the church like his daughter Hypatia, and her successor Proclus).

Since “Euclid” is mentioned only in post-12th c. Latin manuscripts, the most moderate hypothesis is that “Euclid” was a translation mistake for the Arabic “uclides”, meaning “key to geometry”. The Latin manuscripts of “Euclid” up to the 15th c. are all derived from Arabic, where ucli = key, while des = geometry.”

Funny to see how you are clinging on to Wikipedia for documentary of Euclid’s existence.

” Professor Raju has done some interesting research which challenges some of Einstein’s premises, notably with his work on functional differential equations.”

Khandu Sir,
You are one of a kind to draw such a nice conclusion of Prof. Raju’s work.

Thank you for your very learned response. I cannot fully respond as fully as I would like in my short reply.

Wikipedia cites documentary evidence of Euclid’s existence with a fragment of his Elements dated to 100 AD. This is well before the Arabs under Islam about 750 AD was presumed to have rescued his work. The Coptic Christians have Jesus with a very deep tan and in Europe he is fair skinned. I would not read any racist intent on either of the races.

The theorems in Euclid no doubt were known to India but any systematic recording of history is lacking which is not the case with Greece. There is grasp of calculus hundreds of years before it was discovered in the West. It does not seem to have found use for anything but astronomy. Newton’s calculus came about from his study of gravity. This had immediate application in gunnery and brought into being the industrial revolution. India was helpless against the industrial might of the Western powers. A course of study in calculus in any English high school syllabus is replete with applications to many types of problems. The calculus in Newton’s papers are not recognizable in the calculus that is taught today because notations have evolved for the better. That is even more true of the Mathematics of Kerala School. A study of the originals would be tedious for anyone but a specialist in the history of Mathematics.

I do not see the same lack of confidence that I am seeing in my Indian counterparts. The Japanese and Chinese have no problems in borrowing the best from the West. A genius has no difficulty in the search to rediscover mathematics. Examinations further hone these skills. Rote learning obviously does not do not.

Einstein made his discoveries a century ago on knowledge and tools that was available to him at the time. Knowledge has greatly advanced since then. Others that have followed since have put him in the shade. Gell-Mann and Feynmann just to name two. Professor Raju has done some interesting research which challenges some of Einstein’s premises, notably with his work on functional differential equations. This work advances the frontiers of knowledge which is what research should be all about. There is also room for history which is certainly in poor shape in India.