Gravity, not Newton’s theory

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

http://www.deccan.com/home/homedetails.asp#Gravity,%20not%20Newton’s%20theory

Gravity, not Newton’s theory

Hyderabad, Dec. 8: Long before the apple fell on Isaac Newton’s wise head, a Turkmenistani astro-nomer had penned the basic ideas of the theory of gravitation. To be exact, almost 450 years before Newton wondered how the earth pulled back things to itself, Abul Fatah Abdul Rahman Al Khazini had idea bulbs popping in his head, according to London-based Hyderabadi archivist Ziau-ddin Shakeb.

Shakeb said that two institutions in Hyderabad, Dairatul Ma’arif and Iqbal Academy, possessed one copy each of Al Khazini’s ancient treatise in which the astronomer-mathematician discussed the theory of gravitation. It is not known whether Newton had any idea of Al Khazini’s work. Quite probably, he discovered the phenomenon independently in 1687.

Shakeb, in an informal chat with a select group of people in the city recently, said that Al Khazini, who died in Turkmenistan in 1270 AD, stumbled upon the theory while he was writing his famous book Mez-anul Hikma or the Balance of Wis-dom. Al Khazini, while working on the book, began studying the movements of the sun, the moon and other planets. He studied the planets during solar and lunar eclipses and made mathematical calculations of the difference in their positions. He realised there was an invisible force working.

“Some of the elements of his speculations are in Mezanul Hik-ma,” said Shakeb. “But, I understand he wrote a paper exclusively on the subject of gravitational theory. I have not been able to trace it.” Al Khazini was a person of Greek origin who had been sold, while a child, as a slave to Abul Hussain Ali Bin Muhammad Al Khazin Al Marozi, the treasurer of the ruler. He brought him up as his own son and gave him the best education. The boy grew up to be a great scientist.

The archivist, who is consultant to auctioneer Christie’s on Indian and Islamic art, said that a few years ago the original manuscript of Mezanul Hikma reached London. It was bought by a private collector.

2

I think these days there are hardly any good major theories, as there were back in days with charles, boyles, issac, etc.. etc..
I think if we all just spend time away from TV, Computer, cellphones, telephones, and try to think about things outside of the box. With the knowledge we each have these days, i am sure we can come up with some interesting theories if we just try.

3

A very interesting point you bring up Furqan... I've been wondering about it myself lately.

After some contemplation, I’ve come to realize that research today is perhaps a little too meticulous to allow anyone to be creative – at least in a formal environment like a University, or a corporate Research center, it seems that way… I was having this conversation with a friend the other day and we concluded that researchers today have this insatiable desire to be “meta” about things they are interested in… instead of focusing on learning from prior research and generating new knowledge, we seem to be overly engaged in asking rhetorical questions about research that has already been done.

I say “we” as referring to myself as well - being a researcher and an academe myself I think the expectations of scientific rigor are to blame partly. May be I’m just saying all this cuz I'm just finishing up writing chapter 2 of my Ph.D. dissertation… with 35 pages of actual write-up, I have more than 7 pages of references! Although while writing, I think I’ve added to the existing body of knowledge in my subject area… but had there been an opportunity to be more creative… i.e. not expect 125 references or so for each chapter, I might have contribtuted significantly more.

Hehe… I’m just ranting :) … but do tell me what you think about this Furqan.

Nescio? your Opinion?

4

I have been thinking about it for quite a while actually. I've come to a conclusion (well sort of) that nowadays, people are so quick to reject any kind of theories without a hefty amout of proof that it is impossible for any major theories to gain any respect from the scientific community.Also, since there are virtually thousands of such theories out there, the loyalty is divided pretty deep.

5

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by I'm Kool: *
people are so quick to reject any kind of theories without a hefty amout of proof that it is impossible for any major theories to gain any respect from the scientific community
[/QUOTE]

its more or less inline with what I've conjectured as well :)
( see ranting above ^^ ).

6

Umar, I agree with you that nowadays the emphasis in 'research' is on the 'method' and 'added information', whereas in fact research ought to be the 'new idea', the 'hypothesis'. What happens now is that whenever someone starts on a research project the idea is already there, the only thing the young investogator has to do is provide the 'method'. this undermines the whole idea of research and undermines the creativity that the new person in the field might have brought.

7

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Umar Talib: *

its more or less inline with what I've conjectured as well :)
( see ranting above ^^ ).
[/QUOTE]

Meh... mine is better.

8

Im inventing an anti gravity gun sooner than u guys think, wait till I zap all of u out of this world...:D

9

Pass it to me when you're done i need to toast my bread.

10

^ :rotfl: