Talk:Thābit ibn Qurra/Archive 1

Archive 1

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2020 and 18 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Benga101.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Generalization of the Pythagorean theorem?

This looks garbled to me:

Another important contribution Thabit made to geometry was his generalization of the Pythagorean theorem, which he extended from special right triangles to all triangles in general, along with a general proof.<ref>Aydin Sayili (1960). "Thabit ibn Qurra's Generalization of the Pythagorean Theorem", Isis 51 (1), p. 35-37.</ref>

so I've moved it here for comment William M. Connolley (talk) 00:09, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

His birthdate

In the arabic version of this article, it is said that he is born in 836 ad, not 826 ad. Where is the truth ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.223.12.118 (talk) 22:29, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

In A History of Algebra, van der Waerden writes that, according to the Fihrist (10th century), he "died in 901 and lived 77 solar years. This would imply that he was born in AD 824, but the Fihrist [also] says that he was born in AD 836, and other sources give 826 as his birth year." My preference, off-hand, would be to use 836, because it's given in the Fihrist, and would be about right if he lived 77 lunar rather than solar years. The fact that the Arabic version of the article also uses 836 adds weight to this opinion. The other sources I've looked at seem to split slightly in favor of 836 vs 826. Eleuther (talk) 20:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

In "Thābit ibn Qurra. Science and Philosophy in Ninth-Century Baghdad" (p. 23-24), Roshdi Rashed writes that the date is uncertain, gives the two dates, and argues why 826 should be preferred (The Fihrist is inconsistant as you noticed, 826 comes from Ibn Abi Usaybi'a, and is consitant with 77 lunar years for his lifespan). Probably the two dates should be given in the present article. Proz (talk) 17:44, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I will change the article to mention both dates, using your source, which anyway is better than the present source. Eleuther (talk) 07:04, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Sâbit ibn Kurrâ

in Turkish. Böri (talk) 10:18, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I do this editing because there is a lot more to say about Sabit bin Kurra. Before anything else this page does not contain his most important contributions and inventions to mathematics:

1- He was the first to apply algebra to geometry. Therefore it is accepted that he is the founder of analytical geometry.

2- He was the first to invent Calculus. His work on Calculus was later developed and expanded by Ebul vefa Būzjānī. His work must have influenced directly or indirectly western mathematicians like Galileo, Gamss, Newton, Euler, Faraday, etc.

3- He invented a geometrical method for calculating algebraic equations of third degree.

4- He worked extensively on irrational numbers and provided new postulates about them.

S. B. Boyer, Scientist of History, talks about Sabit bin Kurra in his History of Mathematics "that were it not for his work on mathematics, mathematical knowledge would have remained a secret for centuries."

Here is a list of some of his treatise (listed in the Turkish language):

1- Kitab-ul-amel bil Kurre;

2- Kitabu tercemeti(=translation) ve ihtisar-il-macisti lil-Batlamyus(Ptolemaeus)

3- Kitabu tercemeti cografiyat(=geography) -il-ma'mure li-Arşimed(=Archimides)

4- Kitabu şerh-il-mu'tiyyati Oklidis

5- Kitabun fil-mesail-u-hendesiyyeti(=geomerty)

6- Kitabun fi ibta-il hareketi fil-felek-il-buruc (a book on motion on heavenly bodies and constellation)

7- Kitab-i hisab-il-heyeti

8- Kitab-ul muhtasar fil-hendese

9- Risaletun fi hareket-il-felek (a booklet on motion on heavenly bodies)

10- Kitab-ul medhal alel-mantık

94.54.125.181 (talk) 12:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Please footnote "An"

The phrase "... was an Sabian mathematician, ..." is not necessarily in error for using "an" instead of "a". There may be a peculiarity of pronunciation and orthography pertaining to "Sabian" such that it is pronounced beginning with something that would be transcribed in phonics as a kind of vowel. But then I think a footnote is required after "an" to document this, rather than leave it be perceived as a mistake, tempting some to CHANGE it to what would then be a mistake, i.e. "a". Yet another reason why WikiP needs to be copy-edited by persons whose expertise is in the standards of writing your articles, NOT in the subject-matter of the articles.2604:2000:C682:B600:9CEE:84D6:D6E:F0C4 (talk) 22:45, 7 July 2016 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson

Not a Mandean?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/18089576/Biographies-of-Muslim-Scholars-and-Scientists p. 22 seems to claim that Thabit was not a Mandean, but a Sabian. Other sources say he was a Sabian. So does his name. What is the correct action here? Replace Mandean with Sabian?

Also, is there some justification for featuring physician above astronomer, translator and mathematician?

Walter Nissen 2010-05-03 03:39 03:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Walter Nissen (talk • contribs)

Philip K. Hitti claims he was a 'pseudo-Sabian', one of the followers of some Babylonian star-worshipping cult who claimed (or converted) to be Sabians to benefit as people of the Book and so escape persecution. Hitti's sources seem weighty, so perhaps a change is in order here and in the articles on Thabit's offspring? I am not an expert on the issue myself, so HItti's view may be controversial. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.185.167.243 (talk) 09:12, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I have added references (one determined he was a Mandaean from a genealogical study) regarding Thabit ibn Qurra showing that he was in fact a Sabian-Mandaean from Harran. Mcvti (talk) 18:25, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Arab or Sabian

The point that Thabit was an Arab or a just (like the Persians) and Arabic-speaking Aramean, someone who wrote in Arabic, needs to be discussed. We don't call Persian scholars "Arabs" just because they wrote in Arabic. Why is he called an Arab?

Jews from Spain and Iraq whose language was Arabic are not defined here as Arabs. We need to use consistent standards.PopulationGeneticsLevant (talk) 22:20, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

changed to Sabian-Mandaean instead of Arab, since Mandaean's have their own language known as Mandaic, a dialect of eastern Aramaic. Mcvti (talk) 18:27, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Arabized ?

User Nabataeus is not happy with the sentence “probably Arabized” and removes it from the article. This is from St Andrews :

“The sect, with strong Greek connections, had in earlier times adopted Greek culture, and it was common for members to speak Greek although after the conquest of the Sabians by Islam, they became Arabic speakers. There was another language spoken in southeastern Turkey, namely Syriac, which was based on the East Aramaic dialect of Edessa. This language was Thabit ibn Qurra's native language, but he was fluent in both Greek and Arabic.” so, was he Arabized or not ?—>Farawahar (talk) 00:16, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

You violated the three revert rule (Please do not do it again). Arabized designated, not only language, but a shift in identity. There are many Syriac speaking Arabs in norther Syria/Southern Turkey who consider themselves most and foremost an ethnic Arabs. See 3:50 [1]. That's first, second your source state Thabit native tongue was Syriac which is already included in the article. "Arabized" imply different thing and quite OR, we will just repeat Mubariz situation. Nabataeus (talk) 01:01, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

“You violated the three revert rule (Please do not do it again).”

Euh not at all, the three revert rule states : “An editor must not perform MORE than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period.” I have not reverted MORE than three times ... Maths matter.

“your source state Thabit native tongue was Syriac which is already included in the article. "Arabized" imply different thing and quite OR”

Agreed, remove the sentence.

“See 3:50”

Sorry, i don’t understand Arabic

—->Farawahar (talk) 01:21, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Farawahar, sign your post next to the last word please. It is better this way. As for the video, the old man state: We are Syriac, but Arabs. He is from southern Turkey. And the Arab component there pre-date Islam (e.g. Edessa). Nabataeus (talk) 01:32, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Since Thabit ibn Qurra was a Sabian-Mandaean, he would have known Mandaic, but he might have also known Syriac since he was from Harran. Mcvti (talk) 18:31, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Additional Information in Mathematics Section

Added additional details on ibn Qurra's proof of amicable numbers, and added a citation linking to a new source added by user @TheVictorGoesTheSpoils Hygiea10 (talk) 17:11, 14 October 2022 (UTC) Hygiea10 (talk) 17:10, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Reworked the entire mathematics section, made clarifications, added more sources, and expanded on material.

Wiki Education assignment: History of Medieval and Early Modern Science

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): TheVictorGoesTheSpoils, Hygiea10 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Kasmy.

— Assignment last updated by K8shep (talk) 16:13, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Adding Medicine Section and Additions to Biography

I created a new section covering Thābit's contributions to medicine, and will be adding it to the article now. Hygiea10 (talk) 17:22, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Added more complete list of notable works to works section Hygiea10 (talk) 17:32, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Added some more details to Thābit's biography to describe his early life. Hygiea10 (talk) 17:47, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi Hygiea10! Thanks for your recent edits to this page.

In the biography section, you added content sourced to Rashed 2009a. However, this is an edited volume of which Roshdi Rashed is only the editor, and which consists of chapters by various authors and on completely different subjects. Would you please add the author name, the title of the chapter, and the page numbers for this chapter to the citation template?

Furthermore, would you please add the precise page number where the information can be found to the harvnb templates in the article (likewise for the three refs to Rosenfeld & Grigorian 2008)? You can add them by adding |p=x or for multiple pages |pp=x–x.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Thanks! ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 23:10, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

@Apaugasma Thank you for the feedback! I have attempted to make the citation changes you have suggested; however it is worth noting that the chapter of Rashed 2009a I referenced is an introductory chapter written by Rashed himself, so I do not know if he needs to be listed separately as an author in the citation or if there is some other way to indicate this. I have also added the page numbers to the harvnb templates, and please let me know if there is further issues with those (or any other issues I have made that still need to be addressed). Thank you, Hygiea10 (talk) 05:28, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi Hygiea10, yes in any multi-author volume common practice (both on Wikipedia and in academia more widely) is to cite the author and the editor separately, even if they are the same person. Sometimes you will even see something thing like Smith, John; Miller, Jane (2006). "Introduction". In Smith, John; Miller, Jane (eds.). The Cambridge Companion to [insert field]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. xx–xx. This is because authorship and editorship are two entirely different jobs, and because it is often important for the reader to know exactly who is responsible for what. Also note that these days, different chapters have different doi's (containing in this case the isbn and the beginning page no., https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110220797.1.3)

One remaining issue is that while you added page numbers to one of the three refs, it is not clear which ref verifies what information, and the two other refs remain without page number. If the whole paragraph is supported by Rashed 2009 pp. 3–4, Gingerich 1986 and Rashed & Morelon 1960–2007 may simply be removed. If on the other hand Gingerich 1986 and Rashed & Morelon 1960–2007 support one part of the paragraph while Rashed 2009 pp. 3–4 supports another part, the refs should be moved to the part they support. In that case it would also be nice if you would check which page in Gingerich 1986 supports the information (Rashed & Morelon 1960–2007 don't have page numbers so you don't need to bother).

Thanks, ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 13:43, 19 November 2022 (UTC)