|
History of the Physical Sciences in India
In all early civilizations, the study of the physical
sciences was neither formalized nor separated from other
branches of knowledge. And at least initially, there
were few conscious attempts to study the theory of
science independently of the practical innovations and
technologies that required some application of
scientific principles. In most cases, technological
discoveries took place without any knowledge of the
underlying scientific principles, through hit and trial,
and by experience. Sometimes there was a vague or
approximate awareness of the science, but the
predominant focus remained on the utilitarian aspects of
the technique, on practical efficacy, as opposed to how
and why something worked or didn't work.
In India, the earliest applications of chemistry took
place in the context of medicine, metallurgy,
construction technology (such as manufacture of cement
and paints) and in textile production and dyeing. But in
the process of understanding chemical processes, there
also emerged a concomitant interest in attempting to
describe the basic elements of matter - what they were
composed of, and how they interacted with each other to
produce new substances. Natural phenomenon were studied
in the context of tides, rainfall, appearance of the
sun, the moon and stellar formations, changes in season,
weather patterns and agriculture. (For instance, Vedic
literature mentions the condensation of water vapour
from seas and oceans due to evaporation (caused by the
sun's heat) and the subsequent formation of clouds and
rain.) This naturally led to theories about physical
processes and the forces of nature that are today
studied as specific topics within the fields of
chemistry and physics.
Philosophy and Physical Science
While it is hard to say which precedes which - theory or
practice - clearly there is a dialectical relationship
between both, and the neglect of either leads to the
death of science. Religious beliefs, particularly
religious taboos and irrational indoctrination towards
mystical or magical phenomenon, or adherence to false
superstitions can often pose as serious impediments to
the advance of science, and play an important role in
whether the why and the how of physical causes can be
safely and usefully explored.
Societies that believed that only the "gods" knew the
secrets of nature, and that it was futile for humans to
attempt to unravel the mysteries of the universe were
naturally incapable of making any substantial progress
in the realm of the sciences. Even in societies where
there were no formal religious taboos in understanding
real-world phenomenon in a scientific way, the power and
the influence of the priests could serve as an obstacle
to scientific progress. For instance, in a society where
ritual practices alone were considered sufficient in
achieving desired goals, there would naturally be little
scope for serious investigation into the properties and
laws of nature.
While ancient India did not generally suffer from the
first affliction (of religious opposition to science),
it did suffer from the second (the proliferation of
rituals and superstitions). The progress of science in
India was thus inextricably linked to challenges to the
domination of the priests, and resistance to the
proliferation of rituals and sacrifices. It was
necessary to at least argue that rituals alone were
insufficient in producing desired results, and that some
measure of rational observation of the world was
necessary in shaping human destiny. It is therefore no
accident that, by and large, developments in science and
technology came in parallel with the advance of rational
philosophy in India. (See Development of Philosophical
Thought and Scientific Method).
In the earliest scientific texts such has those of the
Vaisheshikas (6th C BC or possibly earlier), (see
Philosophical Development from Upanishadic Theism to
Scientific Realism), there was a rudimentary attempt at
recording the physical properties of different types of
plants and natural substances. There was also an attempt
at summarizing and classifying the observations made
about natural phenomenon. Intuitive formulations and
approximate theories about the composition of matter and
physical behavior followed. Thus, although the earliest
applications of physics and chemistry in India (as in
other ancient societies), took place without involving
much theoretical knowledge or insight into these
branches of science, there were elements of basic
scientific investigation and scientific documentation in
these early rational treatises. Primitive and tentative
as these steps were, they were nevertheless crucial to
humanity reaching it's present stage of knowledge in the
fields of physics, chemistry, botany, biology and other
physical sciences.
Particle Physics
Although particle physics is one of the most advanced
and most complicated branches of modern physics, the
earliest atomic theories are at least 2500 years old. In
India, virtually every rational school of philosophy
(whether Hindu, Buddhist or Jain - see Philosophical
Development from Upanishadic Theism to Scientific
Realism) had something to say on the nature of
elementary particles, and various schools of thought
promoted the idea that matter was composed of atoms that
were indivisible and indestructible. Later philosophers
further elaborated on this notion by positing that atoms
could not only combine in pairs (dyads) but also in
threes (triads) - and that the juxtaposition of dyads
and triads determined the different physical properties
of substances seen in nature. The Jains also postulated
that the combinations of atoms required specific
properties in the combining atoms, and also a separate
"catalyst" atom. In this way, the earlier atomic
theories became converted into a molecular theory of
matter. While many details of these theories no longer
stand the test of scientific validity, there was much in
these formulations that was conceptually quite advanced
and sophisticated for it's time.
{Although it may be just a coincidence, but the
development of the Jain molecular theory appears to
parallel practical developments in other fields such as
medicine or metallurgy where the vital role of catalysts
had been observed and carefully documented. Indian
medical texts had postulated that proper human digestion
and the successful absorption of medicinal pills and
potions also required the presence of "catalytic"
substances. The requirement of catalytic substances
relating to the manufacture of acids and alkalis
(relevant to medicinal and surgical applications) had
also been documented, as had the role of suitable
catalysts in metallurgical processes, and in the
manufacture of color-fast dyes. (Today, much more is
known about catalytic processes, as a variety of
minerals, vitamins and enzymes have been identified as
playing a key role (as catalysts) in a range of
essential chemical processes that take place in our
bodies, as do catalytic compounds in other physical
processes).}
Atomic/molecular theories were also utilized in (albeit
speculative) explanations of chemical changes caused by
heat. Prasastapada proposed that the taijasa (heat)
factor affected molecular groupings (vyuhas), thus
causing chemical changes. Two competing theories
attempted to provide a more detailed explanation of the
process (as applied to the baking/coloring of a clay pot
through firing): the Pilupakavada theory, as proposed by
the Vaisesikas held that the application of heat
(through fire, for instance) reduced the molecules of
the earthen pot into atoms; and the continued
application of heat caused the atoms to regroup creating
new molecules and a different color. The Pitharapakavada
theory offered by the Nyayikas (of the Nyaya school)
disagreed, suggesting that the molecular
changes/transformations took place without a breakdown
of the original molecules into basic atoms, arguing that
if that happened, there would also have to be a
disintegration of the pot itself, which remained intact,
but only changed color.
An intuitive understanding of kinetic energy appears in
the texts of Prasastapada and the the Nyaya-Vaisesikas
who believed that all atoms were in a state of constant
activity. The concept of parispanda was propounded to
describe such molecular/atomic motion, whether it be
whirling, circling, or harmonic.
Optics and Sound
The earliest of the Indian rationalists also attempted
to provide theories on the nature of light and sound.
Like the ancient Greeks, the eye was assumed to be a
source of light by the early Indian philosophers, and
this error wasn't corrected until the 1st C AD when
Susruta posited that it was light arriving from an
external source at the retina that illuminated the world
around us. (This was reiterated by Aryabhatta in the 5th
C). In other respects, the earlier philosophers were
more on the mark, with Cakrapani suggesting that both
sound and light traveled in waves, but that light
traveled at a much higher speed. Others like the
Mimamsakas imagined light to comprise of minute
particles (now understood to be photons) in constant
motion and spreading through radiation and diffusion
from the original source.
The wave character of sound was elaborated on by
Prastapada who hypothesized that sound was borne by air
in increasing circles, similar to the movement of
ripples in water. Sound was understood to have its own
reflection - pratidhvani (echo). Musical pitches (sruti)
were seen as caused by the magnitude and frequency of
vibrations. A svara (tone) was believed to consist of a
sruti (fundamental tone) and some anuranana (partial
tones or harmonics). Musical theory was elaborated on
the basis of concepts such as jativyaktyoriva tadatamyam
(genus and species of svara), parinama (change of
fundamental frequency), vyanjana (manifestation of
overtones), vivartana (reflection of sound), and
karyakaranabhava (cause and effect of the sound).
In the 6th C. Varahamihira discussed reflection as being
caused by light particles arriving on an object and then
back-scattering (kiranavighattana, murcchana).
Vatsyayana referred to this phenomenon as
rasmiparavartana, and the concept was adapted to explain
the occurrence of shadows and the opacity of materials.
Refraction was understood to be caused by the ability of
light to penetrate inner spaces of translucent or
transparent materials and Uddyotakara drew a comparison
with fluids moving through porous objects - tatra
parispandah tiryaggamanam parisravah pata iti.
(Al Haytham (b, Basra, worked in Cairo, 10th C) who may
have been familiar with the writings of Aryabhatta,
expounded a more advanced theory of optics using light
rays, diagrammatically explaining the concepts of
reflection and refraction. He is particularly known for
elucidating the laws of refraction and articulating that
refraction was caused by light rays traveling at
different speeds in different materials.)
Astronomy and Physics
Just as the study of Mathematics in India received an
impetus from the study of astronomy, so did the study of
Physics. As mentioned in the essay on mathematics,
Aryabhatta (5th-6th C) made pioneering discoveries in
the realm of planetary motion. This led to advances in
the definition of space and time measuring units and
better comprehension of concepts such as gravitation,
motion and velocity.
{For instance, Yativrasabha's work Tiloyapannatti (6th
C) gives various units for measuring distances and time
and also describes a system of infinite time measures.
More significantly, Vacaspati Misra (circa AD 840)
anticipated solid (co-ordinate) geometry eight centuries
before Descartes (AD 1644). In his Nyayasuchi-nibandha,
he states that the position of a particle in space could
be calculated by assuming it relative to another and
measuring along three (imaginary) axes.
The study of astronomy also led to a great interest in
quantifying very large and very small units of time and
space. The solar day was considered to be made up of
1,944,000 ksana (units of time), according to the
Nyaya-Vaisesikas. Each ksana thus correspnded to .044
seconds. The truti was defined as the smallest unit of
time i.e. 2.9623*10-4. The Silpasastra records the
smallest measure of length as the paramanu i.e. 1/349525
of an inch. This measurement corresponds to the smallest
thickness of the Nyaya-Vaisesika school - the trasarenu,
which was the size of the smallest mote visible on a
sunbeam as it shone into a dark room. Varahamihira
(circa AD sixth century) posited that 86 trasarenu were
equal to one anguli i.e. three-fourths of an inch. He
also suggested that 64 trasarenu were equal to the
thickness of a hair.}
The Laws of Motion
Although the earliest attempts at classifying different
types of motion were made by the Vaisesikas,
Prasastapada took the study of the subject much further
in the 7th C AD, and it appears from some of his
definitions that at least some of the concepts he
enunciated must have emerged from a study of planetary
motion. In addition to linear motion, Prasastapada also
described curvilinear motion (gamana), rotary motion (bhramana)
and vibratory motion. He also differentiated motion that
was initiated by some external action from that which
took place as a result of gravity or fluidity.
He was also aware of motion that resulted from
elasticity or momentum, or as an opposite reaction to an
external force. He also noted that some types of actions
result in like motion, and others in opposite motion, or
no motion at all - the variations arising from the
internal and inherent properties of the interacting
objects.
Prasastapada also noted that at any given instance, a
particle was capable of only a single motion (although a
body such as a blowing leaf composed of multiple
particles may experience a more complex pattern of
motion due to different particles moving in different
ways) - an important concept that was to facilitate in
later quantifications of the laws of motion.
In the 10th C. Sridhara reiterated what had been
observed by Prasastapada, and expanded on what he had
documented. Bhaskaracharya (12th C), in his Siddhanta
Siromani and Ganitadhyaya, took a crucial first step in
quantification, and measured average velocity as v=s/t
(where v is the average velocity, s is distance covered,
and t is time).
For their time, Prasastapada's work, and Sridhara and
Bhaskaracharya's later elaborations ought to be
considered quite significant. However, one of the
weaknesses of later Indian treatises was a failure to
follow up with further attempts at quantification and
conceptual elaboration. For instance, several types of
motion had been earlier assigned to unseen causes. There
was no subsequent attempts to solve these mysteries, nor
was there the realization that the invisible cause
behind various types of motion could be conceptually
generalized and formally characterized and expressed in
an abstract way, through a mathematical formula as was
done by Newton a few centuries later.
Experimentation versus Intuition
In fact, the next major step in the study of motion was
to take place in England, when the ground for scientific
investigation was prepared by the likes of Roger Bacon
(13th C) who described the great obstacles to learning
as regard for authority, force of habit, theological
prejudice and false concept of knowledge. A century
later, Merton scholars at Oxford developed the concept
of accelerated motion (an important precursor to the
understanding that force=mass*acceleration) and took
rudimentary but important steps in the measurement and
quantification of heat in a rod. One of the hallmarks of
British (and European) science thereafter was the fusion
of theory and practice, unlike the generally intuitive
approach followed by Indian scientists when
investigating fields other than astronomy.
For instance, right up to the 16th C, Indian scientists
continued to record useful scientific observations, but
without serious attempts at quantification, or deeper
investigation into the physical and chemical causes of
what they observed. Magnetism is referred to by Bhoja
(10th-11th C) as well as by Sankara Misra later. Udayana
(10th-11th C) recognized solar heat as the heat-source
of all chemical changes, and also that air had weight in
a discussion of balloons in his Kiranawali.
Vallabhacharya (13th C) in his Nyaya-lilavati pointed
out the resistance of water to a sinking object, but did
not go on to discuss the principle any further. Sankara
Misra (15th-16th C) noted the phenomenon of
electrostatic attraction after he had observed how grass
and straw were attracted by amber. But the cause was
deemed adrishta (unseen cause). He also recorded some
awareness of the concept of kinetic energy and in his
Upaskara dwelt on the properties of heat, and tried to
relate the process of boiling to evaporation. In the
same treatise, Sankara Misra also gave examples of
capillary motion citing the ascent of sap from root to
stem in a plant and the ability of liquids to penetrate
porous vessels. He also wrote about surface tension, and
posited sandrata (viscosity) as the cause behind the
cohesion of water molecules and the smoothness of water
itself.
The Social Milieu
Yet, unlike in astronomy, where many Indian scientists
got very intensely involved, and were driven to work
towards a considerable degree of accuracy, no such
compulsions appeared to guide Indian scientists in other
fields. Whereas Indian astronomers were compelled to
develop useful mathematical formulae and explore the
mysteries of the universe in greater depth - in other
fields of scientific investigation, Indian scientists
seemed to remain content with intuitive and general
observations, tolerating a far greater degree of
vagueness and imprecision. The answer to this apparent
inconsistency may lie in the social milieu. The study of
astronomy was triggered partly by practical
considerations such as the need for accurate monsoon
prediction and rainfall mapping, but perhaps even more
so, by the growing demand for "good" astrologers. The
obsession with astrological charts - both amongst the
royalty and mercantile classes led to considerable state
patronage of intellectuals who wished to pursue the
study of astronomy. Patronage was also available for
alchemists - for those attempting to discover the
"elixir" of life. But support for modern scientific
research as was beginning to take shape in 14th C Oxford
was generally lacking.
The situation prevalent in 15th-16th C Italy was not
significantly different, and Leonardo Da Vinci
(1452-1519) was particularly frustrated that there was
not sufficient interest in his many inventions and how
those with means failed to distinguish genuine
scientific activities from quackery and the work of
charlatans. But Da Vinci was convinced that dedication
to scientific truth would eventually prevail. "For
nature, as it would seem, takes vengeance on such as
would work miracles and they come to have less than
other men who are more quiet. And those who wish to grow
rich in a day shall live a long time in great poverty,
as happens and will to all eternity happen to the
alchemists, the would-be creators of gold and silver,
and to the engineers who think to make dead water stir
itself into life with perpetual motion, and to those
supreme fools, the necromancer and the enchanter."
Although Raja Bhoja's Somarangana-sutradhara (circa AD
1100) describes many useful mechanical inventions, and
the use of levers and pulleys is described in numerous
other Urdu, Persian and Arabic texts in India and the
Middle East, Da Vinci's notes on mechanics, the study of
levers of different kinds, cantilevers, pulleys and
gears in combination, varied gadgetry, bridges, and
studies of flight were of a truly pioneering nature, and
exceeded in complexity and breadth any civil and
mechanical engineering treatise that had preceded him.
And even though in his time, Da Vinci's works were not
especially appreciated, Western Europe was in the midst
of a monumental change in it's attitude towards science
and technology. A century later, the momentum towards
the modern scientific era was to gather considerable
pace, and eventually the European Renaissance created an
environment where the ideas of Da Vinci and Francis
Bacon (15-16th C England - who stressed the importance
of the experimental method in science) were able to
blossom and flourish.
But at the same time in India, several factors posed as
hindrances to the development of modern science. In
comparison to Europe, India enjoyed a relatively milder
climate, and the production of necessities was deemed
sufficient to satisfy the population of the time. The
courts - whether Mughal or regional spent a good part of
their rich treasuries on cultivating the fine arts and
promoting the manufacture of luxury goods and decorative
objects of exquisite beauty. Science and technology
simply attracted little attention (except when it came
to improving the tools of war).
The growing influence of religion - whether Quranic or
Brahminical also had it's negative effect. While the
Quran claimed that all the world's knowledge was already
described in it, Brahminical orthodoxy created a sharp
divide between the mental and the physical and thus
prevented scientists from going beyond passive
observation and intuition to practical experimentation,
active theorizing and quantification. Whereas Akbar and
Jehangir were not averse to science, and the latter took
an active interest in books on botany and zoology, it
appears from anecdotal accounts that Aurangzeb had a
decidedly skeptical attitude towards the sciences.
Although some patronage was available in the regional
courts, (and outside the courts), alchemy, astrology,
study of omens, numerology and other semi-rational and
irrational traditions drew much more attention, and thus
distracted from genuine scientific pursuits.
On the other hand, European scientists drew on the best
works produced in the East - studying foreign documents
with due diligence, often accepting little at face value
- but instead verifying the results with apparatus and
scientific measuring tools of their own creation. There
was a time when such had also been the case in ancient
India - but over time (due to both internal and external
factors) - India's scientific spirit got eroded. Thus
Europe was not only able to catch up with the knowledge
of India and the East, it was able to rapidly surpass
it.
Since independence, Indian scientists have been provided
the opportunity of narrowing the gap, and in some fields
have done especially well. However, the quality of
science education for the masses still needs
considerable improvement. On the one hand, the study of
the physical sciences in India needs to be accompanied
with practical demonstrations and more experimentation
as is common practice in the West. In many instances,
tools and apparatus used to demonstrate and quantify
scientific phenomenon need to be modernized or improved.
On the other hand, there also needs to be somewhat
greater appreciation of the intuitive approach that has
been the hallmark of ancient and medieval Indian
science. The conceptual elegance of some earlier
formulations, and the facility to inform and educate
through analogy is also something that can be learned
from the Indian tradition.
It may also be noted that in terms of pedagogy, the
standard Western texts are not always as useful. Often,
the teaching of physics and chemistry becomes too
esoteric for the average student. There is excessive
abstraction in most text books, and undue theoretical
complexity is thrust upon relatively young students. In
contrast, the Indian approach with it's stress on
observation of natural phenomenon, and epistemological
approach to understanding each field are much easier to
grasp for beginners and intermediate students. Once the
student understands the basics, and develops a good
intuitive way of perceiving scientific phenomenon - the
complexities and mathematical abstractions can follow -
and the world of the physical sciences can be opened up
to more than just the few who are able to transcend the
complexities and difficulties that accompany the study
of these branches of science today.
References:
1.The Positive Sciences of the Ancient Hindus (Brajendranath
Seal)
2. Concise History of Science in India (Bose, Sen,
Subarayappa, Indian National Science Academy)
3. Studies in the History of Science in India (Anthology
edited by Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya)
4. Causation in Indian Philosophy (Mahesh Chandra
Bhartiya, Vimal Prakashan, Ghaziabad)
Related Pages:
History of Mathematics in India
Technological discoveries and applications in India
Development of Philosophical Thought and Scientific
Method in Ancient India
Philosophical Development from Upanishadic Theism to
Scientific Realism
Post Comment
|