The Babs knew about the right angled triangle theorem (previously credited to Pythagoras) and made the world's first trig tablet.
So they knew it's theorem 1,000 previous to Pythagoras and more important, were able to avoid fractions by using base 60 rather than decimals.
Interesting.
Its true that they used a base 60 .
After all its were we get our measurements of time from .
But nothing can take away from Pythagoras doing it in fractions.
My thoughts .
I use trigonometry daily.
Its fun .
Adriano, it seems you wish to dispute the origin of all knowledge.
The fact that the square of the hypotenuse of a right angled equals the sum of the square of the other two sides is generally accepted as having been revealed and proven by Pythagoras.
Would it sit better with you if his name was Adriano, Antonio, Bernado, Donato, Guiseppe, Pietro, Abdul, Ali, Ahbud, Mustafa or Muhammed or heaven forbid Jacob or Issac??
What are you prattling on about??
Select to expand quoteAdriano said..
The Babs knew about the right angled triangle theorem (previously credited to Pythagoras) and made the world's first trig tablet.
Hang on, you are saying the Babs knew about it and that it was previously credited to Pythagoras meaning that Pythagoras predated the Babs.
Yeah, OK. I have had a few beers and rums tonight too.
Cisco, if you're going to be like that, take it to heavy weather.
I was just sharing a new discovery about math. Please, there is no need to make this personal.
This discovery demonstrates that Pythagoras didn't reveal the theorem at all, but that he proved it using fractions. Who knows, maybe a line of research could look into whether Pythagoras knew about the Babylonian trigonometry and adopted the knowledge and furthered it with fractions.
The Babylonians proved it 1000 years earlier with trigonometry. The question now, is what did the Babylonians use this knowledge for?
It is the world's oldest trigonometric table. A table suggests the knowledge may have been used as a reference document, perhaps in construction or design.
Whether it's commonly accepted that Pythagoras discovered this or not is not the point. He was not the first. History has been re-written.
Select to expand quotecisco said..
Hang on, you are saying the Babs knew about it and that it was previously credited to Pythagoras meaning that Pythagoras predated the Babs.
Yeah, OK. I have had a few beers and rums tonight too.
Are you having a go at Adriano, or are you pissed off because there were someone way before Pythagoras who found an "alternative" way to work out the same problem ?
If it is the former, then it is personal, innit ? If it is the latter, then you forgot that there are many ways to arrive at a solution. But it may take a very different paradigm, or system. But then, being a master navigator and a proud owner of a HUGE yacht, you always know best. 
Quite an achievement ! But then it involved a very different way to count. The decimal system is easy to deal with. 10 mm to a cm. 100 cents to a dollar, and not the 12 inches to a foot, and then you have to work out the 1/8, 1/16. Quite a pain.
With 60 being the base, that can be painful for the day to day applications.
I use triangles quite a bit to work out lengths and sizes. I often thought there should be an easier way to not have to work out the square roots. Without a calculator those ancient craftsmen will have to find ways to overcome such a handicap. Good on them. I like it a lot !
Yeah 60 is a nuisance for the day-to-day, but has other interesting applications.
Select to expand quoteJupiter said..
But then, being a master navigator and a proud owner of a HUGE yacht, you always know best.
None of the above. Just a little 30 footer and only went to Master V and MED I and sensible enough to know that I don't know what I don't know.
Ahh you mean those known unknowns and unknown unknowns like Donald Rumsfeld talked about?
The big scary exploding ones that were a threat to humanity around Baghdad and Tikrit even though it was unknown if they were unknown unknowns or known unknowns or known knowns?
Select to expand quoteAdriano said..
... and more important, were able to avoid fractions by using base 60 rather than decimals.
Oh yeah?
What's 1/3 + 2/3 in sexagesimal (or decimal)?
the babs probably had plum bobs, levels and string lines to work with for building. nothing else needed for triangles
.... so back to the maths, where does the Chinese abacus fit into the history of calculation?
