भारतकोश
सिद्धान्तशिरोमणि: गणिताध्याय (भास्कराचार्य - ग्रहगणित, मध्यमाधिकार व स्पष्टाधिकार सटीक)

सिद्धान्तशिरोमणि: गणिताध्याय (भास्कराचार्य - ग्रहगणित, मध्यमाधिकार व स्पष्टाधिकार सटीक)

Siddhanta Shiromani Ganitadhyaya of Bhaskaracharya with Commentary

भास्कराचार्य द्वितीय द्वारा

DevanagariHindipublished573 पृष्ठ

पृष्ठ 116, कुल 573 में से

संदर्भ में पढ़ें
पृष्ठ 116

96 above correction leads to an error of a day. So, it is that we pronounced that out of the years 2000, 2100, 2200, 2300 A.D., the year 2000 A.D. alone is a leap year and not the remaining, the convention being that the number of the century, here 20, must be also a multiple of four. On this back-ground, suppose we prepare a manual called a Karaṇa grantha taking the length of the year to be 365·25 days. It works alright for some time but in the course of 400 years the error will have reached to as much as one day. Thus a manual like the above works only for a short time and the approximation made gradually brings in a divergence on account of which such a manual grows obsolete. That is why one Narasimha who happened to prepare a manual in 1333 Saka year (1411AD) opens his work with the words “तिथिचक्रं यत्प्रणीतं मल्लिका- र्जुनसूरिणा, कालेन महता तस्मिन् खिलीभूते तदादरात्, नौपुरीसिङ्गयार्यस्य नरसिंहेनसूनुना एतदेव स्फुटतरं क्रियते सौरसम्मतम्” i.e. “In as much as a manual named Tithi-Cakra prepared by one Mallikār- juna Sūri long ago, based upon the Sūryasiddhānta has now diverged far from the Sūryasiddhānta (on account of the approximations made transcending the limits of negligibi- lity) I, the son of one Singaya belonging to a place named Nau-puri (probably Vada-palle of the East Godavary Dt.) am rectifying it and bringing it to accord with the Sūrya Siddhānta again.” This kind of obsoleteness arising out of inevitable ap- proximations that have to be made in the preparation of manuals is permissible. But Suppose the premise of the manuals itself is incorrect, then the rectification of the manuals is no good so long as the data given in the pre- mise are not corrected. There are two fundamental defects in the ancient works according to a modern analysis namely (1) The Supposition that all the planets were in conjunction at the Zero-point of the Zodiac in the beginn- ing of a Mahāyuga (2) Small variations in the constants like the daily motion of the planets and the like. Accord- ing to the modern interpreters of Hindu Astronomy the