/sci/ - Science & Math

Neil DeGrasse Tyson is my nigga
>op confirmed for 2edgy5me neckbeard atheist

http://www.youtube.com/embed/gMJxjYRXYkU?rel=0&start=35

Sounds like someone missed his science dosage.

>>5928395
Neil DeGrasse Tyson has been my inspiration for going back to school. He's certainly had an impact on my desire to learn and my motivation to do so.

>>5928456
ayo engineer, holla back

>>5928432
I can't wait.

how come I dont see Einstein?

>>5928503
because if he didn't matter he'd just turn into energy

>>5928503
Because Einstein was a pretty cool guy, he married his cousin and doesn't afraid of anything.

>>5928432

"Hello, I am pandering to the Redditors that think NDT is 'so epic'!"

Instead let's wager on the probability OP will ever gain a phd.

>>5928537
has this kid burned out and started flipping burgers yet?

>>5928537
>scientists

>>5928550
but I heard he debunked Einstein

>>5928543
10/10

>>5928429
>implying he's a real scientist

stop making these threads

"There are more stars in the universe than there are atoms in space"

>>5928395
All scientist known to the general public are overrated. Think about it.

Ray Kurzweil

It's not even close.

He was never really a scientist/engineer, but the public perceived him to be one of the most influential inventors of modern times.

Elron

Anyone involved with popular science, ever.

>>5929202
This guy is actually underrated

Neil may be a popsci, but him and Bill were the main reasons I'm doing a bachelors in mech engineering and eventually working on a physics masters.

>>5930915
Its really sad that he is idolized as a "great man" despite the fact that he was a rich douche bag who contributed almost nothing technologically to apple's products. He just figured out how to sell retards overpriced hardware and the masses love him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3t9cEddzzw

>>5928442
This 100x

>>5928449
Fuck your shit, edison was an entrepreneur and inventor, not a scientist as anyone who's studied how awesome he is would know.

>>5928541
Is that Grothendieck holding Atiyah?

>>5930933
I wish I was smart enough to understand his theories.

>>5928442
I don't feel that Tesla was truly a "scientist" in the way we see scientists today. I feel he was simply an engineer with a huge proclivity towards electromagnetic shit. A brilliant engineer, but simply that.

>>5932686
this. top 10 scientists? tesla doesn't make it. top 10 engineers? for sure.

the guy was a maker, which i think we need more of.

>>5932686
I'd easily take Tesla's body of work over some top rated scientists though if I really had to choose.

How do all you uber-autismal assperkers propose getting your useless research proposals funded if nobody gives a shit about science because nobody ever informs them about it?

No matter how you try to twist this around, science popularizers like Bill Nye, NDT, Carl Sagan, Bill Cox etc. actually significantly contribute to the advancement of science exactly because they keep the general populace if not informed, at least interested and appreciative of scientific research.

Fuck, even private investors have to be motivated to establish fonds outside of their own personal monetary interests sometimes.

>>5932708
Your ignorance is astounding. Politics and industry don't give a shit about pop sci tv shows. Funding is not given becuase "muh colorful spaec picturrrrrrrrs". Funding is given to projects which promise profit or military advantage.

>>5932700
Oh fuck yeah dude. If we had a Gilligans Island thing going, you better bet your ass I'll take Tesla over, say, Max Plank or Feynman.

>>5932713
>>Funding is not given becuase "muh colorful spaec picturrrrrrrrs".

Sometimes it is, numbnuts. Who funded the Large Hadron Collider?

There's a shit-ton of basic research which it isn't clear has any immediate payoff or military value whatsoever except, perhaps, 50 years in the future something else can be built on/from it.

You're extracting arguments from your rectum.

I could post any philosopher that's ever lived

>>5932727
His entire point (I'm condensing for you anon) is that the ends can not and do not justify the means.

Exceptions to the rule and all that, sure. Ya got me on that, there's always gonna be one whacko who throws his money at shit. But most investors will not fund something without any expectation of a return.

And just to call you a retard, the LHC was funded for a reason. We needed to find that cheeky cunt the Higgs Boson. That has HUGE potential for returns. They didn't just go out and fucking say "TAKE MY MONEY!" They saw a chance for a revolutionary breakthrough, and they took it. Now that we found it, we just have to find a way to make it pay off.

>>5932738
Its not his fault if he is.
He lacked any decent formal support or introduction to subject matter.
But originating the collective works of numerous other mathematicians entirely under his own power was quite monumental.
He was a prodigy that displayed more potential for contribution to mathematics than entire major asian civilizations to date.

>>5928554
Thats what he said. He never did it.

>>5932747
What the hell is the measure of potential for contribution? Is this guy
>>5928537
not overrated now because he might someday contribute something?

>>5933014
"The limitations of his knowledge were as startling as its profundity. Here was a man who could work out modular equations and theorems... to orders unheard of, whose mastery of continued fractions was... beyond that of any mathematician in the world, who had found for himself the functional equation of the zeta function and the dominant terms of many of the most famous problems in the analytic theory of numbers; and yet he had never heard of a doubly periodic function or of Cauchy's theorem, and had indeed but the vaguest idea of what a function of a complex variable was..."

His work was unprecedented given his basic limitations, like lack of formal introduction to subject matter, and lack of paper to write on.

>>5932748

BBBBUUTtttttt .....he was a faggot!!!

>>5933059
My first post here so not those guys.
Ramanujan really have a ehole lot of potential. G.H. Hardy was not one iota mistaken in comparing his innate capabilities to Gauß and Euler. However, the circumstances made it so he couldn't contribute much. Hence, the first guy was right to point out that hewas overrated as we judge individuals on what they did and NOT on what they could of done.

>>5932749
he was a great scientist

If saying that science disproves any belief system aside from atheism makes you a scientist, then I'd say Richard Dawkins.

>>5933174
He is a good scientist and deserves our respect.

>>5933174
The fact that you would discredit Dawkins so quickly over his euphoric nature shows that you actually dont know much about the man. He was (still is) a great scientistic and science communicator. I dont agree with his militant atheist nature; but that doesnt detract from all the great things he has done.

>>5932723
>Not wanting to bro it up with Feynman on a desert island

>>5930972
Yeah, geobros4lyfe

>>5928395
Tyson might not be the best scientist, but damn is he one inspiring speaker.

>>5936019
Michael Jackson isn't a scientist fuckwit.

>>5930951
>>5930915

>>5932748
Make like Turing and kill yourself

>>5933174
i like how he never said anything like it

>>5933174
Atheism isn't a belief system, moran

>>5936884
It's definitely a belief system. It's not a religion though.

>>5936886
What belief does the atheist necessarily profess? You can't name one, let alone a multitude that would constitute a 'belief system'.

>>5936888
That there are no gods.

>>5936898
Absolutely incorrect. Atheism is the rejection of the belief that a god exists. One does not have to believe no gods exists to be an atheist. This is elementary logic.

>>5936901
Those two are the same fucking thing.

>>5936902
You are a moron.

>>5928554
He alone said he did. Literally no one else has believed him or thought any of his "science" held any water other than him and maybe his annoying mom who drags him everywhere.

>>5932737
>We needed to find that cheeky cunt the Higgs Boson. That has HUGE potential for returns.
Well, that settles it, they'll patent it and make errybody pay for it.

>They saw a chance for a revolutionary breakthrough, and they took it. Now that we found it, we just have to find a way to make it pay off.
You are beyond retarded.

>>5932749
He was a great scientist that not that many people know about.

>>5936019
Harry Potter uses the force you fucking retard.

>>5936931
>I reject the belief in Gods, but I don't believe that Gods don't exist
No, you are the moron.

>>5928456
This is what Tyson has done better than virtually any other modern scientist.
He hasn't accomplished much, but he's facilitated accomplishment.

How does one become a grossly overrated scientist?

>>5937569
Be popular on reddit.

Being disabled, not white or a woman helps too.

>>5928395
>Post grossly overweight scientists ITT

>>5930915
daerht\

>>5936884
people are this fucking stupid
please tell me I'm being trolled

>>5930915
winner hands down of all time

>>5937629
I can't believe I need to write this out but a system implies an interconnected set of beliefs. You can be an atheist, i.e. not hold the belief that God exists, and believe all sorts of different things about everything else.

>>5936950
I don't believe in god =/= I believe there is no god

>>5937650
They are logically the same statement.

>>5937656
Try telling that to an infant who has not yet heard of the idea of god.

>>5937656
"believe" is a verb you retard.

>>5937673

What difference does that make?

>people using the LHC as an argument for the importance of vulgarization
The LHC was a collegial decision by Europe deciders who are mostly unelected. What the general public thinks has no importance.

In fact it has no importance because science funding is not an argument either in Europe or America.
Journalists don't ask them questions about it and no one shifts his vote just because of science funding policy.

What we need are science political parties who would trade voting instructions for funding policies. Hell, there are environmentalists parties, why not science?

>>5937675
the verb became a man, Jesus, in the case.

>>5937675
belief in the absence of a god (the second statement) requires knowledge of the idea of god to not believe in.

>>5937674
>>5937673
>>5937650
>>5937644

sure is fedora in here.

leave em' be - give em enough time and they'll write their own gospels (handed down to them by Science of course) and build a big extravagant building (to do Science in of course), be very hostile to people who disagree with them (to promote Science of course) and get nervous and excited whenever someone tries to argue with them (because it's Science of course!!!)

>>5937687
>blah blah
more fedora

>>5937687

What kind of hat did Sam Spade wear? Imma get one of those.

>>5937692
fedora.

>>5937687
Too obvious/10

>>5937692
he wore a Fez

>>5937683


both statements use the word "God" and therefore require knowledge of "God".

An infant simply doesn't have this discussion - the point is a non-sequitur.

If you're going to try and be agnostic then don't indulge in the self-righteousness that theists or anti-theists indulge in.

Can we go back to discussing the OP's post. Instead of arguing amongst ourselves.

>>5937713
An infant can accept every bullshit you say, so, you can tell anything you want and it's ok.

>>5937715

Dude, why discuss boring scientists on a science board when we can talk about EPIC HAT MEME! XDDDDDDDD

>>5937733
We can do both.

>>5937713
If you want to be pedantic about my example, change the "I" to "you".

The main point is "belief", even in the absence of something, is an active state requiring volition, whereas not believing is not.

>>5937748
the aspie as confused as "i don't believe in god" is often used, imprecisely, to mean "i believe there is no god"

whereas you could be a christian who for one moment does not believe in god because you've forgotten about him, but you couldn't say for that moment the christian belives there is no god.

>>5937754
Thank you, that is a better example.

I do hate it when people crudely reduce natural language to logic, it can be done, but it is way more complicated.

>>5937754
Different person then who you were responding to, but, I see where you're going with this.

>captcha: prayed tiansau

No one rates him high as as scientist.

>ITT: We post pictures of more successful scientists than we will ever be and call them overrated

>>5938110
I guess you're right... Neil is wearing a suit...

>>5937822
leddit does

on the other hand, /pol/ calls him an useless retard.

>>5938110
They kind of have to be successful to be overrated
but yeah I'm sure you think you have a point somewhere in there.

>>5938336
What is "leddit'?

>>5939359
You're literally a month new.

>>5938336

Neither opinion is valid.

>>5939383
Your opinion of their opinion is not valid.

I don't have an opinion.

I'm just sayin.

>>5939359
chinese reddit

Carl Sagan, Neil deGrasse Tyson (although I like him) and Sheldon Cooper.

>>5935008
>implying Oppenheimer wasn't the most attractive man ever

>>5928537
is that the little shit that says he can think in 5 dimensions?

>>5940298
The very same.

>>5940298
Hmmm, I guess I have to watch Jeek speaking, I never had the nerve to watch the little apostle of the Lord.

>>5940307
His autism is pretty damn impressive. If his parents weren't such Jesus-fearing shits, I wonder if he would've turned out more......not shit.

>>5928541
whoa
wat

>>5940310
I'm watching him and damn, I remember that James Woods meltdown video.