/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10858584]

Why are there no more Einsteins, Newtons, Teslas and so on? Did genetic permutations converge towards average intelligence due to the TV generation?

[Anonymous No.10858619]

>>10858584
There are, it's just that fields are so much more specialised that it's orders of magnitude more difficult to make a foundational contribution.

Also Einstein and Newton are orders of magnitude better than Tesla, every other nobel winner is about as good if not better than Tesla.

[Anonymous No.10858646]

>>10858619
Fields weren't specialised in the 50s?

[Anonymous No.10858667]

>>10858584

[Anonymous No.10858679]

>>10858667
At least I'm part of the beautiful one...

[Anonymous No.10858681]

>>10858584
They all got aborted.

[Anonymous No.10858692]

>>10858584
>two dudes who lived 200 years apart
What the fuck even is your point you cock gobbler of an OP?

[Anonymous No.10858741]

>>10858619
this. exponential decrease.
also creativity and intelligence are correlated with higher levels of suicide.
and human society is pretty bleak so maybe many have killed themselves due to increased awareness of the nature of things. also many have things to contribute but maybe they decide not to for whatever reason? or dont have business or people sense to make things happen.
they are out there!

[Anonymous No.10858748]

>>10858619
this. exponential decrease.
also creativity and intelligence are correlated with higher levels of suicide.
and human society is pretty bleak so maybe many have killed themselves due to increased awareness of the nature of things. also many have things to contribute but maybe they decide not to for whatever reason? or dont have business / people sense or even just the confidence to make things happen or be heard.
they are out there!

[Anonymous No.10858752]

>>10858584
Because progress tends to become harder, not easier, as you go up the technological ladder.

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/intro-apollos-ascent/

[Anonymous No.10858760]

>>10858667
What does it matter what the average IQ is?
The vast majority of the people on this planet will function as taxpayers and consumers, and so fulfil their role.
Much of the African population are not substantial taxpayers or consumers, but if their societies improve, they will be - and their birth rate will drop accordingly.

There's certainly no need for a billion people with 135+ IQ score.

[Anonymous No.10858769]

>>10858760

[Anonymous No.10858798]

>>10858769
they need to reduce that birth rate somehow, i guess

best case scenario: they all stay put and build their countries into something their children and children's children will be proud of.

[Anonymous No.10858800]

>>10858584
If one wants to get into college and academia now, they have to pass standardized psychometric tests (ACT/SAT/GRE). The advent of selective tests coincides well with the waning of innovative heavy-lifters such as Einstein. It's possible that the selecting process only selects those who are good at test taking using crystalized knowledge, but poor at selecting those with the ability to generate novel concepts and make complex scientific inferences.

A typical gre question might ask:
3. A certain pet store sells only dogs and cats. In March, the store sold twice as many dogs as cats. In April, the store sold twice the number of dogs that it sold in March, and three times the number of cats that it sold in March. If the total number of pets the store sold in March and April combined was 500, how many dogs did the store sell in March?

But out in the field, a physicist may be confronted with a new problem which no body has answers to:
Could Hubble's Law, [math] H_0 [/math], be derived from quantum principles? If not why not?

[Anonymous No.10858824]

>>10858692
based

[Anonymous No.10858828]

>>10858584
It started with radio.

[Anonymous No.10859013]

>>10858748
Right, imagine if someone actually managed to come up with a correct new theory/experiment, that's only half the battle. What's arguably harder is actually getting it out there and getting sufficient backing. Depending on the situation it's not like the establishment is just going to recognize them and roll over immediately. And the people who are good at marketing are usually not those who are good at coming up with thinking deeply about science for long periods of time. I'm convinced that this is a largely modern pathology as nowadays we have to sift through all the careerists and there's just too many damn mediocre people in general who get to participate in the system.

[Anonymous No.10859140]

newton saw the apple fall (not really but you know)
einstein thought something like how a falling man feels no force so it's like he's floating free i.e. taking the natural path.
they had intuitive experiential stuff to start from to grasp hold of.
now it's all abstract as fuck

[Anonymous No.10859163]

because we've discovered most things that are obtainable / understandable for our limited brains to understand

[Anonymous No.10859178]

>>10858584
Things need to die so that we can push. Remember that in the case of Einstein, people already thought that physics was solved and this was so ingrained that the new breakthrough came from a fucking brainlet patent clerk who couldn't even properly derive his own equations.

Compare that to now. Things are going so good that someone like Alessandro Strumia can be discarded in favor of diversity hires for the LHC. Physics is clearly still on easy mode. Give it 50 years so that things normalize, all the brainlets are kicked out to their patent agencies, and then see what happens.

[Anonymous No.10859180]

>>10858646

You cannot use the qualifier of in the 50's when you discuss the foundational contributions of Newton and Einstein you twat.

[Anonymous No.10859345]

>>10859178
reading this gave me a migraine

[Anonymous No.10859379]

>>10858667
>>10858760
t. people who don't know how IQ works or what it means
The average IQ is 100, was 100 20 years ago, and will be 100 regardless of how many Nigerians are born in the next decade - it's 100 by definition

[Anonymous No.10859610]

>>10858584
Just because you can read about the history of all the previous super geniuses in a couple of hours, it doesn't mean that a new super genius appears every couple of hours. Dial down your expectations to a more realistic level. Breakthroughs take time. Meanwhile their development is happening now, while they might not seem as big as the breakthroughs of history, its because you're seeing the breakthroughs as they happen, not as a couple of pages in a book.

[Anonymous No.10859613]

>>10859140
So the issue is abstract pure science compared to applied science.

[Anonymous No.10859629]

>>10859178
That's not how it works. A smart person can do well in any situation

[Anonymous No.10859663]

>>10858798
>>10858769

i hope the chinese good luck.

[Anonymous No.10859931]

>>10858584
You mean you don't know about Elon Musk??!!?

[Anonymous No.10859953]

>>10859629
But notice the difference

Physics on easy mode: Smart person can easily pursue trivial research directions that will almost certainly yield results. Physics is so easy that at the end of his next small discovery, the beginning of the next small discovery is on sight. It is a rat race

Science on hard mode: No such thing as low hanging fruit anymore. Brainlets off to patent offices. Geniuses start claiming physics is done. You need a true visionary to even create something remotely original, will probably come from a brainlet with a unique perspective.

[Anonymous No.10859972]

>>10859379
how does your point relate to either post you cited?

[Anonymous No.10859975]

>>10859379
you are eithr troll or a retard

[Anonymous No.10859983]

>>10858760
>What does it matter what the average IQ is?

It matters a lot actually. IQ in a population is a Gaussian distribution. And in a Gaussian distribution, the amount of outliers (such as geniuses) is strongly affected by where the average is located.

For a crude example, if average IQ decreases by lets say 5 points, then the amount of people above IQ 130 is reduced several times.

[Anonymous No.10859984]

Newton and einstein were jews. Hitler killed all the jews. No jews no new science

[Anonymous No.10859991]

>>10858584
If string theory pans out, then here is one new visionary added to the Greats. His genius may be recognized only a century from now, tough.

[Anonymous No.10860006]

wait a few decades. retard

[Anonymous No.10860084]

200 years ago, a physician wouldn't specialize, he was just a physician. Today, a physician can have one of hundreds of subspecialties for which he has to study longer than a physician did 200 years ago.

Same issue appears in science: most cutting edge research is extremely inaccessible, so people have to focus on a small subspecialty instead of a wide range of sciences.

[Anonymous No.10860558]

>>10858584
Unironically, capitalism.

[Anonymous No.10860577]

>>10858584

[Anonymous No.10860583]

>>10859984
Newton wasn't a jew

[Anonymous No.10860584]

>>10858584
Autistic kids are now playing Fortnite and Minecraft

[Anonymous No.10860656]

>>10858584
>1564343791792.jpg

I wonder where this guy is now.

[Anonymous No.10860659]

>>10858584
the ultra dumbed down version is - science be harder now

[Anonymous No.10860774]

>>10858584
>Why vague question?
>Is it genetics
Fuck this board

[Anonymous No.10860782]

>>10858584
>Why are there no more Einsteins, Newtons,

There are, see >>10858619

>Teslas

The world is still very well supplied with crazy people.

[Anonymous No.10860787]

>>10858692
>>two dudes who lived 200 years apart
>two dudes
>two
>Newton, Einstein, Tesla

Maybe a board with "math" in the name is not for you.

[Anonymous No.10860789]

>>10859953
Yeah that's what happened desu. These days we have many people like Newton and tesla. They just can't do it on their own anymore.

[Anonymous No.10860983]

>>10860789
>These days we have many people like Newton and tesla
Name one

[Anonymous No.10860998]

>>10858681
Honk Honk

[Anonymous No.10861000]

>>10860983
David Baker

[Anonymous No.10861075]

>>10860787
Tesla was a midwit who did like one thing so he just omitted him

[Anonymous No.10861076]

>>10860577
/thread.

[Anonymous No.10861085]

>>10861000
Who

[Anonymous No.10861132]

>>10859972
>>10859975
t. samefag phoneposter

And - the chart posted in the first linked post is bullshit. The population projection may be legit, I don't know about that (climbing a bit too steeply given the continent's carrying capacity imo, but again not the focus here.
The issue is with the bottom chart, which is absolutely nonsense. The world IQ level doesn't change. IQ is based on percentiles, and because of that the average IQ is always 100 by definition. That graph there should be a flat line at 100.
As for the second post
>What does it matter what the average IQ is?
>There's certainly no need for a billion people with 135+ IQ score.
Comments like this show that that poster also doesn't understand how IQ works.

[Anonymous No.10861136]

>>10860998
come on man

[Anonymous No.10861149]

>>10858584

There are, they just work for the government on classified projects so you don't hear about them.

[Anonymous No.10861158]

>>10861136
did you assume my gender you Zionist fucking kike fag nigger jew

[Anonymous No.10861198]

>>10860782
Tesla was a smart guy that became a crank. Honestly it wasn't all too uncommon in his era, even well-regarded mathematicians like Lasker argued against relativity.

[Anonymous No.10861791]

>>10858760
>There's certainly no need for a billion people with 135+ IQ score.
Yikes. The more intelligent people there are, the more dice-rolls on them coming up with new knowledge.

[Anonymous No.10861850]

>>10858760
Imagine the world with 135+ IQ, i imagine a far better world a word without useful idiots seems quite enticing.

[Anonymous No.10862035]

>>10861850
Imagine the birthrates. Such a world couldn't exist.

[Anonymous No.10862048]

>>10862035
I highly doubt i would be part of that world but a full population of +135 IQ would excel all areas of thought exponentially.

Now there are new understands that a fair portion of IQ can be linked to genetic factors, so i wonder if the human genetic code would adapt to produce more higher IQs?

[Anonymous No.10862053]

>>10862048
It can't because high IQs don't have kids.
I've been to Singapore its the smartest place on the planet. It looks like it too. But they also have the lowest birthrates on the planet so they cope by calling in immigrants.

[Anonymous No.10862063]

>>10862053
I would foresee if existed a world where people had +135 IQ sex wouldn't be recreational and reproduction would be done at labs etc. As it would be a necessity for the continuation of the species i feel as if it would be mandated.

[Anonymous No.10862117]

>>10862063
Yeah that's the only way such a society can exist. I dunno how far away we are form artifical births.

[Anonymous No.10862187]

>>10862035
>>10862053
Birthrates have less to do with intelligence and more with social values. If birthrates were mostly based on intelligence, it wouldn't make sense that that the average birthrates of Europeans went down from 6 to 2 in a timeframe of around one century while the average IQ of Europeans has stayed about the same.

It's not that hard to get the more intelligent people to procreate at higher rates with some changes in society and politics, especially if you put economic incentives on top of it.

[Anonymous No.10862198]

>>10858584
They wouldn't be considered special if anyone could achieve what they did. But at the same time, I think that modern lifestyle indeed makes people more stupid. Having access to so much means of easy entertainment makes people give less attention to their intellectual and cultural pursuits

[Anonymous No.10862211]

>>10862187
Average IQ is of course the same. Its always set to 100. The actual intelligence wasn't high though. You're delusional if you think Europeans back then were as smart as us. Newton is nothing compared to us now.

[Anonymous No.10862213]

>>10862187
Your argument falls apart when you see people like Bill Gates and Steve jobs having had so few kids.
Rich people and smart people have historically had low kids at all stages of humanity.