/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11296784]

Is Terence Tao a genius or a meme? What has he accomplished exactly?

[Anonymous No.11296822]

he is a retard. he said hillary is better than trump.

[Anonymous No.11296827]

>>11296784
I use compressed sensing in my research if it counts.

[Anonymous No.11296829]

>>11296784
>What has he accomplished exactly?
His major accomplishment is ruining the lives of various narcissistic teenagers who, feeling themselves to be kindred-spirits, committed to a life of academic cuckoldry and mediocrity. Resulting in a wasted life that can only be characterized as neurotic, paranoid (Imposter Syndrome), anxious, infertile and narcissistic (volatility between insecurity and delusions of intellectual superiority over "the people" or some other group).

[Anonymous No.11296832]

>>11296829
Refer to my other post for more general remarks
>>11296814

[Anonymous No.11296837]

A number of seriously huge contributions to analytic number theory and analysis in general. Worked on progressing navier stokes for a while. Just made a huge breakthrough on the collatz conjecture, which seems impenetrable. Green tao theorem, prime numbers containing arbitrary length arithmetic progressions, was a massive result.

[Anonymous No.11296842]

>>11296837
>huge breakthrough on the collatz conjecture
Literally irrelevant

[Anonymous No.11296846]

>>11296842
(his paper, not the conjecture)

[Anonymous No.11296863]

>>11296842
I have no idea, I'm not a number theorist so I don't give a shit. I just see people talk about it a lot. Would you be able to specify precisely what he did?
In any case, he did plenty more than just Green Tao, that's just the big result.

[Anonymous No.11296868]

He's a meme, he doesn't even deserve his Fields.

[Anonymous No.11296888]

>>11296863
He proves that for the majority of integers, the smallest element in the associated Collatz sequence grows at most as fast as any diverging function of your choice, for instance f(N) = log(log(log(log(N))). The only requirement is that f(x) -> infinity as x -> infinity. In other words, Collatz sequences tend to have small elements.

But this doesn't say that

1- The small element must be 1 (which is what we want, to prove that 1 is in all Collatz sequences)
2- That this holds for all natural numbers. All that is said is that the set for which the claim is not valid must be sparse in logarithmic way.

So, this basically proves nothing. People nowadays like the idea of gradual progress towards an academic goal (eg proving Collatz), but that's not the way things are usually solved.

[Anonymous No.11296893]

>>11296832
Imagine being proud enough of your retarded ramblings that you share a link to them

[Anonymous No.11296902]

>>11296888
you keep putting in these moronic parentheticals as though i don't immediately and completely understand what you are saying. if you want to assume you're talking to complete idiots who don't have even the least bit of mathematical intuition, you should try r/math.

[Anonymous No.11296906]

>>11296902
That's just the way I write, even on papers.

[Anonymous No.11296916]

>>11296888
It's really weird how people can't grasp that density results are essentially irrelevant for stuff like Collatz or Goldbach.
>>11296902
You literally said you weren't a number theorist, tho.

[Anonymous No.11296921]

>>11296902
I don't think these are safe levels of autism

[Anonymous No.11296929]

>>11296902
if it offends you maybe you aren't as mathematically mature as you thought lol

[Anonymous No.11297073]

>>11296888
I'm not in number theory, but isn't that a useful technique for applications outside of number theory (eg, proving something about extinction for a system that evolves according to some related discrete rule or a hamiltonian)? Or are the techniques used too number theoretic to have those applications?

[Anonymous No.11297075]

[Anonymous No.11297083]

>>11297073
I don't know, but basic stochastic process
theory and probability theory + numerical simulations seem a better match for that than some obscure number theory result

[Anonymous No.11297144]

>>11296784

Terry Tao wrote a book when he was like 15. It wasn't a book that had much real math in it, but it seems like he was somehow groomed to be a mathematician because he probably wasn't actually at a high level at that age.

As a mathematician, he's definitely not a hack. I don't know much about him, but I think he proved some lower bound for a conjecture about the primes or something. Good on him

>>11296893

He samefagged that thread too. Fucking loser lmao

[Anonymous No.11297206]

>>11296906
>that's the way i write
please stop, no one reading your papers needs the exposition
or at least limit yourself. assume your reader has a base competency in the field unless your paper is explicitly introductory.
>>11296916
i understand basic mathematics, don't need to be a number theorist to know, say, that a function which diverges upward can be taken to have a limit of infinity as x goes to infinity.
and in terms of density results, i'm not so sure about that. from an analysis perspective, results on density often give you a whole lot of information and leeway. i guess when you're dealing with this weird number theory density notion it's not quite as useful, i haven't worked with it myself.
>>11296921
>>11296929
it isn't offense or autism, it's about reading your audience. if i say "i don't know much number theory" the most important thing is that i know i don't know much number theory. then you should feel comfortable giving exposition without much detail and should expect me to read further if i'm interested. mathematical communication is difficult and sprinkled with all kinds of arbitrary social cues around pride and levels of knowledge, i certainly hear that. but it's an important language to learn.

[Anonymous No.11297228]

OP here
Terence Tao vs Ramanujan, who would win

[Anonymous No.11297236]

>>11297144
>>11296888

I guess Tao is more like an engineer in that he is good at solving problems but he has not come up with some revolutionary new theory.

[Anonymous No.11297239]

>>11297206
His post reads absolutely fine.

[Anonymous No.11297248]

>>11297239
Oh, it's a good post for sure. Just a bit of an obnoxious one. It feels like something someone might write into an undergraduate seminar presentation.

[Anonymous No.11297257]

>>11297206
>it isn't offense or autism
>proceeds to sperg profusely

[Anonymous No.11297260]

>>11296784
I think the real question we should be asking here on /sci is whether he was clamped, vaccinated, and circumcised, them proceeding form there. You need to start at the basics sometimes.

[Anonymous No.11297280]

>>11297228
Ramanujan wasn't literally created to be a mathematician. Tao had fucking Erdos living with him as a personal tutor. They're both memes, but Tao is essentially the math Justin Bieber.

[Anonymous No.11297450]

>>11297075
Just keep doing what you are doing

[Anonymous No.11297465]

>>11297257
No idea when autism started being equated with retardation when the majority of autists aren't mentally impaired.

[Anonymous No.11297467]

>>11297450
hell ya im havin the tiem of my lief hope i dont get banned LOL

[Anonymous No.11297541]

>>11296888
based trips

[Anonymous No.11297690]

>>11296829
pretty true desu

[Anonymous No.11297692]

>>11297465
Autism is different now. Lumping it together is part of the scam.

[Anonymous No.11298002]

I have found him to be a disappointment overall. Given his precocity I was hoping for a Von Neumann Tier intellect. With his focus I was hoping maybe a proof for the twin prime conjecture or Riemann Hypothesis... but nothing of the sort. He is focused on incremental improvements. I had hoped he had moved onto things like the P vs NP problem but nope. It’s impressive that he somehow manages like 5 first author publications last year despite being a professor.

With his best years arguably behind him, I am disappointed that I probably won’t live to see any meaningful progress towards those problems in my lifetime.

[Anonymous No.11298517]

ITT people who haven't achieved anything talking down on other people's achievements.

[Anonymous No.11298538]

>>11298002
>twin prime conjecture or Riemann Hypothesis, P vs NP
Probably requirres developing whole new never thought of before framework, that takes a touch of insanity and dedication.

I think people like Tao ultimately are just good at solving puzzles with pieces that are already there, idk

[Anonymous No.11298548]

>>11296784
Almost the only way you get respect on /sci is to go on talkshows and multiply large numbers in your head. Why is he not doing anything like that?

[Anonymous No.11298730]

>>11297280

> Tao had fucking Erdos living with him as a personal tutor.

Holy shit, somebody needs to stop asian parents

[Anonymous No.11298759]

>>11298002
I think he has explicitly written about solving big risky problems versus incremental shorter problems

[Anonymous No.11298778]

>>11296784
His textbooks are the worst i've read

[Anonymous No.11298979]

>>11297541
What is the context of your pic? Care to explain?

[Anonymous No.11299006]

>>11296902
>I UM SMART!!!! SMART, YOU HEAR ME??? DONT TREAT ME LIKE A STRANGER ON THE INTERNET, YOU HAVE TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THINGS I ALREADY KNOW, BECAUSE OTHERWISE I FEEL INSECURE ABOUT ALL THE TIME IT TOOK ME LEARNING THE SUBJECT

[Anonymous No.11299073]

>>11296784
Meme. Savant at best but I think not even that is true. He's good, but not particularly more than his contemporaries.

[Anonymous No.11299082]

>>11296827
Compressed sensing has nothing to do with him, just like you wouldn't credit Jacques Dubochet (one of the inventors of cryo-em) with the invention of the microscope, not to mention he wasn't exactly the sole author on the paper that showed you can use compressed sensing more efficiently than once thought.
Beside, compressed sensing is pretty memetic in and of itself.

[Anonymous No.11299096]

>>11298002
>It’s impressive that he somehow manages like 5 first author publications last year despite being a professor.
In math, authorship is usually in alphabetical order, so there's no real concept of "first author", because even a seemingly inconsequential contribution can be instrumental to unblock a problem. He could have contributed a lot, or almost nothing, or absolutely nothing but have forced himself unto papers, or participated in other schemes (you name me, I name you - we both get 5 papers this year instead of 2 and 3 respectively). Generally, the more papers a prof is on, the least likely it is he has been involved in any of them, for obvious and less obvious reasons both.

[Anonymous No.11299856]

>>11296829
this post is too powerful

[Anonymous No.11299877]

>>11296829
i have to admit, i came to realize a lot of the motivations of my pursuits (along with an interest in subject material) were a desire to eventually reach a vague egotistical image i had of myself as some big brain mofo so i would have an excuse to feel superior to some vague mass of people. oh well doesnt matter now ive come to realize i never had what it takes to make it as an academic whether it was discipline or smarts, i hope i have killed this egotistical part of me and matured.

[Anonymous No.11300047]

>>11296784
Pretty sad that a proven genius can contribute nearly nothing to modern mathematics. In previous centuries he'd have contributed a fucking ton, probably. There's basically nothing left to do except mental masturbation.

[Anonymous No.11300063]

>>11296829
>>11296832
>>11297690
>>11299856
>t. welders who think being 120 IQ in a room of ~100 IQ is more fulfilling and productive than being 120 IQ in a room of 140 IQ

[Anonymous No.11300117]

>>11299082
>in and of itself.

[Anonymous No.11300124]

>>11300047
>There's basically nothing left to do
There's a lot of famous unsolved problems you utter mong.

[Anonymous No.11300646]

>>11299096
That was my bad I meant single author publications. He is undoubtedly a genius just not the type of genius I was hoping for.

[Anonymous No.11300665]

>>11298759
He has written about it but it sounds to me like he is scared of getting stuck for years without making progress. I think unfortunately that that is a requirement for some of those hard problems and he seems unwilling to tackle them even though he probably could get away with a multi-year sabbatical to tackle a fundamental problem that simply requires a longer term plan. I would think that’s the type of problem tenured professors should tackle. Funnily enough he says that most people shouldn’t pursue a hard problem like that except when they are well established in the field like he is.

It would really be tragic that he be in fact a genius of the level of von Neumann that is limited not by intellect but by lack of ambition and risk aversion.

[Anonymous No.11300762]

>>11296822
both are equally trash and jewish.

>>11296784
his fields medal is impressive (watch that one numberphile vid) but what ive seen on his work are his notes on lin alg and real analysis and he writes very well and with the perfect amount of intuition

[Anonymous No.11300778]

>>11300063
I'd rather be 90 IQ in a room of 80 IQ than 150 IQ in a room of 151 IQ.
I wouldn't be here otherwise.

[Anonymous No.11300832]

>>11300778
Your're saying that you'd rather be 90 than 150.
I bet that's an improvement in either case.

[Anonymous No.11300848]

>>11297467
Reminds me of comfypunk. Got an archive?

[Anonymous No.11300849]

>>11298979
I think its childs skull. U can see 2 sets of teeth, milk and permanent.

[Anonymous No.11300888]

>>11299006
This. I'm honestly in shock at how hard >>11296902 >>11297206 is trying to damage control.
Even in highly specialized talks (e.g. group seminars), people still start from some level of fundamentals to make sure everyone is on the same page. The fact that you have to point out what you think are patronizing offhand remark, and then go into damage control the moment you're called out for it, on an anonymous imageboard no less, tells me enough about your mental maturity. And obviously, it's clear to everyone else as well.
tl;dr get your head out of your ass and quit larping

[Anonymous No.11300910]

>>11300848
lolya
>>11299574

[Anonymous No.11301761]

>>11300849
>milk teeth
>roots
wot

[Anonymous No.11301865]

>>11300063
nah not a welder, and i dont think what you just said, how did you make that assumption? i think its good to spend time with people smarter than you, the good point i was noting was pursuit of sciences for egotistical purposes and the mental challenges that arise as a result. if you deliberately surround yourself with dumber people to flex youre massively insecure

[Anonymous No.11301882]

>>11300047
We haven't even begun

[Anonymous No.11302074]

>>11300117
>I don't know who Kant is or how systems work: the post

[Anonymous No.11302675]

>>11301761
this is isn't /med/ I see

[Anonymous No.11302726]

>>11296906
>That's just the way I write, even on papers.
it makes your meaning clear, and easier to follow. I appreciate that.

[Anonymous No.11302777]

>>11300665

that's why major breakthrough are often done by outsiders, they can spend years on a problem without publishing anything

[Anonymous No.11302837]

>>11299877
jesus you hit it on the nail

[Anonymous No.11302999]

>>11302675
After some quick research, I didn't think it'd be like this. I never got any interest in dentistry, I forgive myself. After all, it's what I'd always been told.

[Anonymous No.11303028]

>>11298778
this, desu