/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.6422117]

Name someone smarter then Einstein.
>protip : you can't

[Anonymous No.6422120]

>>6422117
Issac Newton
Henry cavendish

[Anonymous No.6422121]

>>6422120
Relatively speaking

[Anonymous No.6422122]

>>6422117
Well I am.
Also because of Flynn effect, it is also a not so strange thing.

[Anonymous No.6422135]

You're right, I can't.

Einstein is by far the greatest genius to grace this earth.

[Anonymous No.6422154]

jacob barnett and that new 2 year old kid whose IQ is higher than einstein's

[Anonymous No.6422157]

>>6422117
Euler
Gauss
de Broglie
Lorentz
Fitzgerald
Maxwell
Poincare
Hamilton
Bohm


...there, that was easy.

[Anonymous No.6422158]

>>6422117
There's no such thing as being 'smarter' than someone, since intelligence is a social construct. The only reason Einstein made contributions to science is because daddy paid for his education

[Anonymous No.6422174]

>>6422158
>intelligence is a social construct
Is there any basis for this

[Anonymous No.6422183]

Too bad OP, the oracle at Delphi already declared Socrates as the wisest being of all time.

>Einsteinfags getting BTFO

[Anonymous No.6422189]

>>6422158

It's not too hard to understand what you are "studying", unless you are a troll, of course.

[Anonymous No.6422210]

>>6422117

Oh look, it's this thread again. First, the definition and measurement of intelligence is left undefined by you, so you're really not off to a good start.

I could name plenty of people have contributed more to society than Einstein... I can also name plenty of people who contribute less to society, or nothing (I'm looking at you, OP).

Nobody cares about raw intelligence besides oneself and/or people who can put that intelligence to good use. "Oh I heard some random person who does something useless has the highest IQ ever!" Great, nobody cares, unless you're going to give him/her an opportunity to solve a problem that actually matters, or if he/she himself/herself is creating those opportunities (i.e. doing research in his/her spare time).

Time and time again, people post stupid IQ/intelligence bullshit. Instead of wasting your time on /sci/ with this shit, try to do something with your life.

[Anonymous No.6422215]

>>6422210
Einstein basically solved the mysterys of the universe.
He figured out the forces that govern us, what atoms are and shit no one else could come close to understanding.

His contributions are up there with anyones.

Do not disrespect his genius.

[Anonymous No.6422214]

Ludwig Wittgenstein

[Anonymous No.6422220]

>>6422215
kek

[Anonymous No.6422221]

>>6422215

>what atoms are and shit no one else could come close to understanding.

Lol, learn some history of science.

But yeah, his contributions are up there, but at the top, it's pretty much impossible to compare.

Although I would like to add to my previous comment:
>>6422210

That I ignored the sheer amount of luck involved with having the opportunities to apply intelligence.

[Anonymous No.6422237]

Einstein's IQ is only 160. There are literally millions of people smarter than him by definition.

[Anonymous No.6422241]

John von Neumann

[Anonymous No.6422251]

I always thought riemann was p smart

[Anonymous No.6422250]

>>6422241
I second.

[Anonymous No.6422252]

>>6422241
von Neumann and Einstein had office pretty near each other. Einstein complained to the administration because von Neumann liked to work with German marching music blaring in his office.

[Anonymous No.6422257]

>>6422214
This. Ludo's supposed to have had an IQ of 190.

[Anonymous No.6422261]

>>6422257
>>>/x/
You don't know what that number means, if you think it can be measured.

[Anonymous No.6422264]

[Anonymous No.6422293]

>>6422117

It's a team effort that spans generations, you can't say one is smarter than the other, considering the ease of obtaining information today and the fact that many of the modern discoveries wouldn't have happened if not for discoveries done by the previous generation(s).

[Anonymous No.6422299]

>>6422241
>fucked up his so called "proof" of the nonexistence of QM hidden variables
>genius
I chuckled.

[Anonymous No.6422317]

off the top of my head lorentz boltzmann maxwell newton and that's without going into the mathematicians

[Anonymous No.6422330]

newton, euler, riemann, gauss, neumann, planck are possible contenders

[Anonymous No.6422339]

[Anonymous No.6422348]

Feynman, Paul Dirac, Fermi, Lev Landau, Witten, Andrew Wiles...

[Anonymous No.6422352]

>>6422348
dirac is the only legit one in there

please..

[Anonymous No.6422354]

Me.

[Anonymous No.6422360]

>>6422354
>Still waiting for the hate to roll in.