Is this a scientifically accurate ranking?

File: 1.65 MB, 1340x2458, 1481986609989.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Fri Dec 15 18:51:18 2017 No.9370485 [Reply] [Original]

Is this a scientifically accurate ranking?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:17:23 2017 No.9370553 >no erdos

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:20:35 2017 No.9370563 >Einstein >Mid-tier what do you think ?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:22:44 2017 No.9370568 >>9370563 the competition is fierce at the upper levels. Einstein does not make the cut

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:29:10 2017 No.9370590 >>9370568 lol, don't be so obvious next time /pol/.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:30:14 2017 No.9370593 >>9370485 newfag here , why is Darwin at the bottom ?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:31:08 2017 No.9370595 >>9370593 Because OP is angry at atheists.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:33:01 2017 No.9370600 >>9370485 Looks pretty good to me.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:33:45 2017 No.9370602 Where is Barnett?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:36:01 2017 No.9370606 >>9370485 To answer your question: No.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:36:24 2017 No.9370607 >>9370485 Why are deGrasse Tyson and Sagan there? They are communicators, not academics. You might as well put Picasso or Van Gogh in that too.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:38:07 2017 No.9370613 >>9370485 >Lagrange >Low-tier >Darwin >Shit-tier Top kek OP

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:38:54 2017 No.9370614 >>9370607 >Carl Edward Sagan (/ˈseJɡən/; November 9, 1934 – December 20, 1996) was an American astronomer, cosmologist, astrophysicist, astrobiologist, >Neil deGrasse Tyson (/ˈniːl dəˈɡræs ˈtaJsən/; born October 5, 1958) is an American astrophysicist,

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:39:23 2017 No.9370616 >>9370600 You left your glasses here m8

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:41:35 2017 No.9370619 >>9370616 Now that I took another look, I'd place Cauchy in demi-god -tier. Otherwise it's perfect.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:41:35 2017 No.9370620 >Grothendieck >Not at least Wiser Gods of the Olympus-tier

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:44:05 2017 No.9370627 >>9370485 >Laplace in low-tier >not even a mention of based Kelvin, Boltzmann and Gibbs >total memelords pretty bad/10

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:47:04 2017 No.9370632 >>9370485 This has been bothering me for a while... What the fuck kind of headwear is Euler wearing? His boxer briefs?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:47:24 2017 No.9370633 >>9370485 What's so great about Archimedes?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:53:28 2017 No.9370645 >>9370633 He literally derived and used simplified forms of calculus to solve geometric problems, almost two millennia before Leibniz and Newton.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:56:53 2017 No.9370655 >>9370645 no way holy shit there's a surprising numbers of things like that, like Pascal's triangle is thousands of years old

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:58:26 2017 No.9370656 >>9370485 >Dirac below Feynman You fell for the memes. The only reason anybody outside of quantum physicists care about Feynman is because he was a chad.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 19:59:50 2017 No.9370660 File: 3.14 MB, 2493x2398, FieldsMedalFront.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9370633 his face is on the fields medal

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:01:08 2017 No.9370662 Why is Galois so high? And no Cedric Villani?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:03:50 2017 No.9370669 >Darwin and Dawkins are shit tier This list was obviously made by a creationist

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:07:08 2017 No.9370673 >>9370485 Way too many of them are too low.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:10:04 2017 No.9370677 >>9370485 Not even nikola, seriously. Einstein is in the mid tier. Darwin, Tyson and Dawkins shit-tier, common man.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:11:46 2017 No.9370684 File: 56 KB, 645x729, d27.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9370669 >Dawkins is one of the greatest minds of our generation, only creationists disagree

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:14:06 2017 No.9370690 >>9370677 This, except Tyson and Dawkins. They belong there, same with Nye. Also, no Boltzmann?

Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:19:09 2017 No.9370705
File: 1.00 MB, 1716x1710, 43.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9370684
Wrong dummy, nobody's saying Dawkins should be listed as a great scientist, they're saying the list was obviously put together by a creationist because he felt the need to come up with a bunch of atheists to put at the bottom. Someone without an agenda like that wouldn't even mention Dawkins.
This whole ranking post is basically just a rehash of pic related.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:20:14 2017 No.9370707 >>9370660 damn, I underestimated him I always thought of him as the crazy streaker who discovered density

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:21:39 2017 No.9370709 >>9370705 welcome to the internet, where everything is shilling this holds for the real world too

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:22:05 2017 No.9370710 >>9370705 there are plenty of atheists in higher tiers

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:47:18 2017 No.9370749 Cauchy deserves demi-god tier desu, all of complex was influenced by him

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:52:37 2017 No.9370761 >>9370485 >newton >euler >gauss >riemann >fourier all god-tier legends

Anonymous Fri Dec 15 20:55:01 2017 No.9370768

>>9370632

"In this picture Euler is portrayed wearing a bag wig tied with a black ribbon. This style was customary for fashionable men from the 1660s to the later 18th century for those who could afford this expensive item of personal grooming. Wigs required considerable upkeep as well: a barber to shave the head and to powder the wig, which was replaced or restyled every year."

From Leonhard Euler: Life, Work and Legacy

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 21:01:02 2017 No.9370775 Why is Bernoulli so low?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 21:05:38 2017 No.9370785 >>9370485 >Bohr not in the talentless hacks tier basically nothing he thought in his entire life was correct

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 21:07:27 2017 No.9370790 >>9370485 fuck i wanna be a legendary mathematician. too bad im a fucking brainlet retard who spends his time on 4chan

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 21:09:28 2017 No.9370798 >>9370485 I like de broglie but Schrodinger rapes his ass

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 21:16:05 2017 No.9370814 >>9370485 Darwin does not deserve to be in shit-tier. His scientific contributions to biology are astronomical.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 21:19:18 2017 No.9370820 >>9370614 both wrong

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 21:22:45 2017 No.9370826 >>9370814 But he's an atheist so he's shit tier.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 21:40:56 2017 No.9370854 >>9370485 >demigod tier >newton nigga what

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 21:56:00 2017 No.9370887 >>9370826 How does that invalidate his scientific contributions?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 22:05:48 2017 No.9370903 >>9370887 Because it does.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 22:07:54 2017 No.9370909 >>9370854 are you saying he isn't worthy of that?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 22:09:09 2017 No.9370911 File: 28 KB, 180x133, 180px-No_computer_no_science.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I couldn't help but notice that you left out Ada Lovelace, the world's first computer scientist!

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 22:15:54 2017 No.9370923 >>9370485 >Newton higher than Leibniz the eternal anglo strikes again.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 23:33:33 2017 No.9371068 >>9370485 Why are there no Asians besides Tao?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 23:39:26 2017 No.9371082 File: 545 KB, 572x703, 829nd9832n89.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Where's Shinichi Mochizuki??

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 23:41:07 2017 No.9371087 >>9371082 top right corner

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 23:41:50 2017 No.9371089 >>9370485 >no pythagoras inventing abstraction kek

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 23:43:01 2017 No.9371093 >>9371087 left****

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 23:45:34 2017 No.9371100 >>9370485 >darwin >bernoulli >laplace >rutherford >fermi >leibniz >einstein >dirac >feynman >bayes >lower than maxwell, heisenberg, galileo, cauchy, shrodinger, galois, turing, archimedes and cantor Shits all fucked up

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 15 23:46:37 2017 No.9371101 >>9370775 OP is fucked up in the head

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 00:05:57 2017 No.9371146 >Wiles above Fermat

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 00:08:14 2017 No.9371152 >>9371146 What wiles did is infinitely more impressive than anything Fermat did.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 00:12:04 2017 No.9371156 >>9370485 no. it's fucked up

Anonymous Sat Dec 16 00:12:16 2017 No.9371157

>>9370485
>Any of them besides Krauss, Dawking or Tyson
being subpar tier or below
>Tao with Einstein
>Dirac not high tier
>Galileo not based tier
>Heisenberg not based tier
>Schrodinger not based tier
>Archimedes even included
>Riemann not olympus tier
>Mendeleev not based tier
>Descartes not Olympus tier

You have a long way to go before you accurately rank the greats.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 00:16:06 2017 No.9371167 >>9371157 Without Archimedes about another 10,000+ years til humans discover calculus.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 00:26:44 2017 No.9371187 >>9371167 >An ancient greek contributed anything that wasn't obvious by the 11th century Europe and Asia You must be joking.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 01:12:49 2017 No.9371276 >>9371187 OMFG you absolute fucking brainlet. IF ARCHIMEDES DIDN'T EXIST THEN THE MATH WOULDN'T BE OBVIOUS FUCKTARD

Anonymous Sat Dec 16 01:50:17 2017 No.9371351

>>9370485
Galileo should be demigod tier tbqh
>>9370705
I wouldn’t be surprised if the quotes on the right are cherrypicked but the I can only agree with the views on the left. Why do you relate these images to anti atheism? at least Einstein always shied away from being labeled as religious

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 02:03:48 2017 No.9371381 >>9370485 No, but it's scientifically accurate b8.

Anonymous Sat Dec 16 02:18:38 2017 No.9371421

Ask a guy who has collaborated with Sagan anything.

I don't really know if you all consider Planetary Science to be valuable enough to merit this list, but Sagan was brilliant.

His research tremendously increased our understanding of multiple bodies in the Solar System.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 02:32:24 2017 No.9371473 >>9370485 Very stimulating b8, almost warranted an actual response. On the other hand, sage

Anonymous Sat Dec 16 03:13:05 2017 No.9371542

>>9370485
>Turing & Von Neumann above Ramanujan & Grothendieck
>Einstein in mid-tier
>Dirac, Feynmann & Fermi below Schrödinger & Planck
>popularizer considered as scientists and put in shit-tier

So... how is your freshman's year going ?

Bonus :
>Newton not on the same level as Leibniz

Anonymous Sat Dec 16 03:28:14 2017 No.9371561

>>9370485
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE ITS A SHIT LIST because its too biased for mathematicians. Einstein's 4 papers in his miracle year alone grants him at least olympus tier. Wile's FLT is pretty op but it's next to useless. Archimedes should be way lower than Euler/Gauss/Newton. Without Mendel our biology would fall back at least 100 years - so no vaccines, antibiotics, cancer treatments - life expectancy would be like 40 years.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 04:05:33 2017 No.9371598 >>9370593 Darwin was a hyped up biologist. Biology is trash tier.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 04:08:31 2017 No.9371602 >>9371561 >Wile's FLT is pretty op but it's next to useless Why do you spout bullshit about things you obviously don't know anything about? Techniques he developed for the proof are used in the cutting edge of number theory all the damn time.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 04:12:03 2017 No.9371605 >>9371602 >implying number theory is useful

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 04:17:03 2017 No.9371608 maxwell higher. groethendick higher. cantor one higher imho. einstein higher... dont be edgy tao lower ramanujan lower

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 04:22:51 2017 No.9371610 File: 18 KB, 600x600, e9d.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9370785 ?

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 04:28:37 2017 No.9371612 >>9370485 Congrats OP you made me angry you really did it good job

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 06:52:50 2017 No.9371727 >>9371561 >Einstein >Anything but Result stealing kike -tier The only thing he did was bring some important results, by other people, into light.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 07:47:07 2017 No.9371778 File: 151 KB, 400x382, 14912959479845.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I think you've forgotten someone

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 07:48:17 2017 No.9371782 >>9371727 he came up with general relativity.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 07:55:28 2017 No.9371785 >>9370923 This

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 07:59:38 2017 No.9371789 File: 17 KB, 236x264, nature boi.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9370485 kys

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 11:24:01 2017 No.9372020 File: 237 KB, 755x1543, sci 'eisteins' theory of relativity.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9371782 >"came up with"

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 11:25:02 2017 No.9372021 >>9371276 Pure speculation.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 12:06:14 2017 No.9372081 >>9370485 It's a scientifically accurate ranking as much as a sequence of random pictures of random scientists.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 13:04:28 2017 No.9372235 Cantor should be one of the wiser gods

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 13:07:53 2017 No.9372239 >>9372020 How exactly would someone be able to take an already published scientific paradigm, copy it, and magically get recognized as the one who originally came up with it? Why isn't everyone doing that?

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 13:33:59 2017 No.9372290 >>9372239 Kike nepotism.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 13:37:35 2017 No.9372303 >>9372290 And how exactly did kikes get into a position to where they could arbitrarily make a guy famous for ripping off an already published idea? Is there just an infinite chain of nepotism going back through the past with no beginning?

Anonymous Sat Dec 16 13:47:16 2017 No.9372324

>>9372303

Pretty much, yeah. Whites tried their best to get rid of white in-group preference so everyone would have the equality of opportunity. The Jews saw this and started abusing the system, guilting whites for in-group preference while practising it among themselves. They quickly took over the press, journals, universities, politics, etc, which gave them the power to do exactly that.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 13:47:49 2017 No.9372325 There should be a cheater tier. As far as I remember, a few years ago it was discovered that Mendel manipulated his statistics.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 13:50:30 2017 No.9372329 >>9372290 brainlet

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 13:55:28 2017 No.9372344 File: 34 KB, 500x500, 1369409184838.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Lagrange low-tier yea lets ignore 1/6th of all maths..

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 14:36:52 2017 No.9372427 >>9372020 lol

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 14:54:47 2017 No.9372469 >>9372427 It's funny because it's true.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 15:13:01 2017 No.9372500 >>9372469 No it's not. It's funny because the creator of the meme is clinically retarded.

>>	Amon Sat Dec 16 15:21:04 2017 No.9372513 >>9370595 this. OP is a pathetic christfag

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 15:49:11 2017 No.9372580 >>9370705 >>9370684 Dawkins deserves to be on the list just because he created the term "meme" and it's actually served a valuable purpose in multiple fields of science as well as social studies.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 15:58:05 2017 No.9372599 >>9370614 They are graduated at STEM but their career was not in research. It's like calling Edward Witten a historian.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 16:12:56 2017 No.9372630 File: 29 KB, 741x568, 1493420229495.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Ayyy yo where Euler at?

Anonymous Sat Dec 16 16:16:23 2017 No.9372635
File: 103 KB, 513x641, genius.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9370485
Although having Archimedes placed at the very top makes me harder than diamonds, having people like LaPlace, Einstein, and Faraday at the bottom while Turing, Riemann, and Poincare are at the top triggers me like no other.

Also, although these are very smart people, Krauss, Dawkins, Tyson, and Sagan don't belong on this list at all for obvious reasons. They are incomparable to the rest of the list, so they can't be called shit.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 16:19:43 2017 No.9372641 >>9372630 Right there on the second row, where he belongs.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 16:21:39 2017 No.9372644 >>9372641 I should read the source material more closely before commenting I agree with his placement though

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 16:27:40 2017 No.9372653 >>9370485 >Tao above Lagrange wtf has Tao done

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 17:23:18 2017 No.9372772 >>9372653 green-tao theorem compressed sensing

Anonymous Sat Dec 16 18:04:15 2017 No.9372886

>>9372500
"As far back as 1895, Poincaré, the innovator, had conjectured that it is impossible to detect absolute motion", and that "In 1900, he introduced 'the principle of relative motion' which he later called by the equivalent terms 'the law of relativity' and 'the principle of relativity' in his book, Science and Hypothesis, published in 1902". Einstein acknowledged NONE* of this preceding theoretical work when he wrote his unreferenced 1905 paper.

(*Emphasis added)

Even Keswani-Origin and Concept of Relativity 1965

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 18:43:37 2017 No.9372991 File: 1.78 MB, 320x228, 1509369730210.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9370485 If your goal was to bait with garbage rankings then you did a fine job

Anonymous Sat Dec 16 20:11:27 2017 No.9373190

>>9372886
>Poincaré
There's a difference between mentioning a topic in philosophical writings vs. actually writing up a new kinematics that doesn't depend on the existence aether.
Poincaré's *physical* papers never abandoned aether. You can see in his own words that he only imagined in a vague sense what Einstein would rigorously accomplish and thought of it as something someone else would figure out in the future:
>It matters little whether the ether really exists: that is the affair of the metaphysicians. The essential thing for us is that everything happens as if it existed, and that this hypothesis is convenient for us for the explanation of the phenomena. After all, have we any other reason to believe in the existence of material objects? That too, is only a convenient hypothesis; only this will never cease to do so, whereas, no doubt, some day the ether will be thrown aside as useless.
By the loose standard you're trying to go off of, Newton "plagiarized" Aristotle.

Anonymous Sat Dec 16 20:33:14 2017 No.9373229

>>9370485
I'm fine with it. Einstein belongs a little higher up maybe. And Darwin doesn't deserve the shit tier, either leave him out completely or don't put him at the same tier with Tyson. Evolution is an important principle that even has application beyond life. Furthermore, earthly life has been there for more than 1/4 of the time the universe exists, that's an astronomical time span. Life has to be included when thinking about the universe as a whole.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 20:38:16 2017 No.9373241 >>9370485 THis is fuckkeedd

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 20:39:47 2017 No.9373247 File: 125 KB, 310x353, Carl_Friedrich_Gauß_10_DM.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9370485 Mfw there are guys from my university in tier 2,3 and 4 and I had BBQ next to their graves.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 20:40:37 2017 No.9373249 >>9370485 euler gets credit for a lot of shit he didnt do. Schrodinger also wtf ^Maxwell how bout fucking Heaviside???

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 21:50:42 2017 No.9373398 >>9370485 Why is Gandalf on the list, and why is he labelled as Grotiendieck?

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 21:59:31 2017 No.9373416 File: 3.04 MB, 2116x1780, TRINITY--all--762.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 22:00:27 2017 No.9373418 >>9370568 lmao >kelper > einstein back to pol retard

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 22:05:13 2017 No.9373433 >>9370909 placing newton lower than archimedes just cause the latter came before him is a stupid way to measure them 1:1 newton is definitely the most influential figure on that entire list for his individual contributions

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 22:06:35 2017 No.9373435 >>9370485 I don't know anything about Mochizuki beyond pop sci stuff. Why is he so hated on this board? Just interested.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 22:07:01 2017 No.9373437 >>9371276 >>>/lit/

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 22:08:20 2017 No.9373442 >>9372290 >>>/pol/

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 22:22:17 2017 No.9373462 >>9370485 Why is schrodinger so high? How is he above Maxwell?

Anonymous Sat Dec 16 22:22:30 2017 No.9373463

>>9372020
he said "General Relativity" brainlet, and talking about Special relativity, yeah, the formulatión and everything was there before Einstein, but he was the one who made an explanation, not just random equations crafted to match the experimental data.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 22:26:16 2017 No.9373470 >>9370485 >Darwin placed next to fucking tyson retard. Darwin was brilliant.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 22:26:33 2017 No.9373471 >>9373190 >>9373435 /Sci/ hates popsci.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 22:43:00 2017 No.9373489 >>9373471 I know. But Mochizuki doesn't do any pop sci, right? Thought he was quite shy, not even willing to eat with the 50 mathematicians on his meeting/conference.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 22:53:31 2017 No.9373506 >>9371542 >Believing that Von Neuman and Turing contributed less than Pajeetramudan t. Pajeet

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 22:56:38 2017 No.9373512 >>9370614 so is steve brown and pajeet darpajeetadajinadan and 2 million other people across the globe who also aren't worth of being on this list.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 23:36:03 2017 No.9373607 >>9370485 >lagrange and laplace below the quantum morons Shit ranking.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 23:46:24 2017 No.9373620 >>9370485 >hurr Einstein midtier >hurr Ramanujan “based tier” >hurr maxwell not demi-god tier you’re ao fucking stupid, please fucking never post again you absolute mongoloid

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 16 23:47:34 2017 No.9373624 >>9373607 math is science

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 00:12:28 2017 No.9373669 >>9370485 i know it's just a shit post but where is Euclid. if anything i would put him where archimedes is

Anonymous Sun Dec 17 07:40:33 2017 No.9374263

>>9373190
cogent point. Poincare never abandoned aether.
I have no hatred or disdain for Einstein. The infographic seems like more of a jab at how Einstein is depicted as the alpha and omega of scientists in pop-science circles and k12 education in the US.
I agree with you,
but your example isn't entirely applicable either.

Newton and Aristotle were not contemporaries..
and
Newton warmly acknowledged Aristotle's (and other thinkers) contributions to his work...
Shoulders of giants

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 07:46:26 2017 No.9374273 >>9373442 >Ignoring facts because you don't like them What are on doing on a science board?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 08:07:04 2017 No.9374290 Why the hate on Einstein? If your only reason is "he iz a kike gas his ass" then >>>/pol/

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 08:08:21 2017 No.9374292 Leibniz subpar-tier?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 08:31:07 2017 No.9374301 >>9374290 Maybe read the thread?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 08:32:29 2017 No.9374306 >>9370485 >street shitting indian above glorious aryan master race pure blooded german superior jewish einstine

Anonymous Sun Dec 17 08:39:31 2017 No.9374314

>all these shitters crying about Einstein not being in >le popsci told me Einstein was the smartest guy evar XD -tier, despite him being fairly placed in the middle and not in the bottom as some irrelevant fraud, which he wasn't.

The absolute state of /sci/.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 09:25:18 2017 No.9374363 Vote for SENS and LEAF for P4 A 2017!,, http://www.projectforawesome.com/?charity=7RGRgIDG

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 09:55:01 2017 No.9374398 >Hausdorff not even listed >Grothendieck not Penultimate Ancient Super Creator - tier trash

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 09:55:42 2017 No.9374399 >>9374314 >I'm a true science fanboy because I think Einstein is overrated >also check out my biology degree yeah that's right >what do you mean relativity, you mean as in we all have different opinions on the same topic?

Anonymous Sun Dec 17 10:06:01 2017 No.9374409

>>9374314
>Einstein was a fraud
This meme is retarded and based on not knowing the difference between vague informal ideas mentioned in passing vs. actual rigorously defined kinematics.
I can't even begin to imagine how cartoonish and simple your worldview is for you to be able to think some idiot fraud walked up to Science Headquarters one day and had his sneaky jew friends there give him credit for a bunch of already existing ideas.
Maybe, hypothetically, that scenario never happened and the reason Einstein received a lot of praise and credit for his work is because he deserved a lot of praise and credit for his work. Wow, wouldn't that be crazy? But no, it's always a conspiracy with you contrarian faggots.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 10:07:48 2017 No.9374414 >>9370485 >Turing Demi-god >Church and Post nowhere to be seen take your list and shove it up your communist asshole saged

Anonymous Sun Dec 17 10:47:44 2017 No.9374470

>>9374399

>Not a single line without a logical fallacy.
If you ever wonder why people don't take you seriously, this is why.

>>9374409

I wrote that in a bit wonky way. The end was supposed to state that Einstein wasn't a fraud. Still, go suck the cocks of your jewish overlords somewhere else.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 11:47:35 2017 No.9374612 >>9370620 Right? Is this list meant to be bait or is OP just autistic?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 18:47:33 2017 No.9375626 >>9370632 >His boxer briefs? I fucking laughed because I always think he’s wearing a folded up pair of pants whenever I see that picture

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 18:56:13 2017 No.9375640 >>9370705 Is Krauss doing standup act?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 19:01:45 2017 No.9375649 >>9371421 I agree he should be much higher on the list >>9373416 What kind of abstract shitpost is this?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 19:06:19 2017 No.9375658 Why is Lagrange so low?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 19:06:53 2017 No.9375661 >>9374409 Laughed so hard reading this

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 19:39:12 2017 No.9375707 Where is Clairaut?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 19:40:16 2017 No.9375708 Where is DeMoivre?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 19:44:54 2017 No.9375715 >>9375707 >>9375708 While impressive in hindsight, their contributions to some meme sub-fields do not warrant a place on this list. They'd be mid-high on their sub-field lists.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 19:47:01 2017 No.9375717 >>9370485 Where am I?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 19:50:20 2017 No.9375724 >>9370826 >Darwin next to tyson wtf op

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 19:50:27 2017 No.9375725 >>9370662 >Cedric Villani Wtf no

Anonymous Sun Dec 17 20:15:19 2017 No.9375770
File: 5 KB, 250x250, REEEEEEEEE.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9370485
>Darwin in the same tier as Tyson, Dawkins, Krauss, and Sagan

WTF OP? Those are a bunch of celebrity scientists that haven't contributed shit. Darwin postulated man evolving from apes at a time when he was lucky not to be burned alive for that idea. He also predicted the existence of DNA nearly half a century before it was discovered. Have some respect!

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 20:17:45 2017 No.9375777 >>9370485 >Descartes >not shit tier >Darwin >shit tier Not even close.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 20:50:11 2017 No.9375838 >>9370485 I know it's a meme but whenever I see Darwin in shit tier levels on lists like these it always triggers me without fail

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 20:51:53 2017 No.9375841 >>9370485 >Einstein Faraday mid >Leibniz subpar No

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 20:56:22 2017 No.9375850 >>9375770 Dawkins is not as bad as Tyson but both don't even belong on a pic of top scientists, also op's pic is too westerner

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 20:58:16 2017 No.9375852 >>9370485 >157 comments >no one knows what penultimate means fucking illiterate engineering niggers ruining this board

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 21:00:22 2017 No.9375854 >>9375852 I too have read the series of unfortunate events, retarded ending desu

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 21:00:24 2017 No.9375855 >>9372020 Fucking idiot, none of them did what Einstein intended to do

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 21:08:19 2017 No.9375866 Why Kepler so low? Fuck off

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 21:23:47 2017 No.9375887 >>9370485 This list is rather pedestrian.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 17 22:04:24 2017 No.9375962 File: 418 KB, 575x573, pegg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9370485 >Wiles above Faraday >Tao above Rutherford and Leibniz >no mention of Lavoisier or Boltzmann Unreadable

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 01:48:10 2017 No.9376335 >>9375887 You literally have no idea who 80% of them are and what they contributed.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 03:15:39 2017 No.9376434 >>9375852 I assumed that OP meant penultimate as in second to god or some horseshit like that

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 03:24:52 2017 No.9376444 Planck should be on Demi God tier

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 03:28:11 2017 No.9376449 >>9370485 >no Curie eat a dick

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 03:34:31 2017 No.9376452 >>9376449 Curie would have to go far below darwin but above those popsci people, no reason to extend the list even further

Anonymous Mon Dec 18 03:35:02 2017 No.9376453

>>9370705
But the Krauss quote is entirely accurate, nobody reads what the philosophy of science field produces. In fact philosophers of science complain about that all the time.

In fact everybody who posts this picture should give an example of a contemporary philosopher of science they have read.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 03:36:33 2017 No.9376455 >>9375962 >>9370485 WHERE THE FUCK IS JUAN MALDACENA SUSSKIND TOLD ME HE WAS THE SHIT

Anonymous Mon Dec 18 04:27:57 2017 No.9376491
File: 600 KB, 593x665, 1504190281899.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9370485
>Cantor
>Hilbert
>not at most mid-tier
Henri the Intuitive Engineer and last Polymath Poincare >>Isuck the turn-my-urine-into-gold alchemist Newton
>>9370607
This.
>>9371146
This.
>>9372020
THIS.
Also, Archimedes just learnt from Thales who learnt from the Babylonian tradition of mathematics and construction surveying, He's at most a translator and technician.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 05:54:45 2017 No.9376559 Why is laplace so low?

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 06:27:15 2017 No.9376574 File: 368 KB, 3000x3000, 1509492763768.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9375777

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 06:29:26 2017 No.9376576 >>9375852 I haven't read any comment about that word specifically nor do I know why anyone should bring it up. Why are you mad?

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 12:54:56 2017 No.9377037 >>9376444 I think Planck's good where he is. He's obviously great for making the observations that kick-started quantum physics, but his work was full of contradictory assumptions that had to be ironed out by other physicists.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 13:02:55 2017 No.9377048 >>9370485 >Cauchy in the middle Are you fucking kidding me? He should be at the top.

>>	Paid article Mon Dec 18 13:13:12 2017 No.9377066 File: 69 KB, 498x456, 1497469544594.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9370485 what did the balding chad japanese professor and Hawking do?

Anonymous Mon Dec 18 13:23:01 2017 No.9377081

>>9376574
Nah descartes is shit tier for his meme philosophy. "Cogito ergo sum" has misshaped western thought for far too long.

Darwin is a personal taste thing I guess. Bible bashers almost have to rate him there, but for me he's not as egregious as Dawkins or those other meme scientists there.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 13:34:21 2017 No.9377094 >>9377081 Who the fuck cares about his philosophy, we're talking /sci/ here. And his contributions to mathematics are far above shit tier.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 13:43:34 2017 No.9377111 Darwin IS shit-tier. Look under "notable ideas" on Anaximander: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaximander This guy lived like 2200 years before Darwin.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 14:52:10 2017 No.9377225 >>9371276 >being this mad

Anonymous Mon Dec 18 15:00:30 2017 No.9377236

>>9377111
>Darwin IS shit-tier. Look under "notable ideas" on Anaximander
You're an idiot and should avoid sharing your opinion going forward.
>The first animals were born trapped in a spiny bark, but as they got older, the bark would dry up and break. As the early humidity evaporated, dry land emerged and, in time, humankind had to adapt. >The 3rd century Roman writer Censorinus reports "Anaximander of Miletus considered that from warmed up water and earth emerged either fish or entirely fishlike animals. Inside these animals, men took form and embryos were held prisoners until puberty; only then, after these animals burst open, could men and women come out, now able to feed themselves."
>Anaximander put forward the idea that humans had to spend part of this transition inside the mouths of big fish to protect themselves from the Earth's climate until they could come out in open air and lose their scales.
How do so many anons here manage to convince themselves all these extremely well established great historical thinkers were secretly dumb plagiarists?

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 15:01:06 2017 No.9377240 >>9371598 >Biology is trash tier t. underachieving uni dropout jelly at his sister's biology degree should've put more effort in pal

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 18 20:23:38 2017 No.9377939 >>9370485 t. engineer fag

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 19 06:20:49 2017 No.9378913 >>9370593 His own ideas are so wack that Evolution has become Dualistic hodgepodge (Modern Synthesis) simply to avoid self-refutation.

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 19 06:48:59 2017 No.9378934 >>9374263 >infographic seems Infographic is retarded and misinforms people. The same as literally every pol image.

Anonymous Tue Dec 19 13:39:04 2017 No.9379607
File: 2.91 MB, 257x212, 1512968727803.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9371598
>hyped up biologist

he was an ecologist, but what he was is irrelevant, it's what he did; come up with the correct(ish) explanation for the origin of every living organism.

Anonymous Tue Dec 19 13:51:21 2017 No.9379641
File: 40 KB, 418x376, Archimedes_htm_m29b58180.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>9370485
>Be Me
>Archemedies
>Tfw the word Arch is literally in my name.
>Tfw Arch-Wizard.
>Tfw one day some faggot interrupts my God-Tier Autism.
>Trying to write it in sand cause' non of these faggots have any papyrus or stone in this fucking hut.
>"Come with me" He says.
>"I am too busy!"
>Keep making my diagram.
>Get plunged into the chest with a gladius.
>Die
At least I didn't have to take a bath.

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 19 15:26:14 2017 No.9379919 >>9370485 Put Hitler first.

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 19 15:30:28 2017 No.9379937 >>9370485 >fermat low tier >wiles good tier LOL!

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 19 15:35:22 2017 No.9379953 >>9370485 Why penultimate?

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 19 15:37:59 2017 No.9379963 why does this bait have so many replies sage

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 19 15:58:57 2017 No.9380032 >>9379919 >le egdgy faggot Could not even get into art school, you not even funny

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 19 16:05:51 2017 No.9380061 >>9379937 who was it that proved the conjecture again?

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 19 16:14:26 2017 No.9380098 isnt euclid the greatest mathemagician ever since he fed all the others cheat sheets?

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 19 17:30:21 2017 No.9380375 >>9370485 >Langrange >Laplace >Bernoulli >Fermat >Low-tier get out Also Tao should be in demigod tier

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 19 19:14:42 2017 No.9380575 >>9370485 >descartes high tier >muh soul lies in the amygdala >muh demon controlling me! >muh nutin is real >newton 2nd tier >died a virgin >drank mercury >darwin in the bottom along with pop-scientists 5/10

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 20 02:53:00 2017 No.9381257 >>9370485 >Newton >Higher than Einstein No. Einstein fucked his shit into oblivion. Hawking needs to be in shit-tier since he's done more to hinder science with his autistic bullshit than to progress it.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 20 02:54:02 2017 No.9381259 >>9370485 >Tao on the same level as Einstein Tao will be forgotten. Einstein was a god.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 20 03:42:43 2017 No.9381335 >>9374414 Get back to your containment board, /pol/. Church is forgotten.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 20 08:17:41 2017 No.9381631 >>9370485 Not-even-worth-mentionning-tier : Any "scientist" who believes in creationism

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 20 19:59:51 2017 No.9382889 why is watson > einstein

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 20 20:05:35 2017 No.9382895 Maxwell provided the theoretical fundamentals of electricity and magnetism, in which the modern world today are built upon How is Maxwell not higher tier

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 20 20:07:17 2017 No.9382900 >>9381259 Weak bait but I'll give you a pity (you). Ironic kike worshipping got old a few years ago.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 20 20:08:13 2017 No.9382901 >>9382895 The author of the image is probably a faggot math autist

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 20 20:08:53 2017 No.9382903 >>9378934 >reee it's wrong because I say so Oh man, this is supposed to be a science board. Why do people like you insist on coming here. We were having such a great time too.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 20 20:09:16 2017 No.9382906 File: 403 KB, 2048x1408, marie curie.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Where would she plot? She's the only woman who legitimately deserves to be on the list. At least she has to be higher than the 21st century pop sci celebs

Anonymous Wed Dec 20 20:14:16 2017 No.9382919

>>9382906

Elder god tier to promote gender equality obviously. Compared to the wussy men on the list, she had to fight patriarchy and break multiple bulletproof glass ceilings to get where she got. Had she been a male, she could've done literally anything.

Anonymous Wed Dec 20 20:18:29 2017 No.9382928
File: 1.57 MB, 1340x2458, 1513381878675.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

All experimentalists are brainlet bottom feeders

All they do is take other people's idea and try to prove them wrong (when it is proven not wrong, then the experimentalists join the bandwagon credit)

Theoreticists are the trailblazer of human progress

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 21 05:22:12 2017 No.9383892 >>9382928 >All experimentalists General statements like this are almost always wrong, so why be the fool when you can prevent it? Perhaps because can't prevent it?

Anonymous Thu Dec 21 08:23:04 2017 No.9384088

>>9382903
He's right though. Many "infographics" are misinformation or completely made-up, especially the ones of 4chan. You can assume any graphic of a world map, with colours marking something, to be fake. Despite that fact that there are legitimate ones. The format has a predilection towards subjecting the viewer to the creator's will, not an objective array of information, a guided and narrow one.

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 21 18:48:39 2017 No.9385256 >>9373669 was going to write this, op is a poser, bet he didn't even read the Elements (in greek) but that english picture book for simpletons, if even that. Right guys?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 21 20:13:55 2017 No.9385368 what about aristotle? he invented a few sciences

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 08:04:33 2017 No.9386280 File: 625 KB, 2445x3000, 002_men_will_smith_m.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9382903 Go back, subhuman. Your monkey with chaplin moustache lost because he was an inferior being. Go follow your pathetic "leader" and kill yourselves.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 08:11:21 2017 No.9386283 Tao higher than Einstein? Darwin shit tier? Also why is Newton not at the top? Why was Archimedes "better"? I honestly don't know a whole lot about these old faggots.

Anonymous Fri Dec 22 08:23:36 2017 No.9386298

>>9384088

I get where you're coming from, but they didn't refute it in any way. Obviously that """infographic""" is made to be provocative, but I believe it holds some truth to it. Sure, the conventions back then were a little different compared to today, but it's not like the picture is just outright lying.

>>9386280

no u

Anonymous Fri Dec 22 08:33:30 2017 No.9386315

>>9386298
>we should kill everyone, also the sky is blue sometimes
>"but i believe it holds some truth to it"
Your point=retarded
Try again, brainlet.

All infographics are made by subhumans who worhip a loser. Why do you keep forcing your loser mentality on this board?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 08:33:32 2017 No.9386316 >>9370485 >no kolmogorov >no markov > no lagrange cmon man

Anonymous Fri Dec 22 08:42:38 2017 No.9386331

>>9386315

Not an argument. I believe we're done talking now, unless you actually try to come up with something worth my time.

You won't because you can't. You clearly lack any capacity for independent thought, that's why you're always spouting out what you were indoctrinated to spout out. It's painful how predictable you are.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 08:59:06 2017 No.9386347 >>9386331 >entire text denying his fallacious argument >"a fallacious logic is an argument" Nope. Try again, brainlet.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 09:25:41 2017 No.9386368 >>9386347 Umm, Sweetie? I believe I just told you to not bother with a worthless reply like that... Leave me alone you creep!

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 10:05:09 2017 No.9386410 >>9376491 the picture is probably more of a jab at the state of public science education than Einstein himself.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 11:25:51 2017 No.9386500 >>9370568 >the competition is fierce at the upper levels. Einstein does not make the cut xD

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 13:33:35 2017 No.9386689 >>9370485 I can understand the obvious bias towards mathematicians and theoretical physicists. But then why no mention of Kolmogorov, Zeldovich, or Boltzmann? Then again, why am I responding to this obvious bait?

Anonymous Fri Dec 22 13:36:19 2017 No.9386694

>>9370485
>einstein not on wiser gods tier
listen you autistic fuck just because someone is popular doesn't _necessarily_ mean they're not wisergods bestowed upon our uncaring asses

just because he wasn't fully convinced of the non-existence of the ether doesn't mean he wasn't incredibly smart and the most influential of them all

Anonymous Fri Dec 22 14:22:02 2017 No.9386749

>>9386694

This has been addressed in this thread already. Einstein, while significant and smart, was LE EPIC SCIENCE MAN XD of the time. The whole point was to convince the common man that funding kik... scientists is a good thing. It's the oldest trick in the book. There are tons of examples of alike hero myths.

Anonymous Fri Dec 22 15:13:29 2017 No.9386860

>>9386749
>LE EPIC SCIENCE MAN XD of the time
No he wasn't he was as far away from modern science entertainers like Tyson and Nye as you can get. He corrected Newtonian physics for fuck's sake. And he didn't go around doing publicity stunts, if anything he avoided public attention.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 15:21:19 2017 No.9386872 File: 13 KB, 220x306, pascual.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] God-tier right here

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 15:23:32 2017 No.9386878 File: 10 KB, 268x326, Teichmuller.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Put in based.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 15:26:52 2017 No.9386884 >>9372020 Forgot Lorenz. Everyone forgets Lorenz.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 15:27:25 2017 No.9386886 >Tyson >Not in his own special raw-sewage tier

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 15:52:27 2017 No.9386931 >>9382906 >>9382919 B- troll

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 16:27:49 2017 No.9386969 >>9370485 lol did u forget Tesla? l >>9370485

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 17:17:42 2017 No.9387045 >>9370485 >Archimedes The things he "discovered" have already been around. He's more like a primative Galileo if you ask me.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 17:23:43 2017 No.9387059 >>9370645 Simplified forms of calculus existed before Archimedes.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 17:25:01 2017 No.9387062 >>9370677 Exactly, Tesla should be at the top desu.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 17:25:50 2017 No.9387064 >>9371610 >Works entire life on the model of the atom >Make a random guess >Only works for hydrogen Touche.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 18:44:51 2017 No.9387228 >>9382900 Angry /pol/tard gb2 your containment board.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 21:19:14 2017 No.9387556 >>9387064 Are you a chemist by any chance?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 21:25:47 2017 No.9387573 >>9387228 I can see straight through your bait, but it would be rude of me to not give you a (you) so here you go.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 22 21:26:16 2017 No.9387576 >>9377066 Professional smart people

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 23 01:00:41 2017 No.9388012 >Mid-tier: Faraday, Einstein >Low-tier: Lagrange what the actual fuck OP?

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 23 01:03:36 2017 No.9388018 is evolution really how stuff works?

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 23 01:15:11 2017 No.9388045 >>9371598 Give back your vaccines

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 23 18:31:59 2017 No.9389295 >>9388018 von Neumann thought the idea was ridiculous.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 24 06:31:32 2017 No.9390176 >>9376576 It means second to last. Use google for once in your lazy piece of shit life.

Anonymous Sun Dec 24 06:37:13 2017 No.9390183

>>9390176
>>9376576
>>9375852
>>9376434
I think it works, but it would be more intutitve if he used a word that meant second, instead of second to last. Y'all just have sticks up your asses. If you go backwards to the creator the word works conceptually; it just isn't the direction of thought most would take, but it is rational.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 24 06:58:53 2017 No.9390211 File: 317 KB, 1200x1568, 1200px-N.Tesla[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>9370485 Is this a joke? Like I know american education is bad but c'mon dude

Anonymous Sun Dec 24 08:36:07 2017 No.9390331

>>9390176
I know what it means you spergie, it's the same word as in Italian which is my first language. My point was why did you bring it up in the first place? Nobody in the thread asked what it meant or said something that implies they didn't know. Pause your autism sometimes.

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 25 06:55:05 2017 No.9392055 File: 42 KB, 435x478, Bernoulli.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Bernoulli

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 25 09:56:27 2017 No.9392231 >>9372020 michelson was jewish, you know

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 25 09:58:20 2017 No.9392236 >>9374398 this

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 25 10:02:08 2017 No.9392238 lmfaoooooo galois shit tier due to dying at 20

>>	Anonymous Mon Dec 25 23:37:13 2017 No.9393530 >>9392055 What are you trying to say

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 26 00:13:50 2017 No.9393574 >>9393530 t. Marcus XIII Bernoulli, banker and "mathematician"

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 26 10:43:26 2017 No.9394299 >>9370645 Method of exhaustion is from Eudoxus, Archimedes used it to solve very simple problems like the volume of the pyramid. But his impprtance is that he was maybe the first scientist

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 26 10:46:26 2017 No.9394304 >>9370485 where the fuck is lev landau

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 26 11:11:52 2017 No.9394345 >>9382928 Guass was quite experimental, also you're wrong Shannon should make it imo Also it needs to be more focused on maths

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 26 11:33:51 2017 No.9394370 >>9370568 Too mainstream for you?

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 26 11:36:57 2017 No.9394374 That list is remarkably shit. Like it was made from a high school kid thinking they know anything or a fag college freshman.

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 26 11:36:58 2017 No.9394375 >>9393530 I'm trying to say that there is no "Bernoulli" and there were at least 4 mathematicians with that surname

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 26 11:46:40 2017 No.9394399 >>9394345 The highest on that list should be scientist and engineers, without the scientist and engineers the math would be pointless.

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 26 12:29:36 2017 No.9394488 >>9370485 >no shannon

>>	Anonymous Tue Dec 26 13:07:35 2017 No.9394572 >>9370785 sure he was wrong, but he and everyone else knew he was wrong. The thing that was important was that he had the ideas

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 27 07:03:31 2017 No.9396377 >>9373247 I live where Riemann is buried I'll go sacrifice my firstborn to his grave, if I'll ever have one

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 27 07:08:38 2017 No.9396381 >>9370485 ERRATA Darwin and Leibniz are Good-Tier. Watson is Low-Tier. Laplace is Based-Tier. Lagrange is Mid-Tier.

>>	Anonymous Wed Dec 27 07:27:26 2017 No.9396392 >>9372324 >excuses So whites lost?

>>	Anonymous Thu Dec 28 01:26:38 2017 No.9398102 >>9396381 why is Darwin in good tier?

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math