[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 1.06 MB, 1340x2458, list.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9423900 No.9423900 [Reply] [Original]

yes or no and why

>> No.9423912

>>9423900
Euclid was one of The Ones who started it all.
Poo-in-loo is at least 4 ranks too high.
Neumann can stay there, but higher ranks must be added for The Ones.

>> No.9423915

oh great this thread again

>> No.9423917

Ramanujan is overrated

in terms of skill he was in the class of Gauss and Euler

but didn't really have much accomplishments

>> No.9423931

>>9423900
what the fuck is this list? All scholars or is it supposed to be people that ever lived? Because you cannot possibly deny there must be a great degree of subjectivity to the latter. I could make strong arguments fo Shakespeare at the top or the bottom. This is stupid.

>> No.9423960

>>9423900
You have to switch over to the SSS ranking system found in Dance Dance Revolutions. All the labels are just baggage and whack.

DDR uses a traditional AAA ranking system for in game ranking, the S scores are related to metagame ranking. It is standard to extrapolate that S scores require AAA minimums. Form without function is superfluous.

>> No.9423973

>>9423931
>muh arts

>> No.9424029
File: 13 KB, 600x515, 4b6.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9424029

Newton above all. Ramanujan AND Von Neumann demi-god tier.

Von Neumann was prolific, but he mostly functioned as a systematizer and formalizer. He took fields that others had done the ground breaking work in, and added mathematical formalism.

>> No.9424181

>>9424029
>ut he mostly functioned as a systematizer and formalizer. He took fields that others had done the ground breaking work in, and added mathematical formalism.

he also did some original stuff, game theory was pretty much of his origin

>> No.9424184

>>9423917
Agreed, the only reason people mention this guy is he is the one outlier proof that Indians could be as smart as Imperial Age whites, which historically educated people already knew (cf the Khalsa, a Sikh army designed by European advisors, and the closest example of truly direct competition between whites and subcontinentals, a hundred years before Ramalamadingdong).

>> No.9424186

>>9423900
Hasn't Mochizuki been exposed as a hack fraud now

>> No.9424252

Why are bohr and planck so low? Are quantum mechanics a meme?

>> No.9424267

>>9423900
b-b-bu-but muh Einstein!

>> No.9424287

>trained circus-monkey Mozart but not god-among-men Fourier

>> No.9424359

Those who can't do, teach. And those who can't teach, make "tier" threads.

>> No.9424377

>>9423900
Newton should be higher, if not top. Leibniz probably nearly under. Darwin was a well respected, and extremely influential naturalist. Turing should certainly be higher.

>> No.9424514

Why is Oiclid this low?

>> No.9424540

>>9423900
Do people not care about Eratosthenes? He was pretty good but I guess a little unnoticed because of being contemporary with Archie

>> No.9424544

>>9423900

Bill Nye should not even be considered

>> No.9424608

Poincare the last polymath is “good”. Godel and cantor need spots on the list as well.

>> No.9424622

>>9423900
>Feynman and Dostoevsky in the same tier

What is this even supposed to be a list of? I can't draw even a single similarity between those two people.

>> No.9424624

What did Darwin do to deserve subpar-tier

>> No.9424652

>>9423900
Newton and Darwin literally developed entire fields. Everyone else is just expanding on their work.

Newton and Darwin above all. Freud too. (fuck off elitist "psych isnt science" dumbfucks). Those 3 are without a doubt the most influential and greatest scientists of all time. No contest.

Nietsche is a hack. Replace him with schopenhauer

Tesla is a meme whos gone too far. belongs in subpar or good tier.

maxwell is too high. great tier.

move einstein up one or two. the photoelectric effect and the equivalence of energy with mass are two enormous developments, the impacts of which have not been fully realized yet

>> No.9424680

>>9423900
>no mention of Cantor
>no mention of Tarski
>no mention of Tao
shit list

>> No.9424706

>>9424652
I don't know what to say other than that you're completely wrong about everyone except Newton.

>> No.9424709

>>9423900
>Yuler not at the top
Lol hahaha

>> No.9424714

>>9423900
Euclid should be higher. He wrote the first ever perfect mathematical book.

>> No.9424725

>>9424706
Evolution is the most powerful explanatory tool of all time. It is a consideration in every area of biology from nano to macro. Not only is it powerful within biology, it is a major piece of empirical evidence for philosophers and anyone who wants to understand life. Religion dominated the globe for thousands of years. Absolutely dominated it. Evolution was thefirst major evidence that religion is wrong. The entirety of society was and is undergoing a shift to secularism and evidence thanks to evolution clearing the path.

The only way someone can deny Darwin's impact is if they don't understand it.

Nietsche had a huge ego and was only good at tearing things down. He never came up with solutions, never built a philosophy. All he did was critique others. He was a nag. An articulate nag.

Tesla was a wackjob. He wanted to fuck a pidgeon and denied basic scientific evidence. His obsession with perpetual energy was anti-scientific. He had good intentions, to improve society, but as far as science goes he was shitty. Conservation of energy, confirmed over and over through millions of experiments...Tesla ignored that to chase unicorns.

Einsteins early work that I mentioned are some of the most consequential in all of physics. Much of our technology comes back to his work. The quantized energy and mass-energy equivalency are another powerful explanatory tool that some of our best theories and technologies utilize

>> No.9424738

This is such a meme list.

I'd put Euler at the top of mine. I don't know why you have philosophers mixed in. They belong in a different category. I would have to put Kant at the top of that, but I disagree with most of what he says. Also, if you are going to have philosophers, you should have included Wittgenstein in the based tier.

>> No.9424886

Where the fuck is Terence Tao?

>> No.9424909

Where would Rutherford rank?

>> No.9424913

>>9423900
>Edison on the list at all.

May as well put Steve jobs up there with him

>> No.9424920

>>9424913
That is cute. Edison was a legitmate thinker. He was a rare inventor/scientist/businessman. People who hate on Edison are almost always losers. And yes, you can respect both Edison and Tesla.

Edison was basically Jobs and Woz combined in abilities. That is rare as fuck.

>> No.9424922

Nobody mentioned Curie yet? I assume that is a troll.

>> No.9424938

>>9424725
Tesla was a dreamer, he could touch stuff made of dreams but he also lived in the dream.

As for your criticism of Nietzsche
>what is the Ubermesch

>> No.9425034

90% OK need improvements.

>> No.9425037

>>9424652
Psych *may* be science but psychanalysis is not, you literally picked that shittiest psychologist possible bar maybe Lacan

>> No.9425039

>>9424920
Interesting. I guess I'll have to read up on him and his merits, all I ever heard was that he was an excellent businessman.

>> No.9425208

Composer ranks are cringe inducing. Not even including Pythagoras, Fux and Rameau s m h t b h f a m. OP just listed the three composers that show up the most on his Pandora® Classical Music Radio™ and ranked by personal taste. He didn't even bother looking into the development of music theory and aesthetics. tsk tsk.

>> No.9425281

>>9423900
Move up Nietzsche and replace him with max stirner

>> No.9425295

>>9424624
this is a Christian board

>> No.9425306

>>9424186
When did this happen?

>> No.9425316

>>9423900
Why is Einstein so low? His miraculous year is one of the greatest scientific feats of all time.

>> No.9425346

>>9423900

Darwin is literally the proto-Einstein of the biology. They have to be much higher

>> No.9425464

>>9423900
I agree but poor Darwin.

>> No.9425471

Were da kangz n shiet?
Dey shu be da orinals, cracker science jus took everytang from da true science niggas.

>> No.9425676

>>9425471
This but unironically

>> No.9425707

von Neumann is in the right spot, Feynman and Einstein should be higher on the list.

>> No.9425723

>>9423900
What the fuck is Nietzsche, Bill Nye and Neil DeGrasse Tyson doing in there? They are not scientists. One was a philosopher, the other two are communicators.
>but they have majored in STEM
Which makes them as scientists as Edward Witten is a historian.
You did that so just you could hate on popsci, didn't you?

>> No.9425735

>>9425037
The idea of the unsconscious mind itself is enough to put him in a high spot among scientists, even if he was mistaken about how it works. Freud would probably deeply reject today's psychoanalysis, as he strived to make it as scientific as possible.

>> No.9425787

>>9425037
Unconscious/conscious theory and ego theory are again, two of the most powerful explanations ever. Theyre so powerful that they are etched into the background of everyones intuition. Most people already operate under the understanding of consciousness theory, they just dont realize it. Thats how great it is.

Also, conscious theory is important in biology and artificial intelligence. Its the accepted framework.

Science is not a collection of fields, its a framework of thought. Observe, gather information, connect it together, test its explanatory power, consider conflicting evidence/theories and revise when necessary. This is precisely what Freud did with the human psyche.

>>9424938
Thats kind of what I said. Tesla was a dreamer. Dreams arent science. He did some good things, developed useful inventions but he didnt do it in a scientific manner. Thus he is overrated

At best ubermensch is a weird critique of religion. Which I gave him credit for. He was a critic.

The whole nihilism thing is unscientific, egoist nonsense. There is tangible proof that feelings do matter (which nietsche admits). The part he ignores is that other people, with similar biological and psychological function to yours, also have meaningful theories. He ignored that and arbitrarily decided it didnt matter.

A scientist wouldve took that truth and worked it into a scientific framework. Which had already been done by better philosophers. See utilitarianism

>> No.9425863

where is george washington carver?

>> No.9425875

>>9423900
>Darwin that low
Plato pls

>> No.9426013

>>9425306

https://galoisrepresentations.wordpress.com/2017/12/17/the-abc-conjecture-has-still-not-been-proved/

The comments are also relevant

>> No.9426034

>>9425346
>Darwin is literally the proto-Einstein of the biology.
No he is not.

OP include Mendel, he was a fucking genius.

>> No.9426054 [DELETED] 

>>9424725
"Much of our technology comes back to his work"
>muh theoretical foundations

>> No.9426058
File: 172 KB, 640x2400, 1OcVMoB_d.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9426058

>>9423900
Fixed it

>> No.9426854

>>9423900
Tesla can drop two, Riemann and Euclid should be gods, wtf is Beethoven and Mozart doing here there not scientists... OP reshape this ranking. The great tiers should be higher up. They've done a whole lot. Shakespeare? Wtf gtfo

>> No.9426860

No Godel? He should be in god tier
Dr Broglie and Dirac also deserves a place in like the third tier

>> No.9427008

>>9423900
What criterion are you using? One might expect your list to be about people who have contributed to STEM, yet your list is interspersed with musicians and writers. It's also odd to me that you would place Dawkins and Dennett on the same plane as Nye and Tyson. The former do produce work outside of their atheism proselytizing, while the latter don't. In essence, your list is shit. Start over. And get rid of Friedrich "3 edgy 5 me" Nietzsche.

>> No.9427033

>>9424680
>Terrence 'exploding water' Tao
LMAO

>> No.9427620
File: 885 KB, 500x813, Charles-Darwin-portrait-standing-photo-1881-2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9427620

>>9424652
>Darwin literally developed entire fields.

THANK YOU see >>9426034


I am shocked that Darwin is not recognized at its true value. He has completely changed our view of what the living being is, its origins, its present and its future.

It's really the Einstein of biology. So obviously, there are no beautiful equations (it's biology) but there is a world before and after Darwin, as there is a world before and after Einstein.

>> No.9427629
File: 806 KB, 1001x823, 1498564882917.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9427629

>>9424725
>Evolution is the most powerful explanatory tool of all time. It is a consideration in every area of biology from nano to macro. Not only is it powerful within biology, it is a major piece of empirical evidence for philosophers and anyone who wants to understand life. Religion dominated the globe for thousands of years. Absolutely dominated it. Evolution was thefirst major evidence that religion is wrong. The entirety of society was and is undergoing a shift to secularism and evidence thanks to evolution clearing the path.
>The only way someone can deny Darwin's impact is if they don't understand it.

Truly beautiful. This is Darwin.

>> No.9428636

>>9427620
not to mention quantum darwinism

>> No.9428651

>>9423900
>no Wegener

>> No.9428660

>>9424652
>maxwell is too high

YOU!... You burn in hell for saying that.
Maxwell is correctly placed.

>> No.9428666

>>9427629
http://lesswrong.com/lw/kr/an_alien_god/

>> No.9429313

>>9426058
adam smith, Léon Walras, or alfred marshall instead of karl marx.

>> No.9429314

>>9426058
remove marx add hegel

>> No.9429324

Turing should be at the top

>> No.9429335
File: 299 KB, 2464x1656, 0c197e_8ed7f1060923424fba09f67e9dafb0ad_mv2_d_2464_1656_s_2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9429335

Serious question why does the general public not know more about Von Neumann?

>> No.9429355

>>9429335
He converted to Catholicism. Same reason you hear about Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity and not Einstein, Poincare, Lorenz, Lorentz, and Maxwell's Theory of Special Relativity.

>> No.9430778
File: 66 KB, 600x339, 1741-7007-11-46-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9430778

>>9427620
Modern theories of evolution are mathematical theories of population genetics. The math is very similar to statistical physics.

See Joseph Felsenstein's Theoretical Evolutionary Genetics:
http://evolution.gs.washington.edu/pgbook/pgbook.pdf

>> No.9431084

>>9430778

thank you for the pdf

>> No.9431114

>>9423900
Sagan?

>> No.9431715
File: 6 KB, 235x215, angry.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9431715

>>9425787
>t. someone who does not understand nietzsche or philosophy

>> No.9432265

God is already defined as "the one above all" I don't get your chart.

>> No.9432548

>>9431715
I've studied philosophy and Nietzsche. Nietzsche is just an edgelord novelist larping as a philosopher.

>> No.9432563

>>9423900
No, because you are mixing scientists with philosophers, inventors, and science spokesmen.

>> No.9432573

>>9423900
Mozart > Bach > Beethoven
I'd put them into demi-god, great, and good, respectively.

>> No.9432577

>>9432573
>Mozart>Bach
Bach is the absolute pinnacle of music. Everything post-Bach is just a slow decline. Stop falling for the Mozart memes. Amadeus is just a fucking movie.

>> No.9432582

>>9432577
>Stop falling for the Mozart memes
I should be saying that to you

>> No.9433768
File: 1.65 MB, 1340x2458, 1513381878675.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9433768

the official ranking

>> No.9434022

>>9433768
Dawkins must be brainlet tier, why are these two in the blacklist

>> No.9434038

You can tell this list was made by an alt right brainlet with Einstein not in god tier and Dawkins in shit tier.

>> No.9434051

Einstein is amazing. His research papers are the highest grade.

Ramanujan's research papers are shit tier. He didn't use his talent in the right direction.

>> No.9434091

>>9425735
>Freud would probably deeply reject today's psychoanalysis, as he strived to make it as scientific as possible.
which is why he didn't give a shit about empirical evidence I guess

>> No.9434209

>>9433768
Complete shit
>>9434051
He had no education tho

>> No.9434220
File: 322 KB, 639x606, photo.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9434220

>>9434038
It isn't clear what any of the criteria any of the posters here use for juding these individuals. What is the measure?

Difficulty of the work they did? Scientific impact? Philosophical impact? Social and cultural impact? Number of times they're mentioned in google-searches? Their political and economic views?

In terms of cultural and scientific, cultural and philosophical impacts, Darwin should top them all. No single person has so thoroughly revolutionized humanity's view of itself. Even if you are a creationist moron who hates Darwin, you can't deny his legacy.

>> No.9434226

>>9434209
I think you'll find that is the widely accepted classification, brainlet.

>> No.9434287

>>9424252
less than 50% acceptance of any one of the many interpretations of quantum theory says yes.

>> No.9434291

>>9424922
did some work with radiation I guess.

Alvin Weinberg should be on the list, if anyone from the nuclear field.

>> No.9434304

>>9433768
is this random ?

>> No.9434305

>>9427620
It's probably because a lot of people had similarish ideas at around the same time, and Darwin was only really right about heredity among offspring and natural selection driving evolution. He had no idea about genetic information and so forth but he was on the right track compared to Lamarck for example.

The two greatest things Darwin accomplished were the Origin of Species book and that joint project he helped start to build an artificial cloud forest on Ascension Island, which not only worked but is actually expanding on its own. Origin of species led to a massive overhaul of how people did biology, and Ascension island stands to prove that ecosystems can self assemble even with a hodgepodge of species selected from all over the world.

>> No.9434308

>>9426058
dont hit me too hard, you have a chance to enlighten someone new, but who is at the top of this list? i do not recognize his face.

>> No.9434310

>>9434305
>natural selection
>only
get off this board

>> No.9434311

>>9424181
You're thinking of John Nash

>> No.9434314
File: 29 KB, 499x500, 1514672116398.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9434314

>>9425306
It hasn't happened, just opinions so far and rants about the readability of the papers. No one has actually disproved IUT and found flaws yet so >>9426013 is lying, that is just a article and thread of opinions on why his papers suck and not that IUT is inconsistent.

>> No.9434318
File: 109 KB, 1154x622, james-green-3-moons-and-a-planet-that-could-have-alien-life.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9434318

>>9433768
desu I hate Krauss for his opinions on manned space travel.
I get that he thinks going to space should be about nothing more than gathering scientific data, but realistically we only study things to gain an understanding so that we can make use of whatever we're studying. Yeah yeah, the guy in the lab does it because he wants to 'further the knowledge of mankind', but the lab is being funded because the guys with money want a leg up on the competition when it comes to making products that are better than anyone else's.
Chemistry was funded because Kangs wanted gold and everyone thought alchemy was possible.
Physics was funded because governments wanted to exploit both the energy potential and the weapons potential of unstable atoms.
Rockets were developed as a means of delivering nuclear warheads tens of thousands of kilometers away, and the manned space race occurred as essentially a technological dick waving contest showcasing how reliable and accurate our missile guidance technology was. Etc.

Space exploration for scientific gain has been putting along using probes, but it's easy to think someone could come along and pull the plug simply because it doesn't really matter if we use gravometric data to study the interior of Europa or not. The biggest benefit of the space science missions to any administration right now is the administration's ability to say 'we discovered this this and this during our term'.

If Krauss wants to see real scientific data from Mars, he should be advocating that we set up a colony that likes to build everything out of steel, which has mining equipment and furnaces of their own, and send as many people as we can, because the amount of geologic surveying they'd do in a day simply looking for good sources of iron ore would reduce all rover science done to date to a blip. Same goes for every other object in the solar system.

>> No.9434753

>>9434038
>alt-right
Putting a LITERAL poo in loo high up in the list.
NOT putting Werner "Heil Hitler" Heisenberg first.

>> No.9434813

>>9434226
Not at all you fucking idiot, everyone spat on the OP at that thread. Wiles above Einstein and Faraday, Leibniz in Subpar, Maxwell in the same tier as Descartes etc

>> No.9435318

>>9425787
>Unconscious/conscious theory and ego theory are again, two of the most powerful explanations ever. Theyre so powerful that they are etched into the background of everyones intuition. Most people already operate under the understanding of consciousness theory, they just dont realize it. Thats how great it is.
>Also, conscious theory is important in biology and artificial intelligence. Its the accepted framework.
>Science is not a collection of fields, its a framework of thought. Observe, gather information, connect it together, test its explanatory power, consider conflicting evidence/theories and revise when necessary. This is precisely what Freud did with the human psyche.

Literally this. It's sad that he had some cookie theories around the specifics because that's all people obsess over.

>> No.9435345

>>9423973
What's wrong with the arts memefag

>> No.9435606
File: 83 KB, 384x313, idunkno.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9435606

>>9423900
I never understand why Darwin is always so low. His theory of natural selection leads to the current understanding of modern germ theory and medicine. Not to mention demonstrably showing us our place in nature.

I presume it's Christcucks but I'm not sure.