[ 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: 1.53 MB, 1340x2458, 1543375336863.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11654421 No.11654421 [Reply] [Original]

Is this ranking scientifically accurate ?

>> No.11654436

>>11654421
>Babbage
>not based tier
>no greeks other than Archimedes
No

>> No.11654451

>>11654421
Pythagoras?
Hello?

>> No.11654456

>>11654436
>>no greeks other than Archimedes
>>11654451
>Pythagoras?
mid-tier in my opinion.

>> No.11654496

>>11654456
The greeks aren't so famous nowdays mainly because nobody cares about Euclidean geometry. Some of the stuff they did are really hard for someone to think on their own like Apollonius's problem or defining the trig functions for the first time.

>> No.11654505

you're missing fisher

>> No.11654552

>>11654421
Newton did more than just physics you know

>> No.11654577

>>11654496
In the russian tradition it is Kolmogorov who is famous for geometry ahead of Euclid.

>> No.11654585

>>11654421
Bolyai?

>> No.11654633

>>11654577
Makes sence. Both sides during the cold war wanted to reduce the others influence on each other and would not use stuff invented/discovered by the other. Same reason why Lyapunov remained relatively unkown in the west untill recently.
Also I found this about Kolmogorov: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformation_geometry
Could the name in russian be different because geometry was taught in a different way than Euclids system in Russia?

>> No.11654664

>>11654633
There was a language barrier. Russian mathematicians published in russian journals and in russian language. That was independent of political considerations. Also chinese, japanese, german and french mathematicians published their research in their respective languages. Often there were results of essential research that spread only slowly across boundaries for this reason. This went on up into the 1980'ies, before most but not all publications got written in english.

>> No.11654671

>>11654421
>makes a list of scientists
>doesn't even know the meaning of the word penultimate

>> No.11654675

>>11654633
>geometry was taught in a different way than Euclids system in Russia
It was, and it still is. Less axiomatic, more targeted at engineering applications.

>> No.11654752

>>11654421

The indian kid who invented zero needs to be in the ultimate creator god tier. Not some greek faggot who couldn't into modern number systems.

>> No.11655293

Ummm...this is too biased towards before the 21st century. You're missing the greatest minds like:
Trump
Musk
Uncle Ted
Greta Thunberg
Steve Jobs
Grant Sanderson
Joe
Sal Khan
that Nekopara dude
Kurisu
Alon Amit
and the guy who dreams in code.
Shit list, OP.

>> No.11655296

>>11654421
I guess turing and tao are supposed to be thread bait

>> No.11655306

>>11654421
Where's Tesla san?

>> No.11655333

This list is made by some physics faggot who clearly doesn't know anything about biology.
Also
>no Aristotle
Now, why would Archimede be the highest?
His principle is cool but what else did he do?

>> No.11655347

>>11655333
he died for math in the sack of Syracuse
>Others write that a Roman soldier, running upon him with a drawn sword, offered to kill him; and that Archimedes, looking back, earnestly besought him to hold his hand a little while, that he might not leave what he was then at work upon inconclusive and imperfect; but the soldier, nothing moved by his entreaty, instantly killed him.

>> No.11655574

>>11654421
So who's the ultimate?

>> No.11655719

>>11654752
Archemedes recognised the limitations of the greek number system and proposed his own system for very large numbers. It is similar to a modern system base 10^8
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sand_Reckoner#Naming_large_numbers

>> No.11655850

>>11655306
>Where's Tesla san?
Putting tesla on a list with those plebs would be an insult to tesla. He's on a completely different list all by himself.

>> No.11655942

>>11655719

do you understand that neither the greeks nor the romans had the number 0 , nothing you have today would have been possible without it

>> No.11655953

>meme neuman so high
>planck so low

kill yourself, op

>> No.11655954

>>11654421
>Gould and Darwin in the bottom tier
Explain yourself

>> No.11655964

>>11654421
>Von Numale demi God tier

YOU FUCKING POPSCI JOKE. KYS

>> No.11655985

>>11654421
How can you have godel and cantor ahead of fourier? Some of the most overrated mathematicians that ever walked this earth, godel especially. I would rather have kolmogorov or even grassmann ahead of them.

>> No.11655992

>>11654421
Put God on top. Satan's bottom.

>> No.11655994

>>11655985
>even grassmann
Based.

>> No.11656016

>>11655942
You can do a lot of stuff without 0. It's not needed in the deffinition of the naturals and the greeks already had limits, and after Archimedes integration. They also didn't have negative numbers. Anyways I think Archimedes rightfully deserves top tier because of all that he did despite the limitations of his era and also because his wroks had great influence on Galileo, Newton and many other renaissance scientists (admited by themselves), which in turn influenced later scientists.

>> No.11656019

>>11655954
He's a christfag and Darwin btfo'd his precious fairytales

>> No.11656021

>>11656016

you can't take limits, you can't use binary, you can't define 0 element, you can't prove anything in linear algebra
you can't prove anything in real analysis

do you realize how fucking retarded you are?

the number 0 is crucial for every modern mathematical development , archimedes and his inventions are not

>> No.11656028

>>11654421
Some things bug me
>Mendel os too low
>If Newton is so high, Kepler should too
>Fibonacci should be higher as Laplace and Mendel

>> No.11656037

>>11654421
gould is so below shit tier he isn't even worth mentioning. might as well have bill nye up there while you're at it.

>> No.11656045
File: 25 KB, 306x306, 1589066288930.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11656045

>Lagrande in low tier
>Wiles on the same tier as Bohr and Dirac
>Leibniz that far down
absolutely retarded

>> No.11656073

>>11654421
>anon is not in the wiser gods of the olympus-tier

>> No.11656079

>>11656021
>you can't take limits
You can, the greeks did it
>you can't use binary
You don't have to
>you can't define 0 element, you can't prove anything in linear algebra
True
>you can't prove anything in real analysis
You can do all of real analysis without 0
>the number 0 is crucial for every modern mathematical development , archimedes and his inventions are not
I don't think that you are fully aware of the work of Archimedes. Besides the inventions he figured out integration, infinite sums, found ways to approximate several irrational numbers, he defined the Archimedian spiral and found formulas for the surfaces and volumes of 3d shapes that come from rotations of 2d shapes. In modern math all these stuff are dealt with in calculus and multivariable calculus and 0 of course is not needed to do any of them.

>> No.11656086

>>11654421
Missing Willard "Grandaddy" Gibbs. Belongs at least in great tier. Good to see Pauling!
Maybe Ken Wilson in Based-tier, RG doesn't get enough appreciation here..
>>11654436
Babbage was most well known for being the other video game store in the mall

>> No.11656248

>>11656079

no you can't. Zenos paradox is literally a paradox BECAUSE they didn't understand limits. It's an example of how limited the greeks were, so they couldn't conceive that a series converges.

> use binary without 0

ok , lets see you set it up

> you can do real analysis without 0

no you can't. peano axioms require a 0 element, the real numbers require the number 0 , the epsilon delta definition of a limit requires the number 0

a sum can only converge if it at least also converges to 0 etc. etc.

every single proof in linear algebra nad real analysis is founded on the number 0

archimedes has nothing to do with any of this

you are completely clueless lmao

>> No.11656292

>>11656248
you can do all of analysis without zero, just replace every instance of "= 0" with "smaller than eps for every positive eps"

>> No.11656311

>>11656248
also I bet Archimedes knew about both infinity and zero as concepts. he definitely understood infinite sums and their convergence, and a LOT more. the Greeks in general didn't, but Archimedes did.

>> No.11656386

>>11655293
Based

>> No.11656409

>>11654552
So did many of them, look at descartes

>> No.11656426

>>11654421
>No Heron
>No pythagorus
>No euclid
Shit nigga what are you doing

>> No.11656431

>>11654421
So many of them have sloped foreheads that /sci/ says is associate with lower IQ. They must have stole their work from others.

>> No.11656434

>>11656248
The greeks understood limits. They even came up with a, rudimentary way of finding the area of a circle through a sum of triangles - integration which itself is a limit. But regardless you don't need to have formalised limits to conceive of infinity and zero.

>> No.11656443

>>11656431
I do think it's interesting there's only certain types of faces you see represented among the exceptionally intelligent.

>> No.11656448

>>11656443
Usually very ugly

>> No.11656460

>>11656409
>descartes
What is he famous for besides mathematics?

>> No.11656470

>>11655333
>This list is made by some physics faggot who clearly doesn't know anything about biology.
all important biology came from the side interest of a physicist

>> No.11656471

>>11656460
He's far more famous for philosophy than mathematics

>> No.11656477

>>11654421
What's your metric?

>> No.11656487

>>11656248
>>11656311
Zeno died 150 years before Archimedes was born. Archemedes had a masterful understanding of limits or the method of
exhaustion as they called it. It was introduced by Eudoxus about 100 years after Zeno. It is true that most greeks at the time didn't care about it or at least didn't use it. Zeno's paradox (I assume you mean Achilles and the turtle) was not about limits. It stated
>for Achilles to overtake the turtle he would need to first reach its position. But in the time he reaches the position the turtle has moved, so he needs to do it again. Therefore Achilles can not overtake the turtle with finite actions.
It was (and is) a paradox about wether or not it is possible to perform supertasks in reality. The greeks had a better understanding of infinity than the average person has today (they casualy used induction and other related stuff). They had however no concept of a number 0, they thought that it was the same as nothingness. To better understand how the greeks viewed these concepts you can look at how Euclid defines the point, the line and other stuff (that which has no part, that which has no end, ...)

>> No.11656499

>>11656487
>They had however no concept of a number 0, they thought that it was the same as nothingness.
absolutely wholesome
how can you define numbers based on geometry and have 0 be a number
you can't. that's why {set} degeneracy had to be invented and now visual math intuition is kill

>> No.11656685

>>11655306
over on >>>/r/eddit/
and possibly on >>>/x/

>> No.11656699

>>11654421
Swap Turing and Einstein.

>> No.11656843

>>11654421
>Feynman > Laplace
okay, boomer

>> No.11656871
File: 192 KB, 1067x1070, 1528885888319.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11656871

>>11654421
Where is pic related??

>> No.11656986

>>11654752
what exactly did he do with zero? because making a symbol for "nothing" isn't in itself useful at all.

>> No.11657042

>>11656460
>give her the dick
>t. rene descartes

>> No.11657173

>>11655293
top tier bait, anon.
bait nonetheless.

>> No.11657226

>>11654421
Do we even know enough about Archimedes to really warrant him there?
Why blacklist Hawking?

Personally I'd have Oiler and Gauss together at the summit
Galois had high potential and it's fun to meme him, but his total output is too small to really merit his place that high up, next time he should try not dying.

Descartes should be higher for his philosophy. For literally hundreds of years people were looking for truth through a direct connection with God, and only the church could offer the service. He was the first since the ancient Greeks to trust that his senses could deliver truth, it was a real paradigm shift and paved the way for everyone else. Leibniz is also too low on account of his philosophy.

Darwin is a joke I assume?
Also Noether is totally missing

>> No.11657251

>>11654671
...Robert?

>> No.11657265

>>11654421
Where are the Black scientists?

>> No.11657305 [DELETED] 

>>11656460
His legacy contributed to astronomy.

By the the way Descartes was more cited (in science) than Galileo & co at the time.

>> No.11657310

>>11654421
Did a creationist make this?

>> No.11657430

>>11655293
>that Nekopara dude
my nigga Stoner

>> No.11657755

>>11654421
>Russell, Gödel nowhere

>> No.11658245

>>11657310
Why do you say so?

>> No.11658401

>>11654421
galois, neumann and ramanujan are all reddit meme tier and should be good-tier at best

>> No.11658455

>>11654421
>Fermat = low-tier
>Andrew Wiles = good-tier
...oh the irony
also this ranking is rubbish from head to toe

>> No.11658476

>>11654421
What criteria are they being ranked on?

>> No.11658531

>>11658476
OP's favorite scientists

>> No.11658550
File: 26 KB, 565x546, 1292566585233.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11658550

Idol worship is not science.

>> No.11658574
File: 338 KB, 538x572, 1582484972457.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11658574

>>11655964
>>Von Numale

>> No.11658712

>>11654421
>no tesla
>einstein
Unbelievable

>> No.11659276

>>11654421
kepler and maxwell should be the same tier as einstein

>> No.11659599

>>11654421
Archimedes was indeed god

>> No.11659927

>>11654421
>Godel

>> No.11660551

>>11654671
I think you could argue "penultimate ancient creator" is referring to the idea that archimedes is "second only to god" or something.

>> No.11660570

>>11654421
Leibniz is at least Based-Tier

>> No.11660972

>>11654421
Wheres my nigga Reynolds?

>> No.11661003

>>11656685
Brainlet cope

>> No.11661346

>>11654421
Einstein to wiser gods tier, perelman to at least based tier. Then I'd be happy.

>> No.11661350

>>11654421
>>11661346
Wait, you forgot Euclid completely. Bro...

>> No.11661502

>>11658455
How? All Fermat did was conjecture, Wiles provided proof. Wiles’ proof was an enormous accomplishment