Greatest Physicist Ever - Redux Discussion

[Izzhov]

Note: Please See thread "Greatest Physicist Redux."

 

[ranger]

Oh, great! Not another one of these threads.

 

[humanino]

I'd go for Archimedes, or Zz, or maybe Emmy Noether

Oh but the question was settled already in [thread=115107]this thread[/color][/thread] : she's Britney

 

[humanino]

OMG !
I did not notice this picture before :
Solvay[/color]

 

[ziad1985]

This is a joke right ?
http://britneyspears.ac/

 

[ranger]

This is a joke right ?
http://britneyspears.ac/

Naw, it looks like semiconductor physics, with just pictures of britney spears. Kind of foolish if you ask me.

 

[humanino]

This is a joke right ?
http://britneyspears.ac/

No no, Britney is really a major in SC physics. She just decided to have fun instead of loosing her time in physics lab.

 

[Izzhov]

Hmm, this thread has certainly gone off on quite a tangent.

Interesting how Einstein hasn't gotten any votes so far.

By the way, I totally forgot about Archimedes! If I could change the poll I would replace Rutherford with him.

 

[humanino]

If I could change the poll I would replace Rutherford with him.

Uhm... we would still miss Faraday

 

[humanino]

I always wondered, whether Gell-Mann was more or less important than Landau... never could figure.

 

[imaplanck]

I was just thinking ''why isn't Faraday there" myself. Planck and Tesla to name a couple more amiss.

 

[EL]

Interesting how Einstein hasn't gotten any votes so far.

People just want to look sophisticated and not vote for the same guy as all non-physicists would...
In my eyes Einstein clearly is the greatest of them!

 

[humanino]

Ah, Brian David Josephson wins my heart.

 

[humanino]

Let me had another tough choice, just a last one
Hawking or Penrose ?

 

[robphy]

Where is Fermi?

 

[ZapperZ]

Where's the only physicist to have won the Nobel Prize in physics twice?

Even Einstein could not accomplish that!

Zz.

 

[ranger]

These kind of topics are useless and there will always be missing physicist.

 

[ZapperZ]

These kind of topics are useless and there will always be missing physicist.

Not only that, the word "greatest" is not only meaningless, it is undefined as far as criteria goes. One might as well pick a favorite color.

Zz.

 

[Cyrus]

What a lame thread. So creative!

We should rank them and then sell it to HS kids like USNEWS and World Report does.

 

[imaplanck]

These kind of topics are useless and there will always be missing physicist.

Not if we start a 10 year project to post every professional Physicist that has ever lived.

 

[humanino]

These kind of topics are useless and there will always be missing physicist.

But it's quite funny to even ask the question

Actually, I was wondering who is the greatest PF member ever

 

[Dr Transport]

Where's the only physicist to have won the Nobel Prize in physics twice?

My vote is for John Bardeen, but since he is not listed I have to vote for Feynman who could have won 3 Nobels (QED, Theory of Weak Force and Helium Superfluidity). In my mind the only other physicist close in pure talent and breadth of knowledge was Lev Landau.

 

[humanino]

Where's the only physicist to have won the Nobel Prize in physics twice?

Do we have a Nobel prize who also is a Field medalist ?

 

[ZapperZ]

Do we have a Nobel prize who also is a Field medalist ?

Not that I know of. Anyone know of any?

Zz.

 

[Izzhov]

If only I could list more than 10 options, I would include all of the physicists talked about so far!

Even if I could, I still think Newton would win though...

 

[humanino]

Not that I know of. Anyone know of any?

I thought Witten might become one. In any case, that would be tremendous an achievement.

 

[humanino]

If only I could list more than 10 options, I would include all of the physicists talked about so far!

Even if I could, I still think Newton would win though...

You are missing the point. Newton would not be who he is without Galileo. And Einstein also sits on the shoulders of giants.

 

[fuzzyfelt]

Ah, Brian David Josephson wins my heart.

I don't know much about physicists, why do you say that?

 

[Izzhov]

You are missing the point. Newton would not be who he is without Galileo. And Einstein also sits on the shoulders of giants.

Well, now I see why other threads like this usually specify a century.

 

[humanino]

OK let me make a little metaphor. :-)

Knowledge is a huge mountain. Everybody brings something, from a grain of sand to a solid rock. But you must bring it on the top. Many things make it complicated to evaluate someone's contribution. For instance, is it more important to bring a little grain all the way to the top, achieving a major step, or to be one of the first to roll a big block when there is not much to climb ?

 

[imaplanck]

You are missing the point. Newton would not be who he is without Galileo. And Einstein also sits on the shoulders of giants.

If you go by that rationale, you would also have to say Galileo sat on Aristotle or Plato.


Its the fact that Einstein revolutionized Physics with the unification of space and time(among other vast achievements) that puts him ahead of the game in most peoples book.

 

[humanino]

I don't know much about physicists, why do you say that?

I was mainly having fun Josephson was a very young fellow when he won the Nobel prize (actually, a 22 years old graduate student). But today, he is occupied in remotly disconnected activities from fundamental physics, namely paranormal phenomena. How to judge this phenomenon ? Important physicist no doubt. Crackpot as well ?

 

[fuzzyfelt]

o.k. , thanks humanino

 

[humanino]

If you go by that rationale, you would also have to say Galileo sat on Aristotle or Plato.

On the shoulders yes
I never knew them personnaly, and considering philosopher's occupations in greek antiquity, maybe you are right

 

[imaplanck]

On the shoulders yes

I never knew them personnaly,

Really? Now there was me thinking you were 3000 years old and all.

and considering philosopher's occupations in greek antiquity, maybe you are right

:[/QUOTE]

I don't know, but I sounded pretty knowledgeable don't you think?

 

[gravenewworld]

Ummm TESLA?




Q: Does Newton get too much credit? I mean calculus wasn't even really rigorously proven until the likes of Riemann, Cauchy, etc. came around. The Greeks, Egyptians, and Indians all used some principles of calculus way before Newton was ever around.

 

[fourier jr]

I thought Witten might become one. In any case, that would be tremendous an achievement.

i doubt that would ever happen. nobel prizes as far as i know are given for stuff that has practical applications, which is probably why hawking hasn't won one.

 

[ranger]

OK. So you have the first idea that no list will satisfy everyone. But you still don't get the second point as there no answer to the "greatest physicists ever".

 

[verdigris]

kepler

Without Kepler there would have been no quantitative understanding for Newton to work on.

 

[3trQN]

I think God must have been the greatest physicist, but since it wasn't an option ill vote Maxwell.

Newton was allways my hero when i was growing up, unfortunately i don't consider myself qualified to comment on anyone else's greatness because of the level of my physics understanding :)

 

[ranger]

I think God must have been the greatest physicist, but since it wasn't an option ill vote Maxwell.

Newton was allways my hero when i was growing up, unfortunately i don't consider myself qualified to comment on anyone else's greatness because of the level of my physics understanding :)

Its funny how you're calling God a physicist.

 

[3trQN]

Its funny how you're calling God a physicist.

Why is that?

 

[marcusl]

I was mainly having fun Josephson was a very young fellow when he won the Nobel prize (actually, a 22 years old graduate student). But today, he is occupied in remotly disconnected activities from fundamental physics, namely paranormal phenomena. How to judge this phenomenon ? Important physicist no doubt. Crackpot as well ?

My thesis advisor came back from an APS meeting one year and told me that Brian Josephson pulled him aside and started writing equations on a blackboard that he said described the ESP communications channel. My advisor said he didn't know what to think--it looked like the ramblings of a nutcase, but on the other hand Josephson was very bright and had won a Nobel at a young age...

 

[arunma]

Its funny how you're calling God a physicist.

He's right, because God is most certainly not an engineer!

 

[fourier jr]

He's right, because God is most certainly not an engineer!

i think it was john littlewood who said he was a pure mathematician who decided to do some applied for a change.

 

[arunma]

i think it was john littlewood who said he was a pure mathematician who decided to do some applied for a change.

Lol. I guess that works too. Of course it is more than ego that motivates me to postulate that the Divinity is a physicist. Physics is, after all, the most fundamental of all natural scientists. Many of the great discoveries in chemistry, and even in biological areas like genetics, were made by physicists (that's actually why so many terms in genetics end with -on). Clearly it would be a divestment of glory for God to be anything but a physicist.

 

[Cyrus]

......


Maybe he's just sitting around twiddling his thumbs.

 

[arunma]

......


Maybe he's just sitting around twiddling his thumbs.

...and thinking about physics, of course.

 

[Cyrus]

Gotta give you that one, it was clever.

 

[Izzhov]

Lol. I guess that works too. Of course it is more than ego that motivates me to postulate that the Divinity is a physicist. Physics is, after all, the most fundamental of all natural scientists. Many of the great discoveries in chemistry, and even in biological areas like genetics, were made by physicists (that's actually why so many terms in genetics end with -on). Clearly it would be a divestment of glory for God to be anything but a physicist.

Physics may not be the most fundamental of all natural sciences. It is just the most fundamental that we know about (or possibly can know about). If a God exists (which I have my doubts about), I'd tend to think he/she/it would be more of a metaphysicist.