Who Is Considered the Greatest Physicist of All Time?

[FeynmanMH42]

Who do you think was/is the greatest physicist who ever lived and why?
In my opinion #1 has to go to Newton, with Einstein and Feynman coming joint second. Newton started it all off, while Einstein and Feynman created a public face for science.
If the physicist you want is not in the poll, then say who it is and why in a post.

 

[arildno]

Hmm..I'm not much in favour of rankings like this, but if I must choose, I'd say Archimedes.

 

[mezarashi]

I think Newton is the 'nerdiest' you can go for a physicist. One man show, let's invent the math when it doesn't exist just can't be beat in my opinion.

 

[Theoretician]

I think Newton is the 'nerdiest' you can go for a physicist. One man show, let's invent the math when it doesn't exist just can't be beat in my opinion.

Exactly, this is why it is very hard to see past Newton as the greatest physicist ever.

 

[debeng]

Newton is no physicist, he is more a mathematican. whatever he proved of physics has been of significance only to the Earth's atmosphere, to this surrounding. and never proved anyhting that accounts to the true property of matter. but his mathematical theories sounds quite universal. his theories of motion are all based on practical materials and not on thoerotical basis so he only proved right what occurs in our surrounding and not beyond it. physics is more a theorotical science, isn't it? i account einstien's theorotical expanadings should be given some credit. he is the best.

 

[inha]

physics is more a theorotical science, isn't it? :

NO! A gazillion experimental physicists disagree with you and quite a few theorists too. Including Einstein himself.

 

[debeng]

i never said it is not a practical one?

NO! A gazillion experimental physicists disagree with you and quite a few theorists too. Including Einstein himself.

i apologize for the direct way of saying it. but yet everything has a philosophical approach, and i believe exploring physics has its too. i think mathemtics is just another side of language. we have created mathematics the same way we have created language. they are the means we explore everything in science and our minds. but we never create physics for it exist on its own.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I used to think Newton, but I've changed my mind since I learned a bit about Galileo. I think Galileo was up against a world where there were more outrageously erroneous notions firmly in place than there have ever been since. It's amazing how much he did discover given that most of his energy had to be diverted to tedious arguments about extremely fundamental, obvious points, like the rate of fall of objects of dissimilar weight.

 

[PerennialII]

... one hybrid of Newton & Einstein with a shake of Galileo please.

 

[sameandnot]

einstein was so revolutionary in his way of thinking. people still do not really understand the observations of that man. Newton was a simple physicist, with great ingenuity, but not so much creative thought as einstein, it appears.

it is very difficult for me to think of Newton as a genius... more of a technician.

einstein on the other hand, was creative genius... absolutely unequaled by Newton.

then again, einstein couldn't have done it without Newton, so it's fair that Newton takes the cake, and that einstein "follow in his steps" so to speak.

 

[Mk]

... one hybrid of Newton & Einstein with a shake of Galileo please.

An omniscient being...

 

[Bladibla]

I think physics itself is too diverse in its subjects to choose a single 'greatest' physicist. Having said that, i'll try to answer it, but in a more specific way.
Experimental physics: Bardeen
Theoretical: Einstein
General: Newton

 

[PerennialII]

... think Einstein could have taken a lesson from Newton about methods of working (a snip of Newton's "somewhat" bizarre work ethics ... or mania is probably a better word).

 

[marlon]

Bohr, Dirac or Planck... In short, the QM-buddies

QM is far more usefull to us (and far more beautiful and elegant a theory than GR ever will be). After QM, classical physics comes second on the list of important, ingenious and usefull physics and GR closes the list.

regards
marlon

EDIT : the only thing Einstein ever did was formulating the equivalence principle, that is all.

 

[marlon]

Experimental physics: Bardeen

Huh

How's that ?

regards
marlon

 

[Lisa!]

Einstein! I just feel more comfortable with him than the others!

 

[rachmaninoff]

What about Santa Claus? He modified GR to accommodate for FTL travel. Einstein never thought of that!

 

[marlon]

Einstein! I just feel more comfortable with him than the others!

I checked the poll and yes, you actually voted for Einstein. Can you please tell me why ?

marlon

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

i would have to say, that if god exists then he would have to be the greatest physicist of all time.

 

[desiguy8179]

why is Heisenberg not on the list and we also cannot ignore ancient scientists like Aristotle whose theories remained supreme for thousands of yrs

 

[tribdog]

why is Heisenberg not on the list and we also cannot ignore ancient scientists like Aristotle whose theories remained supreme for thousands of yrs

yeah those theories were wrong longer than any others

 

[zoobyshoe]

yeah those theories were wrong longer than any others

I call him "The Father of all Crackpots".

 

[fourier jr]

how do i change my vote to galileo? he (& descartes & kepler i think) was was of the people who started the 'mathematicization' science, which imo was/is the most important development in the history of science.

 

[marlon]

why is Heisenberg not on the list and we also cannot ignore ancient scientists like Aristotle whose theories remained supreme for thousands of yrs

INDEED

Or what about Aristarchus, the real and only founder of "heliocentrism".

You know, this is what happens with polls that have only been constructed based upon "popular beliefs". "Everybody" asses Einstein to be the greatest scientist of all time, but 95% of these voters do not even know why. They do not know the work of Heisenberg, Bohr, Planck, Dirac, Bardeen, ...Hell, they do not even know what Einsteins work really is about or what PART of Special/General Relativity actually comes from Einstein HIMSELF!

marlon

 

[EL]

I miss Schwinger and Weinberg...

 

[marlon]

I miss Schwinger and Weinberg...

Spoken like a true QFT guy...

Let's add Yang and Mills, t' Hooft and Veltman, the asmptotic freedom trio, Dyson, ...

I always wonder why Feynman is mentioned in the poll but not the other scientists he won the Nobel Prize with. He did not do all of the work himself, you know.

marlon

 

[EL]

I always wonder why Feynman is mentioned in the poll but not the other scientists he won the Nibel Prize with. He did not do all of the work himself, you know.
marlon

Exactly. But indeed he brought much physics to the public. Anyway, I don't know if that really makes him a better physicist than the others...

 

[tribdog]

marlon isn't going to be happy with anybody's choice until he see's his own name up there.

 

[desiguy8179]

if public interest in science is a criterea,Steven hawking should be mentioned.
Hon. mentions also include ed witten,brian green...may be these string guys will dislodge einstein and Newton if string theory is ever proven to be credible

 

[tribdog]

if those are the criteria throw up Greg Bernhardt

 

[zoobyshoe]

Exactly. But indeed he brought much physics to the public. Anyway, I don't know if that really makes him a better physicist than the others...

A biography I read of him said that while he was at Cal Tech he often sat at his desk for hours fielding calls from physicists all over the country who wanted his take on how to go about doing various out of the ordinary things. He was universally respected among his peers as an extremely clever, innovative problem solver with a huge bag of alternate ways to go about unraveling any problem. It was other physicists who started calling him a genius well before the public might have heard of him when he got the Nobel prize.

As for being a popularizer of physics, he really wasn't. His two autobiographical books have almost no physics in them. His attempt to explain QED to a lay audience pretty much fell flat. He gave some other lectures to general audiences , but they were only half-structured, often going well off the subject of physics, and no one much reads them (These are in The Meaning Of It All, a little book that is much harder to find than Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman. Hardly any demand for it.)

The biography I like is Richard Feynman, A life in Science by John Gribbin and Mary Gribbin.

 

[SpaceTiger]

INDEED
Or what about Aristarchus, the real and only founder of "heliocentrism".

If you're going to pick an ancient astronomer, I think Hipparchus would be a much more natural choice. However, I'd say none of those folks were really "physicists" in the modern sense of the word. This especially goes for Aristotle, whose methods often more closely resembled those of a philosopher.

 

[marlon]

If you're going to pick an ancient astronomer, I think Hipparchus would be a much more natural choice.

ok, you have a good point here

However, I'd say none of those folks were really "physicists" in the modern sense of the word. This especially goes for Aristotle, whose methods often more closely resembled those of a philosopher.

That is also very true. But i do think these people must be in the list because they really "founded" the way our way of modern thinking and reasoning. Especially if you compare Hipparchus/Aristarchus versus Ptolemeaus.

regards
marlon

 

[Stingray]

EDIT : the only thing Einstein ever did was formulating the equivalence principle, that is all.

For someone accusing others of misunderstanding Einstein's contributions, you should learn a bit more yourself. Saying that all Einstein did was the equivalence principle is like saying that all Newton ever did was notice that falling apples hurt when they hit your head (and that they hurt more the farther they fall).

Einstein's version of the EP was hardly any different from Newton's anyway. Today, it's basically an anachronism. By itself, it does not lead to general relativity simply or even uniquely. Einstein contributed vastly more to gravity than you're giving him credit for (although he was not alone either).

Beyond that, he obviously played a major role in special relativity, which is used everywhere these days. His contributions to understanding the photoelectric effect, Brownian motion, etc. were also extremely important historically.

 

[marlon]

For someone accusing others of misunderstanding Einstein's contributions, you should learn a bit more yourself. Saying that all Einstein did was the equivalence principle is like saying that all Newton ever did was notice that falling apples hurt when they hit your head (and that they hurt more the farther they fall).

Well actually, this WAS the case. Newton invented his "own" mathematics to implement in his physical theories : ie integrals, etc etc...ow, i know that Leibniz also invented integrals and i do acknowledge the work of people like Descartes when it comes to vectors and so on...so let's not get into that. Einstein used all of the mathematics from Gauss and especially Riemann and Elie Cartan to mathematically "translate" his physical theories. Most of this "translating" work was not done by Einstein himself but by others like Riemann.

Beyond that, he obviously played a major role in special relativity, which is used everywhere these days.

I never denied that. But all of the basic ingredients of special relativity were all invented by other scientists like Lorentz, Fitzgerald, etc etc...When do you ever hear people give them credit for that ?

His contributions to understanding the photoelectric effect, Brownian motion, etc. were also extremely important historically.

First of all, most people will not even know that Einstein worked on Brownian motion or capillarity or that he even tried to build his own version of the refrigirator. You see, apparentely Einstein is all about relativity. This is indeed not true but what i am contesting is not this but the fact that "relativity is not all about Einstein". Hell no, it most certainly is NOT. Even, the basic concept of relativity does not even come from Einstein.

Again, Einstein is so famous, not thanks to his work but thanks to

1)Adolf Hitler
2) the Catholic Church's interpretation of Relativity
3) the famous extravaganza between progressive and conservative Germany in the first half of the 20th century.

regards
marlon

 

[desiguy8179]

adlf hitler has nothing to do with einstein,he was already quite famous in 1920 when nobody knew hitler.einstein didnt work in isolation so obviously he was inspired by others but einstein is not only famous in public,scientists qually admire him and i don't think they do it becoz of catholic church or german history

 

[zoobyshoe]

adlf hitler has nothing to do with einstein,he was already quite famous in 1920 when nobody knew hitler.einstein didnt work in isolation so obviously he was inspired by others but einstein is not only famous in public,scientists qually admire him and i don't think they do it becoz of catholic church or german history

I have no idea what Marlon is talking about with the Catholic Church thing. I was raised Catholic, and Einstein's name was never mentioned, unlike, say, Galileo and Darwin.

Einstein became world famous after the Eddington thing that proved gravity bends light, about 1920, as you said. He became famous as the guy who figured out this would happen, even before anyone had ever seen it happen. The average guy on the street started to recognise his name and picture as the "mathemetician" who figured out light can go around corners.

It was really a contingent of British scientists, including Eddington, who got the ball of fame rolling for him. They were particularly interested in trying to close the rift between Germany and England that was created by WWI. It was strongly felt that unbiased public recognition of the work of a "German" scientist would be an example to people of all walks of life that the war should be put behind them and dealings with Germany should normalize. Einstein protested gently a few times that he didn't consider himself to be German, and that the Germans might not really consider him to be German, but since he spoke German and lived there, no one much listened.

 

[selfAdjoint]

Well actually, this WAS the case. Newton invented his "own" mathematics to implement in his physical theories : ie integrals, etc etc...ow, i know that Leibniz also invented integrals and i do acknowledge the work of people like Descartes when it comes to vectors and so on...so let's not get into that. Einstein used all of the mathematics from Gauss and especially Riemann and Elie Cartan to mathematically "translate" his physical theories. Most of this "translating" work was not done by Einstein himself but by others like Riemann.

This is pretty naive. The geometry was easy, it was the covariance that was hard, and nobody before Einstein got anywhere near it. Even the great Hilbert only just made it a month or so after Einstein published his COVARIANT field equations in 1915. Einstein's great legacy is not curved space, but background independent physics.

 

[EL]

...It was other physicists who started calling him a genius well before the public might have heard of him when he got the Nobel prize.

Yes, Feynman is definitely one of the greatest physicists ever, no doubt in that. What I wanted to say is that guys like Schwinger et al also are...

Anyway I have now decided to vote for...drums...Albert Einstein!

 

[Bladibla]

INDEED
Or what about Aristarchus, the real and only founder of "heliocentrism".
You know, this is what happens with polls that have only been constructed based upon "popular beliefs". "Everybody" asses Einstein to be the greatest scientist of all time, but 95% of these voters do not even know why. They do not know the work of Heisenberg, Bohr, Planck, Dirac, Bardeen, ...Hell, they do not even know what Einsteins work really is about or what PART of Special/General Relativity actually comes from Einstein HIMSELF!
marlon

Then are you suggesting we are part of the public circle who only know about the popular beliefs. Note that the poll is actually here on the physics forums, not on a very widely publically acclaimed website.

Even if Einstein wasn't hyped up with all the public for his 'nihilism' views etc instead of the actual science, he should be a good contender for greatest physicist. From what I read on history of physics, QM is starting to be developed/discovered AFTER Einstein released his 5 papers, most importanty the quanta explanation of the photoelectric effect. Heisenberg, Schrodinger, Bohr etc of course were VERY important in the development of QM, but einstein was the 'father' of it.

It doesn't matter whether the public 'knows' about the matter or not if we are talking in the matter of development of physics and the singlemost greatest contributor. I don't think Newton invented Calculus because of his celebrity status. Einstein was what a scientist could be closest to a Celebrity, but that is no reason to undermine his achievments in theroetical physics.

 

[sameandnot]

QM is far more usefull to us (and far more beautiful and elegant a theory than GR ever will be). After QM, classical physics comes second on the list of important, ingenious and usefull physics and GR closes the list.

regards
marlon

EDIT : the only thing Einstein ever did was formulating the equivalence principle, that is all.

wow!
your whole subjective opinion is relative. if you can't see that, then it is obvious why you can't understand the contribution that einstein gave the world. people still do not understand relativity in its totality.

einstein introduced quantum theory with his paper on the quantum nature of light. classical physics was extended by einstein.
relativity is remarkably beautiful. and did i read you say that hitler made einstein popular? hey, stick to number crunching, where your opinions are not necessary. great minds are great physicists, hence the reason for feynmans nomination. of course, there were contributions that led to the theory of relativity. that is the nature of all development. you think Newton created classical mechanics out of thin air??

it is difficult to say if anyone would have discovered relativity, even by now, if einstein hadn't had the insight into nature to invision it. it is utterly mind-bending (blowing?) and beautiful. he was surely in a league of his own; totally went beyond the framework of average and even super-average men/physicists (of his day and ours) and provided the world with elegant and simple explanations of nature, that seem to us, now, self evident; ie. brownian motion, equivalence, the importance of the constancy of light;

where's bohm? is my question. plasma? anyone?

 

[Aether]

...it is difficult to say if anyone would have discovered relativity, even by now, if einstein hadn't had the insight into nature to invision it. it is utterly mind-bending (blowing?) and beautiful. he was surely in a league of his own; totally went beyond the framework of average and even super-average men/physicists (of his day and ours) and provided the world with elegant and simple explanations of nature

"Who Invented Relativity? ...One of the interesting historical aspects of the modern relativity theory is that, although often regarded as the highly original and even revolutionary contribution of a single individual, almost every idea and formula of the theory had been anticipated by others." --http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s8-08/8-08.htm

 

[fourier jr]

re: "einstein could only do what he did because of so-&-so"

he was still the one who saw connections where previously people thought there could be none. he was the man for his time & place, just as euler came onto the stage at the "right time" (not long after the birth of calculus, complex numbers, differential equations, mechanics, etc etc) so did einstein. in 1905 physics was ripe for someone to come along & bring everything together, and that happened to be einstein. that doesn't mean that just anyone could have done what he did; he's one of the greatest because he saw all the connections that nobody else did.

that's why i voted for him but after thinking twice about it what galileo did (unifying math & science) is much more significant than any of einstein's (or anyone else's) contributions.

 

[Aether]

...he's one of the greatest because he saw all the connections that nobody else did.

For example? And for each example, please cite an experiment that proves the point (e.g., unproven/unprovable, coordinate-system dependent, etc. conjectures don't count).

 

[Lisa!]

I checked the poll and yes, you actually voted for Einstein. Can you please tell me why ?
marlon

Again Spanish inquistion!

Mostly because of his personality! I think he was the way a scientist should be! Of course that's not the only reason. I used to think Einstein wasn't as great as some people say when I was at high school, but the university changed my mind about him.(who knows perhaps if I ever decide to get my MS and PhD , I'd choose another person.)
You know personally I don't like these kind of questions and I don't know why some people take them so seriously.

with respect to all scientists

 

[marlon]

Again Spanish inquistion!

Opps, i take it you are no fan of mine. Have we met before ?

Mostly because of his personality! I think he was the way a scientist should be!

You mean a lousy housefather, cheating husband and begifted with inferior communicative capabilities.

Anyhow, thanks for answering...the Inquisition will notify you of our verdict, ok ?


regards
marlon

 

[marlon]

This is pretty naive. The geometry was easy, it was the covariance that was hard, and nobody before Einstein got anywhere near it. Even the great Hilbert only just made it a month or so after Einstein published his COVARIANT field equations in 1915.

I am sorry but you make it sound like Einstein created or even implemented his own mathematical formalism to translate his physical ideas. This was NOT the case. Einstein stole the math from other people. Ofcourse this is NOT a bad thing but it DOES need to be mentioned.

Einstein's great legacy is not curved space, but background independent physics.

True...but most of the maths used to formalize this concept (which was indeed Einstein's legacy) was already known. This mathematics was used within the GR context with the help of many other scientists that contributed far more on this than Einstein himself. When do you ever acclaim these people for their work. That is my point



regards
marlon

 

[marlon]

adlf hitler has nothing to do with einstein,he was already quite famous in 1920 when nobody knew hitler.einstein didnt work in isolation so obviously he was inspired by others but einstein is not only famous in public,scientists qually admire him and i don't think they do it becoz of catholic church or german history

Once SR became an established physical theory a vivid discussion arose in Germany on the topic of "relativity of time"...The Catholic Church did not want to accept this fact for the obvious reasons.

In politics, the discussion of relativity extended to the relativity of morals, ethics, tradition. This was a very broad and agitated debate between progressive and conservative Germany. Einstein was a big participator into these discussions.

Now, The link with Hitler is very well known. I am ofcourse not referring to Hitler himself but to the political regime under Hitler. Einstein got a lot of publicity from this regime for all the very well known reasons. this just needs to be mentioned.

regards
marlon

EDIT : and i really do not think that the average man in the street really cared about some mathematician that figured out that light can bend around corners. In that day and age, the average man was not like us, he was very busy with providing for his family and...basically...surviving. Especially in the Interbellum Period.

 

[Lisa!]

Opps, i take it you are no fan of mine.

That depends on you:
I just can't get along well with people who're so argumentative. They tend to misunderstand you and they're opinionated...
So if you'd be the way I said, certainly I can never be a fan of you!

Have we met before ?

Sounds like you don't have a good memory!


Never mind! People say my memory is frighteningly great![/size]:shy:

You mean a lousy housefather, cheating husband and begifted with inferior communicative capabilities.

Since I was certain you'd think like that, I mentioned what I mean by his personality! He was frank, humble, courageous and openminded. and he was a great thinker...(note that I have reasons for what I'm saying)

Anyhow, thanks for answering...the Inquisition will notify you of our verdict, ok ?

Oh great! But you know I don't care about others' verdict.
Regards

 

[marlon]

That depends on you:
I just can't get along well with people who're so argumentative. They tend to misunderstand you and they're opinionated...

You are being a bit easy on this. Asking you why you think a certain way is not equal to being "argumentative". If "they" tend to misunderstand you, maybe asking questions is just about avoiding that. I think you are just a bit afraid of really speaking your mind and thinking like an adult.

Don't worry, wisdom comes with age...



ps : doesn't it strike you as being strange that YOU are the one passing the first judgements ? In some parts of the world, people call this "hippocrite"

Sounds like you don't have a good memory!

I do know we had some discussions before but what i meant with this question is how can you pass judgement on me , based upon the few superficial/hollow talks we had before ?

openminded.

Really, well not for other scientists' work. Just look at his INCORRECT opinions on the very fundaments of QM.

I know you think he was a great thinker, he question is WHY DO YOU THINK THAT ? This is a question you still have not answered.

Oh great! But you know I don't care about others' verdict.
Regards

That is very cool of you to say that. I completely agree with you

regards
marlon