My favored scientist quotes

[Auto-Didact]

Read Euler, read Euler. He is the master of us all.
- Laplace

 

[Mary Conrads Sanburn]

The Nobel Prize in Physics 2019

• James Peebles
• Michel Mayor
• Didier Queloz

The Nobel Prize in Physics 2019 was awarded "for contributions to our understanding of the evolution of the universe and Earth's place in the cosmos" with one half to James Peebles "for theoretical discoveries in physical cosmology", the other half jointly to Michel Mayor and Didier Queloz "for the discovery of an exoplanet orbiting a solar-type star."

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2019/summary/

 

[epenguin]

Not by a scientist but in line with themes here:

To formulate general ideas is to change saltpeter into gunpowder.Formuler des idées générales, c'est changer le salpêtre en poudre.—A. DE MUSSET, Confessions d'un Enfant du Siecle,

 

[Klystron]

"Obvious is the most dangerous word in mathematics. "

-- Eric Temple Bell author of Men of Mathematics.

 

[waternohitter]

The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it. ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

 

[Andre]

...the central mystery of climate science. It is not a scientific mystery but a human mystery. How does it happen that a whole generation of scientific experts is blind to obvious facts?

Freeman Dyson

(Foreword to GWPF report #18 Goklany, I.M. 2015, Carbon dioxide, The good news)

 

[ThatGuyIS]

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Albert Einstein

Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.
Albert Einstein

by definition it’s common for people to use the word logic versus common sense even those there’s an infinite amount of options to choose from through being irrational... While logic is a strict principle of choice(s)

 

[Auto-Didact]

Mathematics is too important to be abandoned to fanatic logicians.
- Benoit B. Mandelbrot

 

[sysprog]

If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
Albert Einstein

If you cain't fix it with duct tape, then you ain't usin' enough duct tape.

 

[Auto-Didact]

It is by logic that we prove, but by intuition that we discover. To know how to criticize is good, to know how to create is better.
- Henri Poincaré

 

[zoki85]

"I've never made a mistake, I've only learned from experience."

-T.A.Edison​

 

[Auto-Didact]

Algebra is the offer made by the devil to the mathematician. The devil says: 'I will give you this powerful machine, it will answer any question you like. All you need to do is give me your soul: give up geometry and you will have this marvellous machine.'
- Sir Michael Atiyah

 

[Auto-Didact]

Mathematics is not a deductive science - that's a cliché. When you try to prove a theorem, you don't just list the hypotheses, and then start to reason. What you do is trial and error, experimentation, guesswork. You want to find out what the facts are, and what you do is in that respect similar to what a laboratory technician does.
- Paul Halmos

 

[Demystifier]

All non-ontological interpretations of quantum mechanics are alike; each ontological interpretation is ontological in its own way.
- Hrvoje Nikolić (paraphrasing Tolstoy)

 

[atyy]

All non-ontological interpretations of quantum mechanics are alike; each ontological interpretation is ontological in its own way.
- Hrvoje Nikolić (paraphrasing Tolstoy)

Ontological interpretations are unhappy.

 

[kith]

Algebra is the offer made by the devil to the mathematician. The devil says: 'I will give you this powerful machine, it will answer any question you like. All you need to do is give me your soul: give up geometry and you will have this marvellous machine.'
- Sir Michael Atiyah

Nice quote! Here are some quotes from Paul Lockhart on a similar theme.

On why the Greeks didn't discover modern math:
"The curious thing is why history went the way it did, and why the modern approach has been so much more successful. The classical Greek geometers were every bit as brilliant and resourceful as their seventeenth-century counterparts (if not more so). It is certainly not a question of mathematical talent. There are plenty of reasons why the Greeks preferred direct geometric reasoning, aesthetic taste, of course, being one of them. In fact, this prejudice was taken to such an extreme that numbers themselves tended to be viewed geometrically (as lengths of sticks), and numerical operations were thought of as geometrical transformations (e.g. multiplication as scaling). This severely hampered their understanding."

On the tension between working with classical-geometry-based and number-based methods:
"There is no question that as visual animals we prefer a picture to a string of alchemical symbols. I, for one, want to feel connected to my problem on a visceral, tactile level. It helps me understand the relevant issues when I can imagine running my hand over a surface or wiggling part of an object and picturing in my mind's eye what happens. But I know that when push comes to shove, the truth is in the details, and the details are in the number pattern.
Of course, any analytic argument could be painstakingly translated into purely geometric terms, and in fact, this is the way many seventeenth-century mathematicians worked; even then there was still a great deal of prejudice in favor of geometric reasoning. This tends, however, to produce very contorted and artificial explanations in place of concise, almost too-simple-to-believe analytic arguments."

On math and modernism:
"I suppose what I'm really talking about here is modernism. The exact same issues - abstraction, the study of pattern for its own sake, and (sadly) the alienation of the layperson - are all present in modern art, music and literature. I would even venture to say that we mathematicians have gone the furthest in this direction , for the simple reason that there is nothing whatever to stop us. Untethered from the constraints of physical reality, we can push much further in the direction of simple beauty. Mathematics is the only true abstract art."

His personal conclusion:
"Maybe it all comes down to this. There are lots of beautiful patterns out there. Some, such as a triangle taking up half its box, can be easily seen and felt; others, like $d(x^3) = 3x^2 dx$, are not so immediately available to our visual imagination. So be it; I myself want to be open to all forms of beauty. For me, that's what being a mathematician is all about."
(all from chapter 25 of Part Two of his book Measurement)

 

[jack action]

«Skepticism is dangerous. That's exactly its function, in my view. It is the business of skepticism to be dangerous. And that's why there is a great reluctance to teach it in the schools. That's why you don't find a general fluency in skepticism in the media. On the other hand, how will we negotiate a very perilous future if we don't have the elementary intellectual tools to ask searching questions of those nominally in charge, especially in a democracy?

[...]

I want to say a little more about the burden of skepticism. You can get into a habit of thought in which you enjoy making fun of all those other people who don't see things as dearly as you do. [...]

It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite balance between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great openness to new ideas. Obviously those two modes of thought are in some tension. But if you are able to exercise only one of these modes, whichever one it is, you're in deep trouble.»

THE BURDEN OF SKEPTICISM by Carl Sagan first published in Skeptical Inquirer, vol.12, Fall 1987

 

[Auto-Didact]

Thus the combination Hamiltonian formalism, complex structure and projective structure is sufficient to deduce the Schr¨odinger dynamics, for all possible phase space dimensions. Unlike the usual axiomatization of QM, Hilbert space is now a consequence.
- K.R.W. Jones

 

[Demystifier]

Thus the combination Hamiltonian formalism, complex structure and projective structure is sufficient to deduce the Schr¨odinger dynamics, for all possible phase space dimensions. Unlike the usual axiomatization of QM, Hilbert space is now a consequence.
- K.R.W. Jones

Can you give the reference? I would like to see the technical details.

 

[DanielMB]

Can you give the reference? I would like to see the technical details.

Just google "The Schrödinger equation from three postulates, Jones"

 

[Demystifier]

Just google "The Schrödinger equation from three postulates, Jones"

It seems that the paper has been submitted to MPLA, but has never been published in a journal.

 

[DanielMB]

Y

It seems that the paper has been submitted to MPLA, but has never been published in a journal.

You are right, it could be traced to the proceedings of a 1994 conference in Adelaide, Australia, but I couldn't find its publication in a journal

 

[Demystifier]

You are right, it could be traced to the proceedings of a 1994 conference in Adelaide, Australia, but I couldn't find its publication in a journal

But some of those results he published as a part of another paper:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003491684710700?via=ihub

 

[Auto-Didact]

But some of those results he published as a part of another paper:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003491684710700?via=ihub

Here is Jones' list of publications:
http://krwjones.com/wordpress/publications/

'The Schrodinger Equation from Three Postulates' indeed seems to have been solely published in the proceedings of that conference: https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814532228

In any case, I would say his most important work (in physics) is probably: https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9507001

 

[Auto-Didact]

"All linear equations describing the evolution of physical systems are known to be approximations to some nonlinear theories, with only one notable exception of the Schrodinger equation."
- I. Bialynicki-Birula

 

[Frigus]

So is biological taxonomy.

Can you please explain it.
I think it is because every organism is interrelated.

 

[BillTre]

Can you please explain it.
I think it is because every organism is interrelated.

There used to be few named species and the naming was not very organized (or systematized).
Now there are more species and rules for how they get named. Generally, now names are to reflect the best understanding of the evolutionary relationships among the species.
Modern names are usually made of a genus name (can be shared with other species in the same genus) and a species name (which can also be used for other species in other genera (plural genus).

Because of the rules now used, combined with new techniques for determining relationships and an immense amount of new molecular data being used, the names get changed frequently.
As a result, some names have been used for more than one species. The older names remain in the literature and have to be reinterpreted.

The genus name is shared among multiple species due to their being related.

 

[Frigus]

All science is either physics or stamp collecting.
-- Rutherford

Plot twist:- he got Nobel prize in chemistry.

 

[melissaa]

Great quotes.
This one is my favorite though:

Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.
(Albert Einstein)

 

[BillTre]

Not really a quote, but a pretty good summary of some of the motivating factors of scientists doing science.
Comment made in response to the idea of most scientists are suppressing anti-global warming science.

 

[BillTre]

Now for a more traditional quote.

A famous quote from 1973 is:
"Nothing in Biology Makes Sense, Except in the Light of Evolution"
by Theodosius Dobzhansky
This refers to the importance of evolution in understanding/explaining the functions and diversity of biological systems.

An interesting, more recent (2018) variant is:
"Nothing in Biology Makes Sense, Except in the Light of Information"
by Bernd-Olaf Küppers
This refers to the importance of information in understanding/explaining biological/molecular functions.

 

[Auto-Didact]

"In Hilbert space no one can hear you scream."
- Yakir Aharonov

 

[Duplex]

Asteroids have us in their sight. The dinosaurs didn't have a space program, so they're not here to talk about this problem.

- Neil deGrasse Tyson

 

[Auto-Didact]

Thus quantum mechanics occupies a very unusual place among physical theories: it contains classical mechanics as a limiting case, yet at the same time it requires this limiting case for its own formulation.
- Landau & Lifshitz

 

[atyy]

All non-ontological interpretations of quantum mechanics are alike; each ontological interpretation is ontological in its own way.
- Hrvoje Nikolić (paraphrasing Tolstoy)

https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.04008
Anna Karenina and The Two Envelopes Problem
R. D. Gill