Your favourite quantum phycisists and why?

  • Thread starter Thread starter confusedashell
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Quantum
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around participants sharing their favorite quantum physicists and the reasons behind their choices. It touches on various aspects of quantum physics, including contributions to theory, interpretation, and notable achievements of different physicists.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants regard P. A. M. Dirac as significant for both technical and interpretational contributions, while others express differing views on the importance of Bell and Bohm.
  • Feynman is mentioned by multiple participants as a favorite due to his contributions to quantum physics.
  • Some participants humorously mention non-physicists or less conventional choices, such as Jessica Biel.
  • Fermi is highlighted for his numerous contributions, including statistical distributions and paradoxes, with some participants discussing specific terms like "Fermi-Dirac."
  • Epicurus is referenced for his early predictions related to quantum indeterminism.
  • Several participants express frustration over the repetitive nature of the thread topic, indicating it has been discussed multiple times before.
  • There is a mention of a historical photo of prominent physicists, with participants discussing its significance and the individuals depicted.
  • Some participants question the relevance of certain physicists, such as Kaku, suggesting he is more known for popularizing physics than for original research contributions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express a range of opinions on their favorite physicists, with no clear consensus on who is the most important or intelligent contributor to quantum physics. Multiple competing views remain throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Some participants reference specific contributions and achievements of physicists, but there is no resolution on the significance of these contributions or the criteria for determining importance.

confusedashell
Messages
125
Reaction score
0
Just thought it'd be fun to see which people are regarded as the most intelligent and most important contributers to quantum physics?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For technical and formal aspects, Dirac.
For interpretational aspects, Bell and Bohm.
 
P. A. M. Dirac for interpretation as well.
Bohm no. Bell just for one small aspect.
 
confusedashell said:
Just thought it'd be fun to see which people are regarded as the most intelligent and most important contributers to quantum physics?

Feynman
 
Myself...

edit
just for the record, it might be the Googolplexth discussion on that pointless topic.
 
Last edited:
mine is Jessica Biel

marlon
 
Yeah, I'll go with humanino. He was also the first person to use "Googolplexth" in a sentence.
 
Last edited:
I'll go with pam, I'll go with P.A.M. Dirac. He has an equation. Do you?
 
I'll go with Emanuel Derman.
 
  • #10
jimmysnyder said:
I'll go with pam, I'll go with P.A.M. Dirac. He has an equation. Do you?

An equation and a notation, no less.

Learning Bell's inequality blew my little mind, way back when. I haven't been the same since.
 
  • #11
I also go with Dirac.

lisab said:
An equation and a notation, no less.

And a monopole, and statistics, and another equation (non-quantum), and ...
 
  • #12
..., constrained dynamics, "delta function", antiparticles, ...
 
  • #13
Fermi. He has an accelerator, a paradox, a problem, a hole, a heap, a statistical distribution, a particle, a Golden Rule, an energy level and a Linux distribution named after him.
 
  • #14
Witten?
 
  • #15
what said:
Witten?
The ? is most appropriate.
 
  • #16
Gokul43201 said:
Fermi. He has an accelerator, a paradox, a problem, a hole, a heap, a statistical distribution, a particle, a Golden Rule, an energy level and a Linux distribution named after him.
and a femtometer.
 
  • #17
Gokul43201 said:
Fermi. He has an accelerator, a paradox, a problem, a hole, a heap, a statistical distribution, a particle, a Golden Rule, an energy level and a Linux distribution named after him.

What statistical distribution? Fermi-Dirac?
Dirac has a video codec named after him, as well as a sea.
(The linux distribution is tied to the accelerator, right?)
 
  • #18
Epicurus predicted quantum indeterminism over 2000 years ago (De Rerum Natura 2.216-293).

:biggrin:
 
  • #19
Toss up between Planck, Dirac, Einstein (well sort of :wink:) Smolin, Born, Kaku and Feynman. With honourable mentions to Pauli, Heisenberg and Schrödinger of course and in no particular order I can think of.

I wish I could find that photo of the great meeting of minds on QM, because frankly my favourites are all there, but I can't remember all the players off the top of my head.
 
  • #20
This is probably the 10th thread asking the same damn question...it gets old.
 
  • #21
robphy said:
What statistical distribution? Fermi-Dirac?
Yes, but, "Fermi function" is almost a household term nowadays! :)
Dirac has a video codec named after him, as well as a sea.
Yeah, but the sea is filled with Fermions, as is the sky above the Dirac sea!
(The linux distribution is tied to the accelerator, right?)
I believe that's right.
 
  • #22
Cyrus said:
This is probably the 10th thread asking the same damn question...it gets old.
This is probably the second person at least mentionning this fact in this same discussion. No time to read even 19 other messages ?
 
  • #23
humanino said:
This is probably the second person at least mentionning this fact in this same discussion. No time to read even 19 other messages ?

Not really. I don't care. I just find it annoying that these threads keep on popping up, over, and over, and over.......and over.

This and, "I like this girl"...:rolleyes:

(Actually, I've read the other 19 threads. So, I am not going to read 19 posts in this one).
 
  • #24
Cyrus said:
I just find it annoying that these threads keep on popping up, over, and over, and over.......and over.
At least for once we agree.
 
  • #25
Schrödinger's Dog said:
Toss up between Planck, Dirac, Einstein (well sort of :wink:) Smolin, Born, Kaku and Feynman. With honourable mentions to Pauli, Heisenberg and Schrödinger of course and in no particular order I can think of.

I wish I could find that photo of the great meeting of minds on QM, because frankly my favourites are all there, but I can't remember all the players off the top of my head.

This one?
http://photos.aip.org/veritySearch2.jsp?item_id=Einstein%20Albert%20E3&fname=einstein_Albert_e3.jpg&title=null&storePublished=Y&color=N&contactID=78
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #26
robphy said:
This one?
http://photos.aip.org/veritySearch2.jsp?item_id=Einstein%20Albert%20E3&fname=einstein_Albert_e3.jpg&title=null&storePublished=Y&color=N&contactID=78

that's the one! It must of be a copyright issue, as it's no longer searchable in google image searches or via wiki, which is where I first saw it IIRC. Either that or I'm just not putting in the right search parameters?

Formidable line up.

Fifth (5th) Solvay Congress, Brussels, 'Institut International de Physique Solvay, Cinquieme Conseil de Fifth (5th) Solvay Congress, Brussels, 1927, the theme was electrons and protons. Back Row L-R: A. Piccard; E. Henriot (Brussels); P. Ehrenfest; E. Herzen; T. de Donder (Brussels); E. Schrödinger; J. E. Verschaffelt (Ghent); W. Pauli; W. Heisenberg; R.H. Fowler (Cambridge); L. Brillouin. Middle row L-R: P. Debye; M. Knudsen; W. L. Bragg; H.A.Kramers; P.Dirac; A.H. Compton; L. deBroglie; M. Born; N. Bohr. Front Row L-R: I. Langmuir; M. Planck; M. Curie; H.A. Lorentz; A. Einstein; P. Langevin; C. Guye (Geneva); C.T.R. Wilson; O.W. Richardson. ABSENT: Sir W. H. Bragg; H. Deslandres; E. Van Aubel (Ghent).

Result of the match: Einstein et al 0 - Pauli et al 4
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #27
Schrödinger's Dog said:
Toss up between Planck, Dirac, Einstein (well sort of :wink:) Smolin, Born, Kaku and Feynman. With honourable mentions to Pauli, Heisenberg and Schrödinger of course and in no particular order I can think of.
Why Kaku?
It seems to me that he is better known for his popular books and textbooks than for original research contributions.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
533
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K