And even there, he's second to Sagin.
Who is/was the world's greatest scientist?
- Thread starter Morrus
- Start date
sabrinathecat
Explorer
Would you classify Westinghouse as a Scientist or an Engineer? Or both?
Sir Isaac Newton is an interesting character. Died a virgin. Only spoke once in his years in the House of Lords (to complain about a draft). Invented calculus to solve mathematical equations that only he himself could comprehend (at the time).
Tesla: brilliant, robbed by Edison (an absolutely evil um, male offspring of unwed parentage), was held back by a lack of funds. Figured out WHY electric motors worked (everyone knew that the did, but not why).
Da'Vincci: just bloody brilliant at inventing machines well in advance of the technology to build them.
The inventors of Insulin get a nod.
As for the scientist who has had the most influence... well, the scientist who invented ballistics. Yep, bullets and firearms have affected more people than anything else. And they still do. (You didn't say it had to be a positive influence)
Sir Isaac Newton is an interesting character. Died a virgin. Only spoke once in his years in the House of Lords (to complain about a draft). Invented calculus to solve mathematical equations that only he himself could comprehend (at the time).
Tesla: brilliant, robbed by Edison (an absolutely evil um, male offspring of unwed parentage), was held back by a lack of funds. Figured out WHY electric motors worked (everyone knew that the did, but not why).
Da'Vincci: just bloody brilliant at inventing machines well in advance of the technology to build them.
The inventors of Insulin get a nod.
As for the scientist who has had the most influence... well, the scientist who invented ballistics. Yep, bullets and firearms have affected more people than anything else. And they still do. (You didn't say it had to be a positive influence)
Ben Franklin - the guy was a rock star and did a lot of things in a lot of different fields. Mostly he was a gamer, yes a gamer mostly Chess..
from his wiki page
from his wiki page
Well, Carl Sagan had Cosmos. And, guess what Tyson is going to have?
Tesla, unfortunately, is a victim of the process that made him legend. The principle of the operation of the electric motor was worked out by François Arago in 1824, decades before Tesla was born. Tesla improved the practical approach to constructing them several times over, but he was not the first to figure out how and why it worked.
Mother Nature invented insulin. Several different people are separately responsible for practical extraction/discovery (1921-23), determining the primary structure/amino acid sequencing (1950), and synthesizing the stuff (1960s).
reelo
Hero
Indeed. A famous biologist once said "Without the knowledge of evolution, nothing in biology makes sense. In the light of evolution, *everything* in biology makes sense."
The impact of Darwin's findings in MANY branches of science is so massive. And they finally led to science shaking off the shakles of religion...
jonesy
A Wicked Kendragon
It's sarcasm. My sig. The second line is in italics. Means I can't read sarcasm.
(It's like we're stuck in an infinitely recursive sarcasm tautology.)
Let's be wary of the religion aspect here. Religion is a disallowed topic on ENWorld as it is easy to disagree and offend others. If you're going to dance on the subject, implying anything negative about religion specifically or in general would likely cross that line.
On Darwin specifically and religion, it was my understanding that he was religious and did not want his work to be construed as a rejection of religion. Though I am not religious, I can respect that there could be a way to accept and integrate science and religion. In my view, Darwin described the process by which various species could emerge, and not the stimulus that might instigate that.
I suspect Umbran will step in if we go any further here.
reelo
Hero
I heed your warning.
Carl also had a memorable voice & delivery that- while mocked- was endearing. And we all remember what we love. Tyson will get a boost on his outreach, but I'm not sure he has the same geeky charisma that Sagin had. Michio Kaku, on the other hand...
Re: Religion vs Science
All it boils down to is that the eventual split between the two- believing what we are told is divine will Vs believing what we can diectly expereience and test- was crucial. Once that became the dominant method of studying how the world works, it was a revolution. Science became the study of what we can determine with rigor. Religion is what we take on faith.
(I say that as a practicing Catholic.)
So my gut says Newton to me. I'm not entirely sure why I'd rank him above Darwin or Einstein; he just kinda "feels" more solid in my mind. Obviously there have a been a lot of other genuine geniuses who have made important discoveries or introduced new ways of approaching things.
It's interesting that we tend to be looking backwards for greatness, rather than modern times. We do that for other things, too, I guess. Is that because the further back we go, the greater the number of potential massive fundamental discoveries is? I mean, obviously someone could hypothetically discover evidence of a multiverse or resolve quantum theories with relativity or figure out how to do something incredible and magical like warp speed or a transporter beam. But without delving into scifi too much, historical figures got to figure out the beginnings of awesome stuff like gravity, heliocentricity, relativity, evolution, etc. Big but basic things which needed that leap (well, relativity isn't so basic).
These days folks do make big discoveries (accelerating expansion, for example) but most of the time it seems to be about refinements and ever more specialized fields with the occasional big moment.
Then again, it was probably always like that. It's not like someone discovered gravity every week.
It's interesting that we tend to be looking backwards for greatness, rather than modern times. We do that for other things, too, I guess. Is that because the further back we go, the greater the number of potential massive fundamental discoveries is? I mean, obviously someone could hypothetically discover evidence of a multiverse or resolve quantum theories with relativity or figure out how to do something incredible and magical like warp speed or a transporter beam. But without delving into scifi too much, historical figures got to figure out the beginnings of awesome stuff like gravity, heliocentricity, relativity, evolution, etc. Big but basic things which needed that leap (well, relativity isn't so basic).
These days folks do make big discoveries (accelerating expansion, for example) but most of the time it seems to be about refinements and ever more specialized fields with the occasional big moment.
Then again, it was probably always like that. It's not like someone discovered gravity every week.