4 ms·
Decent idea, but unfortunately unconvincing examples. Mendel has been the subject of controversy regarding whether his results were fraudulent. Hardly a great
by andars 9y ago
Decent idea, but unfortunately unconvincing examples.
Mendel has been the subject of controversy regarding whether his results were fraudulent. Hardly a great choice for an exemplar, whatever the truth is.
Linus Pauling (described as an "amateur biologist" in a caption) was hardly an amateur interested in the structure of DNA, having written his PhD on x-ray diffraction. In addition, he is introduced in the text as "Linus Pauli," a Nobel-prize winning physicist. This seems to be a Mendelian cross between Linus Pauling, the Nobel-prize winning chemist, and Wolfgang Pauli, the Nobel-prize winning physicist.
Francis Crick, who made the title as an example of the power of amateurs, was pursuing a PhD in the field of x-ray crystallography, which sort of disqualifies him an "amateur" in my mind. Those "careful biology experiments" were studies of x-ray diffraction images of DNA, making Crick's physics background entirely relevant.
- soufron 9y agoThe controversy regarding Mendel is now out of date. It was mostly a clash of power from people who disregarded results coming from someone who was so obviously out of the system. Dammit you're right about Pauling, it's a typo and I'll correct it. Thanks for it. For their "amateur" venture into biology. The idea occurred to me while reading "the double helix". Watson consistently repeat that they were not insiders from the field. And more than the X-Ray diffraction results, it was the "stupid" 3D wooden models inspired by Pauling who helped to achieve faster and better results than the other teams. I'll add it also.
- jhbadger 9y agoThe controversy was actually by the great statistician/geneticist R.A. Fisher in the 1930s -- and the criticism was that Mendel's experimental results were too close to his theoretical results, not that Mendel was an "outsider". It wasn't necessarily conscious fraud on Mendel's part, but once you see a pattern it is easy to discard "bad data" that doesn't fit it. That's why modern experimentalists tend to "blind" groups during the data collection phase.
- soufron 9y agoPeople consider today that Fisher was wrong in his criticism. It's my own opinion that his feud was aggravated by the fact that Mendel was an outsider.
- valuearb 9y agoMichael Faraday. "Although Faraday received little formal education, he was one of the most influential scientists in history. It was by his research on the magnetic field around a conductor carrying a direct current that Faraday established the basis for the concept of the electromagnetic field in physics. Faraday also established that magnetism could affect rays of light and that there was an underlying relationship between the two phenomena.[1][2] He similarly discovered the principles of electromagnetic induction and diamagnetism, and the laws of electrolysis. His inventions of electromagnetic rotary devices formed the foundation of electric motor technology, and it was largely due to his efforts that electricity became practical for use in technology. As a chemist, Faraday discovered benzene, investigated the clathrate hydrate of chlorine, invented an early form of the Bunsen burner and the system of oxidation numbers, and popularised terminology such as "anode", "cathode", "electrode" and "ion". Faraday ultimately became the first and foremost Fullerian Professor of Chemistry at the Royal Institution of Great Britain, a lifetime position. Faraday was an excellent experimentalist who conveyed his ideas in clear and simple language; his mathematical abilities, however, did not extend as far as trigonometry and were limited to the simplest algebra." Tesla never graduated university, and was homeless for a while. Ended up basically creating everything we needed to make and use AC power.
- soufron 9y agoWow, I did not know about these two. I'll note it for later.