6 ms·

Wow... How is this not more well known? It's not like von Neumann doesn't have plenty of other important contributions to his name.

kalium-xyz 6y ago
Most people who have a lot of things named after then wanted to have a lot of things named after them. Consider: why is more named after von Neumann then Erdos?
- eru 6y ago
  Compared https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_John_von_Neumann https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Joh... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Paul_Erd%C5%91s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Pau... Seems more or less a tie to me. [0] Especially compared to this chap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Carl_Friedrich_Gauss https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Car... [0] Actually, it's not a tie: If you add the entries on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conjectures_by_Paul_Erd%C5%91s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conjectures_by_Paul_Er... you get a clear winner.
  - gcanyon 6y ago
    There's a large number of things named after Euler as well -- so many that sometimes things are named after the first person to prove them after Euler: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Leonhard_Euler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Leo...
masswerk 6y ago
Have a look the oral history interview with J. Presper Eckert, it's a long lasting controversy: https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/107275 https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/107275 PDF: https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/107275/oh013jpe.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/107275/oh...
- jshier 6y ago
  The oral history of the person claiming credit was stolen from him is not a reliable source.
  - masswerk 6y ago
    Mind that he repeatedly refers to Julian Biglow of the IAS as a (neutral) witness. There have been plenty of law suits regarding this… Probably, the same also applies to any commentary and/or writing by von Neumann.
    - jshier 6y ago
      Lawsuits? Unless you're talking personal suits, the only one I know of, Honeywell v. Sperry Rand, did not go well for Eckert or Mauchly, personally or professionally, especially Mauchly.
      - masswerk 6y ago
        My (moral) problems with von Neumann are of entirely different nature, namely his persistent advocacy for a "preemptive" nuclear first strike, before the USSR could roll out a thermonuclear bomb in production. Which might be regarded as attempted, cold-blooded genocide. So, not my personal hero.
        arethuza 6y ago
        I don't think there is any doubt that a "preemptive" nuclear first strike by the US would have morally and legally been regarded as genocide. The last time we had a debate on HN on this topic a number of people seemed to think it would have been a good idea - which I found genuinely disturbing. Hopefully I was just being trolled.
        Koshkin 6y ago
        On the other hand, there is still no universal agreement on the morality of the wartime bombing campaigns that lead to high numbers of civilian casualties.
gpanders 6y ago
It is far from settled whether the GP’s interpretation is in fact what actually happened. I highly recommend The Innovators by Walter Isaacson. Among other things, it covers this “controversy” in great detail.
- Rochus 6y ago
  History is not science. There will never be absolute certainty because human language is always open to interpretation. Even when the evidence is clear, the historiography that relates to that evidence is, again, open to interpretation. The interpretation of terms and situations changes over time, and facts can later be interpreted differently (even maliciously). Not even witness statements in a court case, of which there were several in the present case with hundreds of pages of legal reporting, are immune to interpretation. So yes, I can't prove to you that it happened that way because all of my sources are open to interpretation. There are enough other events in history that are considered sufficiently certain, and yet continue to be disputed by certain people for various motives. Some states even consider it necessary to criminalize the questioning of certain historical facts for this reason.

kalium-xyz 6y ago

Most people who have a lot of things named after then wanted to have a lot of things named after them. Consider: why is more named after von Neumann then Erdos?

eru 6y ago
Compared https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_John_von_Neumann https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Joh... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Paul_Erd%C5%91s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Pau... Seems more or less a tie to me. [0] Especially compared to this chap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Carl_Friedrich_Gauss https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Car... [0] Actually, it's not a tie: If you add the entries on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conjectures_by_Paul_Erd%C5%91s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conjectures_by_Paul_Er... you get a clear winner.
- gcanyon 6y ago
  There's a large number of things named after Euler as well -- so many that sometimes things are named after the first person to prove them after Euler: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Leonhard_Euler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Leo...

masswerk 6y ago

Have a look the oral history interview with J. Presper Eckert, it's a long lasting controversy: https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/107275 https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/107275 PDF: https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/107275/oh013jpe.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/107275/oh...

jshier 6y ago
The oral history of the person claiming credit was stolen from him is not a reliable source.
- masswerk 6y ago
  Mind that he repeatedly refers to Julian Biglow of the IAS as a (neutral) witness. There have been plenty of law suits regarding this… Probably, the same also applies to any commentary and/or writing by von Neumann.
  - jshier 6y ago
    Lawsuits? Unless you're talking personal suits, the only one I know of, Honeywell v. Sperry Rand, did not go well for Eckert or Mauchly, personally or professionally, especially Mauchly.
    - masswerk 6y ago
      My (moral) problems with von Neumann are of entirely different nature, namely his persistent advocacy for a "preemptive" nuclear first strike, before the USSR could roll out a thermonuclear bomb in production. Which might be regarded as attempted, cold-blooded genocide. So, not my personal hero.
      - arethuza 6y ago
        I don't think there is any doubt that a "preemptive" nuclear first strike by the US would have morally and legally been regarded as genocide. The last time we had a debate on HN on this topic a number of people seemed to think it would have been a good idea - which I found genuinely disturbing. Hopefully I was just being trolled.
        Koshkin 6y ago
        On the other hand, there is still no universal agreement on the morality of the wartime bombing campaigns that lead to high numbers of civilian casualties.

gpanders 6y ago

It is far from settled whether the GP’s interpretation is in fact what actually happened. I highly recommend The Innovators by Walter Isaacson. Among other things, it covers this “controversy” in great detail.

Rochus 6y ago
History is not science. There will never be absolute certainty because human language is always open to interpretation. Even when the evidence is clear, the historiography that relates to that evidence is, again, open to interpretation. The interpretation of terms and situations changes over time, and facts can later be interpreted differently (even maliciously). Not even witness statements in a court case, of which there were several in the present case with hundreds of pages of legal reporting, are immune to interpretation. So yes, I can't prove to you that it happened that way because all of my sources are open to interpretation. There are enough other events in history that are considered sufficiently certain, and yet continue to be disputed by certain people for various motives. Some states even consider it necessary to criminalize the questioning of certain historical facts for this reason.