5 ms·

It’s very odd to put Erdos amongst Gauss, Euler and Tao. He was very proficient, but nowhere near as talented.

jstx1 5y ago
I also think it's odd to put Tao next to Gauss and Euler. Maybe he's one of the best mathematicians right now but that's different from being the same calibre as the most influential people in the field ever.
- OscarCunningham 5y ago
  Gauss and Euler had the advantage of living among a much smaller population of mathematicians, and when much low hanging fruit had not yet been discovered. If they were born today they would not reach the same level as Tao.
  - jstx1 5y ago
    Yes, they made a lot of contributions because of the time they lived in (right after calculus was invented but before modern mathematics). Still, you have no way of knowing what they would be able to contribute today and that whole hypothetical is kind of pointless anyway.
    - CRConrad 5y ago
      Then your original claim was equally pointless, wasn't it?
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
  - goatlover 5y ago
    How can you possibly know that Gauss and Euler would have been able to achieve less than Tao? That's a baseless claim.
  - mayankkaizen 5y ago
    That is baseless comment. Their achievements are low hanging fruits but only by today's standards. You can say the same thing practically for anybody. Einstein discovered relativity because low hanging fruit. von Neumann did all the amazing works because low hanging fruits. And how can you say they would not reach the same level as Tao? You are indicating that being truly genius is some modern phenomenon. May be 100 years down the line, even Tao will proabably be downplayed and kids will be learning advance calculas before they turn 10. Come on!
    - OscarCunningham 5y ago
      It's mostly a question of population sizes. The world population in their age was around 15% of what it is now, and only a fraction of those people would have had access to enough of an education to be noticed as a top mathematician. So it would be astonishing if their top mathematicians beat our own.

I also think it's odd to put Tao next to Gauss and Euler. Maybe he's one of the best mathematicians right now but that's different from being the same calibre as the most influential people in the field ever.

OscarCunningham 5y ago
Gauss and Euler had the advantage of living among a much smaller population of mathematicians, and when much low hanging fruit had not yet been discovered. If they were born today they would not reach the same level as Tao.
- jstx1 5y ago
  Yes, they made a lot of contributions because of the time they lived in (right after calculus was invented but before modern mathematics). Still, you have no way of knowing what they would be able to contribute today and that whole hypothetical is kind of pointless anyway.
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    Then your original claim was equally pointless, wasn't it?
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- goatlover 5y ago
  How can you possibly know that Gauss and Euler would have been able to achieve less than Tao? That's a baseless claim.
- mayankkaizen 5y ago
  That is baseless comment. Their achievements are low hanging fruits but only by today's standards. You can say the same thing practically for anybody. Einstein discovered relativity because low hanging fruit. von Neumann did all the amazing works because low hanging fruits. And how can you say they would not reach the same level as Tao? You are indicating that being truly genius is some modern phenomenon. May be 100 years down the line, even Tao will proabably be downplayed and kids will be learning advance calculas before they turn 10. Come on!
  - OscarCunningham 5y ago
    It's mostly a question of population sizes. The world population in their age was around 15% of what it is now, and only a fraction of those people would have had access to enough of an education to be noticed as a top mathematician. So it would be astonishing if their top mathematicians beat our own.