3 ms·

Plenty of people have come. Gödel was one, JVN was one, Terry Tao is likely one. But it's also worth remembering that some of the smartest people in our societ

Plenty of people have come. Gödel was one, JVN was one, Terry Tao is likely one. But it's also worth remembering that some of the smartest people in our society are optimizing ad serving.

bowsamic 4y ago
Physics and maths are both so specialised and large now that it’s not really possible to have such great minds now. Einstein had a good grasp on almost all physics of his time, Newton did for literally all of it for his time. It isn’t possible for any modern physicist to have a full grasp of even a single sub field
- 8bitsrule 4y ago
  >Newton did for literally all of it for his time. Even Newton wasn't wary enough of prejudices that slowed useful insights. As a result: "Until the early 19th century, most scientists shared Isaac Newton's view that no small objects could exist in the interplanetary space - an assumption leaving no room for stones falling from the sky." [http://www.meteorite.fr/en/basics/meteoritics.htm http://www.meteorite.fr/en/basics/meteoritics.htm]
- PartiallyTyped 4y ago
  That's the problem with science.. To make linear progress we need an exponential amount of scientists. All the low hanging fruits have been picked.
  - bowsamic 4y ago
    Yep exactly, if 1 scientist = 1 progress, imagine where we would be right now. Instead there are far more scientists than ever but progress on the big or fundamental questions and topics has arguably slowed down
    - PartiallyTyped 4y ago
      I like to think that it's an enormous tree, and with every step that we take, the number of open topics effectively doubles.
      - bowsamic 4y ago
        Sure but there is such thing as the "base topics" which, by specialising, we do get further from. Most people aren't working on fundamentals of quantum mechanics for example. A lot of the problem is that in modern research you need to say your plan _before_ you get funding, and putting a new researcher into a field without a clearly defined project for them is considered a death sentence for any career possibility for them. Because of that reason, fields where the research has stopped progressing effectively stagnate for very long periods. No one will work on something unless there is a guarantee that high quality, impactful papers can be produced that will propel into a career

Plenty of people have come. Gödel was one, JVN was one, Terry Tao is likely one. But it's also worth remembering that some of the smartest people in our society are optimizing ad serving.

bowsamic 4y ago

Physics and maths are both so specialised and large now that it’s not really possible to have such great minds now. Einstein had a good grasp on almost all physics of his time, Newton did for literally all of it for his time. It isn’t possible for any modern physicist to have a full grasp of even a single sub field

8bitsrule 4y ago
>Newton did for literally all of it for his time. Even Newton wasn't wary enough of prejudices that slowed useful insights. As a result: "Until the early 19th century, most scientists shared Isaac Newton's view that no small objects could exist in the interplanetary space - an assumption leaving no room for stones falling from the sky." [http://www.meteorite.fr/en/basics/meteoritics.htm http://www.meteorite.fr/en/basics/meteoritics.htm]
PartiallyTyped 4y ago
That's the problem with science.. To make linear progress we need an exponential amount of scientists. All the low hanging fruits have been picked.
- bowsamic 4y ago
  Yep exactly, if 1 scientist = 1 progress, imagine where we would be right now. Instead there are far more scientists than ever but progress on the big or fundamental questions and topics has arguably slowed down
  - PartiallyTyped 4y ago
    I like to think that it's an enormous tree, and with every step that we take, the number of open topics effectively doubles.
    - bowsamic 4y ago
      Sure but there is such thing as the "base topics" which, by specialising, we do get further from. Most people aren't working on fundamentals of quantum mechanics for example. A lot of the problem is that in modern research you need to say your plan _before_ you get funding, and putting a new researcher into a field without a clearly defined project for them is considered a death sentence for any career possibility for them. Because of that reason, fields where the research has stopped progressing effectively stagnate for very long periods. No one will work on something unless there is a guarantee that high quality, impactful papers can be produced that will propel into a career