7 ms·
Paul Erdős, the most prolific mathematician
- AnotherGoodName 3y agoPolite disagreement and i saw that it's acknowledged in the article but in my opinion Euler is clear cut more prolific by almost any measure apart from number of academic papers published and that's mainly due to the era where publication in academic articles simply wasn't as common as simply writing books. Euler's literally an entire shelf in a library. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Omnia_Leonhard_Euler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Omnia_Leonhard_Euler
- coliveira 3y agoYes, and most Erdos papers were written by other people collaborating with him. While this doesn't detract from his inventiveness, it is different from Euler who practically wrote everything (except for his later papers when he couldn't write anymore).
- skhunted 3y agoIt’s hard to compare people in different eras. Erdos certainly wrote down a vast number of notes that didn’t become published. I think much of Euler’s volumes that are mentioned in the link you supplied would be considered notes nowadays. Erdos also worked in an era where collaboration became essential. In Euler’s era that wasn’t as essential as it is today. Euler also worked in an era where there was a lot of low hanging fruit so to speak. None of this diminishes Euler’s accomplishments and he is certainly regarded as a greater mathematician than Erdos.
- OldGuyInTheClub 3y agoWould a mathematician weigh in on who had more impact?
- skhunted 3y agoEuler had way more impact than Erdos. Euler laid the foundation for a vast amount of applications. Erdos did establish probabilistic methods in graph theory and combinatorics but outside of that I’m not aware of other foundational breakthroughs of Erdos.
- ironSkillet 3y agoHard to compare as others have said, since they were from different eras. Personally I think Euler has made more of a mark due to his contributions to multiple independent fields spanning the whole of mathematics at the time.
- kjellsbells 3y agoA (US) math friend once described it to me as Euler and Gauss creating the interstate system, and people like Erdös spending their careers putting up signposts on as many exits as they could spot. Some of those exits might turn out to be major highways of their own, but we can't tell until other generations of mathematicians take those exits and see where they lead.
- lqr 3y agoIt is not even close. Almost every branch of modern mathematics includes an important contribution from Euler in its history. Erdos was a specialist by comparison. If you sample a random person with a math degree, the probability that they believe Erdos had more impact than Euler is 0. ;)
- eigenvalue 3y agoPretty sure Erdős himself would be the first one to tell you that he was a minor footnote compared to someone like Euler (or Gauss, or Newton, etc). But it’s sort of a silly comparison, like asking who was the greater composer, John Lennon or Mozart? Vastly different times and milieus make the question somewhat pointless.
- OldGuyInTheClub 3y agoI care little for Lennon and a lot for Mozart so I know how I'd vote there. I was asking about quality vs. quantity. I'm sure both had a spectrum of results as far as importance. My sense as a regular math user (but not a mathematician) was that Euler had a broader impact. I use e, i, and pi almost every day. But that's conditioned by not knowing Erdős's work to a comparable extent.
- defrost 3y agoScategorically there's a clear no contest winner here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C78HBp-Youk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C78HBp-Youk
- The_Colonel 3y agoBy the time Erdos started working, all those low hanging fruit was picked. Euler also didn't discover e. g. pi, it's just that his notation was universally adopted. I'm not trying to diminish his contributions, he's still possibly GOAT, just that this method of comparison is necessarily misleading.
- lr1970 3y agoEuler equation e^(ix) = cos(x) + i*sin(x) alone is worth more than Erdos did in his entire life. Euler laid foundations for complex numbers analysis. His other contributions have been already covered in this thread.
- atlintots 3y agoYour comment should answer your question -- there's really no fair comparison between them considering how far apart their eras were. It was much "easier" making new discoveries back then (there were simply fewer mathematicians, and maths itself was much younger). Making any significant contribution in modern times is so much more difficult. It's said within algebraic geometry most mathematicians will publish perhaps a handful of papers in their lifetime -- it takes too long to even get up to speed with the subject before you are able to start contributing.
- hirvi74 3y agoA better comparison would be to see what Euler could produce when powered by amphetamines like Erdos. ;)
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- yobert 3y agoTo me the greatest contribution of Erdos is the social aspect of mathematics. He physically shared his enthusiasm with so many people. He inspires me to work together with others, and to leave your ego behind. He inspired so many with his true love of math.
- ace2358 3y agoAn excellent point! We are spoiled for choice of inspirational mathematicians!
- marttt 3y agoThere is a truly wonderful children's book about Erdos, "The Boy Who Loved Math: The Improbable Life of Paul Erdos" by Deborah Heiligman and LeUyen Pham: https://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Loved-Math-Improbable/dp/1596433078 https://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Loved-Math-Improbable/dp/1596... I think this book really shines in showing why it makes sense to accept "strange" people (or, that other kid in your kindergarten who seems "strange"). Fills me with warmth every time I happen to page it through.
- cschmidt 3y agoThere is also an excellent book about Erdos for adults: The Man Who Loved Only Numbers: The Story of Paul Erdos and the Search for Mathematical Truth https://www.amazon.com/Man-Who-Loved-Only-Numbers/dp/0786884061/ref=asc_df_0786884061/ https://www.amazon.com/Man-Who-Loved-Only-Numbers/dp/0786884...
- hackeraccount 3y agoCame here for this - I really enjoyed that book.
- varjag 3y agoAlso Cauchy, the guy who seemingly had a theorem for everything.
- runnr_az 3y agoWho here has an Erdos number?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- defrost 3y agoAn Erdős-Bacon number is where the cool cats are at. eg: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/people/j.gauntlett https://www.imperial.ac.uk/people/j.gauntlett
- velavar 3y agoNot cooler than those with an Erdős-Bacon-Sabbath number! https://news.asu.edu/20160126-creativity-lawrence-krauss-erdos-bacon-sabbath-score https://news.asu.edu/20160126-creativity-lawrence-krauss-erd...
- defrost 3y agoFrom BBS: The Documentary (film) there's Trevor Marshall http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/photos/104marshall/index.html http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/photos/104marshall/index.html who built amplifiers for Bon Scott: https://trevormarshall.com/bon.htm https://trevormarshall.com/bon.htm (a little band called AC/DC) and wrote a few papers: https://www.trevormarshall.com/ https://www.trevormarshall.com/ most recently medical, initially electronics and some math.
- marton78 3y agoMost of us, I guess.
- HarryHirsch 3y agoMany people - a good chunk of chemists are connected through Roald Hoffmann, whose Erdos number is 6. The world is small. Fun fact - my Stalin number is 4.
- 3y ago
- Terr_ 3y agoAt least until people forget enough Latin: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/citations-needed https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/citations-needed
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ThisIsMyAltAcct 3y agoWell yeah, he was constantly on amphetamines
- leesec 3y agoAs if I could just up my adderall dosage and become a mathematical God
- serf 3y agoit's a shame that everyone quite amphetamines.. otherwise we'd be getting more Erdős, right?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- reaperman 3y ago[0]> According to FDA manufacturer surveys, by 1962, US production reached an estimated 80000 kg of amphetamine salts, corresponding to consumption of 43 standard 10-mg doses per person per year on a total-population basis. Thus, in amphetamine alone, the United States in the early 1960s was using nearly as much psychotropic medication as the 65 doses per person per year in the present decade that social critics today find so extraordinary. And the 1960s are rightly remembered for excessive minor tranquilizer consumption, around 14 standard doses per person per year on the basis of retail prescription sales. It is rarely appreciated that in the early 1960s, amphetamines were actually consumed at a higher rate than tranquilizers. Total amphetamine production 2024[1]: Lisdexamfetamine 26,500kg d-amphetamine (for sale) 21,200kg d,l-amphetamine 21,200kg d-amphetamine (for conversion) 20,000kg Population of USA in 1962: 184.9 million Population of USA Today: 331.9 million This covers the 41.4 million prescriptions for amphetamine in 2021 which would be enough for 3.45 million people, but not illicit amphetamine/methamphetamine. 1.2 million Americans reported using methamphetamine in the past year. Also other similar stimulants like methylphenidate, modafinil would also have to be calculated into any analysis, these weren't nearly as popular in the 1960's. 63,000kg of methylphenidate are produced in USA for 2024. 0: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2377281/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2377281/ 1: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/11/02/2023-24282/proposed-aggregate-production-quotas-for-schedule-i-and-ii-controlled-substances-and-assessment-of https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/11/02/2023-24...
- bigbacaloa 3y ago[dead]
- thorin 3y agoTLDR; The book referenced is a very easy and entertaining read as I recall. Would recommend. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Man-Who-Loved-Only-Numbers/dp/1857028295 https://www.amazon.co.uk/Man-Who-Loved-Only-Numbers/dp/18570...