How does one become a famous scientist?

For the discussion of the sciences. Physics problems, chemistry equations, biology weirdness, it all goes here.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
nash1429
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:06 am UTC
Location: Flatland
Contact:

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby nash1429 » Thu Jul 29, 2010 8:41 pm UTC

I think it is quite common for anyone even remotely associated with nerds to know about Richard Feynman. Not only was he an amazing scientist, HE WAS THE COOLEST GUY WHO EVER LIVED. And he did indeed have the ladies swooning over him.

Cave Wizard
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 2:10 am UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Cave Wizard » Fri Jul 30, 2010 10:00 pm UTC

nash1429 wrote:I think it is quite common for anyone even remotely associated with nerds to know about Richard Feynman. Not only was he an amazing scientist, HE WAS THE COOLEST GUY WHO EVER LIVED. And he did indeed have the ladies swooning over him.


Feynman taught me that when you're dancing with a hot girl and you get a boner, you're supposed to poke her with it

Thanks Feynman!

also

idobox wrote:cancerous cells are genetically different, but still human, so they should be given the same rights as embryos.


I agree with the above statement

I think we should start a website to promote this idea

User avatar
Jorpho
Posts: 6185
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:31 am UTC
Location: Canada

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Jorpho » Sat Jul 31, 2010 7:39 pm UTC

"As an adolescent I aspired to lasting fame, I craved factual certainty, and I thirsted for a meaningful vision of human life -- so I became a scientist. This is like becoming an archbishop so you can meet girls." -Matt Cartmill

User avatar
kernelpanic
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:26 am UTC
Location: 1.6180339x10^18 attoparsecs from Earth

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby kernelpanic » Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:28 pm UTC

fooliam wrote:I can promise you that WAYYY more people are familiar with Carl Segan than Feynman.

Why do you think that you know what other people think better than we do?
I'm not disorganized. My room has a high entropy.
Bhelliom wrote:Don't forget that the cat probably knows EXACTLY what it is doing is is most likely just screwing with you. You know, for CAT SCIENCE!

Image

tuseroni
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 10:41 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby tuseroni » Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:26 am UTC

Cave Wizard wrote:
nash1429 wrote:I think it is quite common for anyone even remotely associated with nerds to know about Richard Feynman. Not only was he an amazing scientist, HE WAS THE COOLEST GUY WHO EVER LIVED. And he did indeed have the ladies swooning over him.


Feynman taught me that when you're dancing with a hot girl and you get a boner, you're supposed to poke her with it

Thanks Feynman!

also

idobox wrote:cancerous cells are genetically different, but still human, so they should be given the same rights as embryos.


I agree with the above statement

I think we should start a website to promote this idea


cancer cells are actually BETTER...they are immortal...they can divide as much as they want and not break down (depending on how you define break down...they work but their dna mutates quite rapidly) they actually evolve rather quickly invading other petri dishes and such...
Image

User avatar
Jorpho
Posts: 6185
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:31 am UTC
Location: Canada

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Jorpho » Mon Aug 02, 2010 3:23 am UTC

tuseroni wrote:cancer cells are actually BETTER...they are immortal...they can divide as much as they want and not break down (depending on how you define break down...they work but their dna mutates quite rapidly) they actually evolve rather quickly invading other petri dishes and such...
But not all tumors are made of HeLa cells or even anything that works like HeLa cells.

Also, please learn how to properly use the ellipsis. Sentences begin with a capital letter and end with a single period, sir.

tuseroni
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 10:41 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby tuseroni » Mon Aug 02, 2010 9:49 pm UTC

i use ellipses as an aside...dont really care how english uses them...also i am boycotting MOST standard grammar. especially capitals, in tus grammar capitals are used for emphasis and a sentence may, or may not, begin with a capital. also periods need not follow asides even if the aside is at the end of a thought (as (). looks weird) also ellipses can be nested (such that one idea (or another idea which is an aside of the aside idea) may be used as an aside)

capitals on nouns need only be used when your spell checker is really annoying you...its a simple grammar
Image

User avatar
poxic
Eloquently Prismatic
Posts: 4689
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:28 am UTC
Location: Left coast of Canada

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby poxic » Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:10 pm UTC

And you're free to do that, of course. It's just that we're used to a high standard of communication on these boards, including punctuation and capitalisation, and we tend to skip over posts that make us do all the work to parse out the meaning.
TEAM SHIVAHN
Pretty much the best team ever

And the day came when the risk it took to remain tight inside the bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom.
- Anais Nin, writer (21 Feb 1903-1977)

User avatar
meatyochre
Posts: 1524
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 7:09 am UTC
Location: flying with the Conchords

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby meatyochre » Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:19 pm UTC

poxic wrote:And you're free to do that, of course. It's just that we're used to a high standard of communication on these boards, including punctuation and capitalisation, and we tend to skip over posts that make us do all the work to parse out the meaning.

I didn't find his original ellipses-laden post to be incomprehensible or difficult to parse. Not even a little bit.
Dark567 wrote:"Hey, I created a perpetual motion device"

"yeah, but your poster sucks. F-"

Image

User avatar
kernelpanic
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:26 am UTC
Location: 1.6180339x10^18 attoparsecs from Earth

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby kernelpanic » Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:03 pm UTC

meatyochre wrote:
poxic wrote:And you're free to do that, of course. It's just that we're used to a high standard of communication on these boards, including punctuation and capitalisation, and we tend to skip over posts that make us do all the work to parse out the meaning.

I didn't find his original ellipses-laden post to be incomprehensible or difficult to parse. Not even a little bit.

But it's definitely annoying.
I'm not disorganized. My room has a high entropy.
Bhelliom wrote:Don't forget that the cat probably knows EXACTLY what it is doing is is most likely just screwing with you. You know, for CAT SCIENCE!

Image

User avatar
nash1429
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:06 am UTC
Location: Flatland
Contact:

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby nash1429 » Tue Aug 03, 2010 1:18 am UTC

kernelpanic wrote:
fooliam wrote:I can promise you that WAYYY more people are familiar with Carl Segan than Feynman.

Why do you think that you know what other people think better than we do?


While Fooliam's statement is pretentious, I think that it is perhaps true that certain people on xkcd boards have forgotten what goes on in the minds of the mere mortal masses (alliteration!!).

SpaceShipRat
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 8:18 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby SpaceShipRat » Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:42 am UTC

nash1429 wrote:
kernelpanic wrote:
fooliam wrote:I can promise you that WAYYY more people are familiar with Carl Segan than Feynman.

Why do you think that you know what other people think better than we do?


While Fooliam's statement is pretentious, I think that it is perhaps true that certain people on xkcd boards have forgotten what goes on in the minds of the mere mortal masses (alliteration!!).

Because, of course, we are immortal?

User avatar
PM 2Ring
Posts: 3632
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:19 pm UTC
Location: Mid north coast, NSW, Australia

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby PM 2Ring » Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:23 pm UTC

fooliam wrote:I can promise you that WAYYY more people are familiar with Carl Segan than Feynman.

Probably. But I bet it'd annoy him when his fans can't even spell his name right. :P

User avatar
Sizik
Posts: 1191
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:48 am UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Sizik » Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:51 pm UTC

tuseroni wrote:i use ellipses as an aside...dont really care how english uses them...also i am boycotting MOST standard grammar. especially capitals, in tus grammar capitals are used for emphasis and a sentence may, or may not, begin with a capital. also periods need not follow asides even if the aside is at the end of a thought (as (). looks weird) also ellipses can be nested (such that one idea (or another idea which is an aside of the aside idea) may be used as an aside)

capitals on nouns need only be used when your spell checker is really annoying you...its a simple grammar


"()" are parentheses. "..." are ellipses.
gmalivuk wrote:
King Author wrote:If space (rather, distance) is an illusion, it'd be possible for one meta-me to experience both body's sensory inputs.
Yes. And if wishes were horses, wishing wells would fill up very quickly with drowned horses.

tuseroni
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 10:41 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby tuseroni » Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:22 pm UTC

oh, my apologies...i just assumed since they kinda look like an ellipse...not the ellipses are just me trailing off...the text equivalent of "um"
Image

User avatar
You, sir, name?
Posts: 6983
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:07 am UTC
Location: Chako Paul City
Contact:

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby You, sir, name? » Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:50 pm UTC

tuseroni wrote:i use ellipses as an aside...dont really care how english uses them...also i am boycotting MOST standard grammar. especially capitals, in tus grammar capitals are used for emphasis and a sentence may, or may not, begin with a capital. also periods need not follow asides even if the aside is at the end of a thought (as (). looks weird) also ellipses can be nested (such that one idea (or another idea which is an aside of the aside idea) may be used as an aside)

capitals on nouns need only be used when your spell checker is really annoying you...its a simple grammar


If you don't care about writing in a standardized way so that others can easily read what you write, how can you expect people to care what you have to say? Punctuation and grammatical conventions are very important.

Wikipedia on punctuation wrote:In written English, punctuation is vital to disambiguate the meaning of sentences. For example, "woman, without her man, is nothing" and "woman: without her, man is nothing" have greatly different meanings, as do "eats shoots and leaves" and "eats, shoots and leaves". "King Charles walked and talked half an hour after his head was cut off" is alarming; "King Charles walked and talked; half an hour after, his head was cut off", less so.
I edit my posts a lot and sometimes the words wrong order words appear in sentences get messed up.

User avatar
meatyochre
Posts: 1524
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 7:09 am UTC
Location: flying with the Conchords

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby meatyochre » Wed Aug 04, 2010 12:06 am UTC

I love the book Eats Shoots & Leaves. hehe

I don't disagree that punctuation has a not-unimportant place in written communication. But whatever, let the guy type how he wants to type. If people never respond to what he says, he'll revise. If not, it doesn't hurt you or me.
Dark567 wrote:"Hey, I created a perpetual motion device"

"yeah, but your poster sucks. F-"

Image

User avatar
PM 2Ring
Posts: 3632
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:19 pm UTC
Location: Mid north coast, NSW, Australia

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby PM 2Ring » Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:08 am UTC

poxic wrote:And you're free to do that, of course. It's just that we're used to a high standard of communication on these boards, including punctuation and capitalisation, and we tend to skip over posts that make us do all the work to parse out the meaning.

While I don't want to discourage people from expressing themselves in their own individual style, I prefer that they adhere to the standards of punctuation, formatting, spelling and grammar that are generally used within the community they are attempting to communicate with. There is plenty of scope for individuality while playing by the rules and as poxic says, breaking those rules imposes an unnecessary burden on the readers.

When you break those rules in the name of individuality (or through not understanding them) it can increase the risk of misunderstanding, as we've just seen with the ellipsis / parenthesis issue. Sometimes it can be useful to bend or break the rules for humour or emphasis, but you need to know what those rules are before you can do so safely.

Poorly written text looks sloppy and can undermine the impact of your message. If you can't be bothered to express yourself clearly, many readers will assume that you haven't put much thought into your post, or even worse, that your thought processes are so sloppy that you are incapable of writing coherently, and that the thoughts you are attempting to express are probably not worth the effort required to read your ramblings.

Thus my main objection is that sloppy text is unfair to the readers: why should all the people reading your posts have to go to extra effort to parse your text when a little more work on your part would make it easier for them? Ultimately, it's up to you to decide how you wish to express yourself, but please bear in mind that people may interpret your non-standard style as rudeness or incompetence.

To get back on topic, clear communication is especially important in science because we are often attempting to discuss new or unfamiliar ideas.

User avatar
Dopefish
Posts: 854
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 5:46 am UTC
Location: The Well of Wishes

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Dopefish » Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:08 am UTC

I am of the opinion that Bill Nye (the science guy) is more of a famous scientist than Feynmen is, at least as far as the general masses go. Heck, some people might consider the mythbusters to be scientists, and they're gaining fame plenty.

Not meaning any disrepect to Nye, but I don't think he did anything particulary outstanding in terms of scientific achievment. If you want to be famous with the masses, you need to go down a completely seperate path to being famous within the scientific community. Fame with people is going to take a lot of visually exciting experimental stuff, and often relatively simple stuff at that.

Fame within the scientific community will require you to be extremally good in your field, get published tons, and preferably entail some significant break throughs.

If you want both, you'll really need to come up with something that truly changes the world (cold fusion and/or [other] elements of science fiction), and that's apt to require a great deal of intelligence, a very large amount of funding, and an immense amount of luck on top of all that.

User avatar
doogly
Dr. The Juggernaut of Touching Himself
Posts: 5385
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:31 am UTC
Location: Somerville, MA
Contact:

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby doogly » Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:43 am UTC

Bill Nye isn't a very famous scientist, he's a fairly famous actor.

No discredit, it's just a completely separate field.
LE4dGOLEM: What's a Doug?
Noc: A larval Doogly. They grow the tail and stinger upon reaching adulthood.

Keep waggling your butt brows Brothers.
Or; Is that your eye butthairs?

User avatar
Dopefish
Posts: 854
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 5:46 am UTC
Location: The Well of Wishes

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Dopefish » Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:59 am UTC

The "at least as far as the general masses go" qualifier was an important one. :wink:

He's more of a scientist than the mythbusters are, as he does have a degree in engineering at least, as well is genuinely involved in plenty of scientific stuff (vice president of the planetary society). It could be argued that anyone who 'does science' is a scientist, and I bet if I asked a random person on the street if he was a scientist, I'd get a positive response.

I have my doubts that he has much in the way of publications in scientific journals, but, that's my point.

You can be a famous '"scientist", or you can be a "famous" scientist, but it's near impossible to be both.

companion_cube
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 6:12 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby companion_cube » Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:49 pm UTC

Basically I want to be like Gaius Baltar.

User avatar
nash1429
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:06 am UTC
Location: Flatland
Contact:

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby nash1429 » Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:00 pm UTC

Perhaps the only truly famous scientist was Einstein. While I have never observed it, I seem to have quite often heard of people not knowing what physics is, and generally the same people seem ignorant of figures like Newton, Heisenberg, or Schrodinger. All three of those people made breakthroughs similar to Einstein in that they radically changed how educated people view the world, and yet ol' Albert was the only famous one. Personally, I think that Einstein's personality and timing won him fame. Not only was he very eccentric, even becoming the archetype of the mad scientist, he discovered relativity at a time when the activities of scientists were not well known to the public because of the previous limits of communication, but just when there was enough of a media that such an important discovery would still disseminate.

tuseroni
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 10:41 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby tuseroni » Wed Aug 04, 2010 10:07 pm UTC

einstein is just newer. this has been going on since aristotle. (though people back then were killed for disagreeing with him...)
there is someone who made a big change like newton and they become the big talk of the masses that genius guy. schoedinger didnt get as much notice, perhaps he was upstaged by einstein, perhaps because no one knew what the hell he was talking about (quantum physics boggles the mind and you have to either accept that you lack the cognitive capabilities to understand it or reject it on principal, the mass do the latter)
einstein made big papers, people didnt understand it but it was big news "einstein reduces time down to a dimension" "einstein combines space and time into space-time" "einstein overturns newtonian physics" (ask someone today they may not know those things but they were big in his time)
einstein was placed into the public zeitgeist, one can argue that many others made more contributions to their fields, but none were quite so heretical, 4 dimensions? time is part of space? time can be slowed? newton was wrong? long held ideas in the public mind shattered.
and quantum physics is more heretical yet, but no one understands it enough.
almost everything we think we know about the universe breaks down on the quantum level, but its so alien, so weird, that it just doesnt register. quantum entanglement and the higgs boson are 100x more heretical than space-time. but people just go "huh?"

i would say hawkings tends to be pretty close to einstein in terms of popularity, of just being "that genius guy" though nothing much he has published has been too heretical, least not to the public understanding (hawking radiation was big, but not to most people. he did popularize black holes)

nikoli tesla is pretty popular in some circles, though not the majority. he was also pretty big in his time (which was around einsteins time)
everyone wanted to go see tesla, if not for einstein he probably would have stayed in the public zeitgeist. the tesla coil is still quite popular with special effects groups and hobbyists.
Image

User avatar
Charlie!
Posts: 2035
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 8:20 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Charlie! » Wed Aug 04, 2010 11:33 pm UTC

I agree that Tesla is showing up in the oddest places, but for quite different reasons than most scientists. This is because in his later life Tesla pretty much descended into crackpottery and made all sorts of extraordinary claims (proof absent). Some people get excited about these later claims of Tesla's, but they don't really want science, what they want is science-themed magic.

So maybe his lesson is to earn decent fame with smart applied science, then leapfrog to immortality by going batshit.


Speaking of famous pseudoscience, you could be the next Time Cube guy. He's pretty famous, although I don't know his name :P
Some people tell me I laugh too much. To them I say, "ha ha ha!"

Ninjendo
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:43 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Ninjendo » Thu Aug 05, 2010 1:49 am UTC

tuseroni wrote:einstein was placed into the public zeitgeist, one can argue that many others made more contributions to their fields, but none were quite so heretical, 4 dimensions? time is part of space? time can be slowed? newton was wrong? long held ideas in the public mind shattered.
and quantum physics is more heretical yet, but no one understands it enough.


Einstein also laid the foundation for quantum physics (which is what he won his nobel for). Einstein did important work in quantum chaos, stimulated emission (important theory for the laser), brownian motion (proving the existence of atoms), his photoelectric effect work lead to the development of quantum mechanics. Not to mention, of course, special and general relativity.

The only person who comes close to Einstein's level as physicist is perhaps Newton, but calculus was far more intuitive than most of Einstein's contributions to science.

User avatar
Jorpho
Posts: 6185
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:31 am UTC
Location: Canada

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Jorpho » Thu Aug 05, 2010 2:00 am UTC

And the refrigerator! Don't forget the refrigerator!

I keep thinking of Fred Alan "Dr. Quantum" Wolf when I see this thread - because a catchy name goes a long way towards making you famous. Of course, anyone who dares to appear in What the Bleep Do We Know ought to be repeatedly and thoroughly denounced, but such a cool name.

User avatar
nash1429
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:06 am UTC
Location: Flatland
Contact:

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby nash1429 » Thu Aug 05, 2010 3:16 am UTC

tuseroni wrote:there is someone who made a big change like newton and they become the big talk of the masses that genius guy


I don't think that anyone has ever reached Einstein's level among the masses. When we read biographies of scientists they often make it seem like their accomplishments are well known by the public because letters/journals/sometimes newspapers are quoted about the individual, but if you asked a 17th century English daylaborer, I highly doubt they could have told you what calculus or universal gravitation were or who discovered them.
Or were you talking about Aristotle? He may have been known among educated men in Greece, Persia, and Egypt, but less so the masses.

tuseroni wrote:einstein was placed into the public zeitgeist, one can argue that many others made more contributions to their fields, but none were quite so heretical


A spherical Earth? The heliocentric model? All bodies fall at the same speed? The Church was actually burning heretics. Einstein was not the first scientist to rock our world.

tuseroni wrote:nikoli tesla is pretty popular in some circles, though not the majority. he was also pretty big in his time (which was around einsteins time)


He would have been if Edison hadn't stolen all his work. He was only known for his batshit stuff, but that's nothing new. There have always been those types.

tuseroni wrote:i would say hawkings tends to be pretty close to einstein in terms of popularity, of just being "that genius guy" though nothing much he has published has been too heretical, least not to the public understanding (hawking radiation was big, but not to most people. he did popularize black holes)


He is probably the biggest currently living household name for scientists, but I wouldn't put him quite at Einstein's level. Where most people can at least put E=mc^2 and Einstein together, I'm not sure if many people could even tell you what a black hole is. Hawking's fame comes from Lou Gehrig's Disease.

Turtlewing
Posts: 236
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 5:22 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Turtlewing » Fri Aug 06, 2010 8:12 pm UTC

I think it depends on how much integrity you have.

If it's not much, publishing a book that explains* the wierder parts of physics in terms "normal" people can understand and which seems to validate popular religious views ought to do it.

As a bonus you'll also become infamous amoungst real scientists.

*for the purposes if this post i'm using "explains" as shorthand for "twist, and misrepresent without lying overtly enough that your target audience can tell the difference"

User avatar
nash1429
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:06 am UTC
Location: Flatland
Contact:

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby nash1429 » Fri Aug 06, 2010 11:51 pm UTC

because qunatum mechanics=telepathy/free will/God :wink:

tuseroni
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 10:41 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby tuseroni » Sat Aug 07, 2010 1:20 am UTC

nash1429 wrote:
tuseroni wrote:there is someone who made a big change like newton and they become the big talk of the masses that genius guy


I don't think that anyone has ever reached Einstein's level among the masses. When we read biographies of scientists they often make it seem like their accomplishments are well known by the public because letters/journals/sometimes newspapers are quoted about the individual, but if you asked a 17th century English daylaborer, I highly doubt they could have told you what calculus or universal gravitation were or who discovered them.
Or were you talking about Aristotle? He may have been known among educated men in Greece, Persia, and Egypt, but less so the masses.

tuseroni wrote:einstein was placed into the public zeitgeist, one can argue that many others made more contributions to their fields, but none were quite so heretical


A spherical Earth? The heliocentric model? All bodies fall at the same speed? The Church was actually burning heretics. Einstein was not the first scientist to rock our world.

tuseroni wrote:nikoli tesla is pretty popular in some circles, though not the majority. he was also pretty big in his time (which was around einsteins time)


He would have been if Edison hadn't stolen all his work. He was only known for his batshit stuff, but that's nothing new. There have always been those types.

tuseroni wrote:i would say hawkings tends to be pretty close to einstein in terms of popularity, of just being "that genius guy" though nothing much he has published has been too heretical, least not to the public understanding (hawking radiation was big, but not to most people. he did popularize black holes)


He is probably the biggest currently living household name for scientists, but I wouldn't put him quite at Einstein's level. Where most people can at least put E=mc^2 and Einstein together, I'm not sure if many people could even tell you what a black hole is. Hawking's fame comes from Lou Gehrig's Disease.


i didnt mean heresy as it applies to ideas contrary to the church, but merely contrary to popular opinion (which at the time of gallileo, copernicus, et al those were the same thing)

the church in the time of gallileo had the ability to suppress such ideas, not indefinately, but enough.
in the end i suppose making a whole shit tonne of new accomplishments will do the job.

as for whether a 17th century daylabourer is likely to know of calculus or the laws of universal gravitation, maybe, but certainly they would know the name "sir isaac newton"
just like most people today know nothing of einstein except "smart guy; e=mc^2"
which i will admit more people likely know e=mc^2 than knew f=ma newton also provided the final nail in the geocentric model (after the sucker punch from copernicus and the body blow from kepler, and that roundhouse from gallileo)
and he became much more popular still with the masses during the enlightenment ask the average 18th century citizen who newton was.
Image

GoC
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 10:35 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby GoC » Mon Aug 09, 2010 12:00 am UTC

kernelpanic wrote:
meatyochre wrote:
poxic wrote:And you're free to do that, of course. It's just that we're used to a high standard of communication on these boards, including punctuation and capitalisation, and we tend to skip over posts that make us do all the work to parse out the meaning.

I didn't find his original ellipses-laden post to be incomprehensible or difficult to parse. Not even a little bit.

But it's definitely annoying.

Though non-standard sentence structure and things such as nested parenthesis and tons of quotation marks can make a sentence clearer. The rules of the spoken language may not be optimal in the world of writing (where you don't have to say "open parenthesis" and where you can go back over what was said easily but where you can't ask for clarification easily).
Belial wrote:I'm just being a dick. It happens.

User avatar
Coffee
Posts: 637
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:56 am UTC
Location: Far away

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Coffee » Mon Aug 09, 2010 8:36 pm UTC

I understand that truly ground-breaking discoveries that turn previously accepted theories on their heads really help with this. (Though I understand Keppler's life wasn't made any easier by this.)
Far away boys, far away boys, away from you now.
I'm lying with my sweetheart, in her arms I'll be found.

JWalker
Posts: 222
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 1:13 am UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby JWalker » Mon Oct 25, 2010 10:20 pm UTC

Consider drugs.

No seriously, Consider drugs. Nootropics (Piracetam, Aniracetam, etc), stimulants (amphetamines, some anti-depressents, or the most widely used one, caffiene) even consider hallucinogens (LSD, shrooms, etc) even cannabis . You would be honestly shocked how many of those in the upper echelons of academia have or are currently using some combination of these drugs. A famous example is that of Francis Crick, who came up with the idea of DNA being a double helix while on LSD. Paul Erdos (a famous mathematician) was a notorious amphetamine user throughout his career, except for one month when he quit on a bet, famously saying "Before, when I looked at a piece of blank paper my mind was filled with ideas. Now all I see is a blank piece of paper." He never attempted to quit again.

I am not saying these things are good for you, but they certainly make you think differently. In science, coming up with a radical new idea takes a lot of creativity so perhaps its unsurprising that some would use chemicals to give them new perspectives on problems that have given them trouble. Food for thought anyways. Just be very careful with them.

User avatar
Jorpho
Posts: 6185
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:31 am UTC
Location: Canada

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Jorpho » Tue Oct 26, 2010 12:15 pm UTC

JWalker wrote:You would be honestly shocked how many of those in the upper echelons of academia have or are currently using some combination of these drugs.
Um, even if those echelons are composed of a majority of drug users (which I really doubt and two anecdotes will not convince me), I expect the majority of drug users do not end up in such lofty positions.

masakatsu
Posts: 121
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:02 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby masakatsu » Thu Oct 28, 2010 8:07 pm UTC

There is significant usage of ECA stacking at higher level of education, but most high performers don't abuse too heavy of drugs.
I will not attack your math, just your epistemology.

You think you have it bad, I teach Intro to Project Management to Undergrads.

User avatar
Jorpho
Posts: 6185
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:31 am UTC
Location: Canada

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby Jorpho » Fri Oct 29, 2010 2:51 am UTC

I thought ECA stacks were primarily for bodybuilding. Is that not so?

ferrouswheel
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 5:14 am UTC
Location: New York

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby ferrouswheel » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:30 am UTC

Charlie! wrote:And, of course, if you want to make people swoon at your approach, I suggest you do some famous research on chloroform.


They fall for it every time. ;)

Dhes wrote:How many woman “swoon” for scientists?
“Hey baby wane go to my place and play with my Large hadron collider”


tuseroni wrote:one does not become a famous scientist...one becomes a scientist and fame either comes or it doesnt.
...
also women dont swoon at scientists, none of them...and if you are looking for a career to get women...you are DEFINITELY looking in the WRONG place.


I am a woman and I swoon for scientists. Currently swooning over an astrophysicist who harbors hopes of being the first man on Mars. However: (a) I know of few other women with similar tastes, and (b) people who are admired for their accomplishments, intelligence, and contributions are in that position primarily because they are sincerely interested in their work, and not in the social consequences of their endeavors.

GoC
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 10:35 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby GoC » Fri Oct 29, 2010 1:03 pm UTC

Jorpho wrote:Um, even if those echelons are composed of a majority of drug users (which I really doubt and two anecdotes will not convince me), I expect the majority of drug users do not end up in such lofty positions.

That's because drugs is a very broad category. There's the "good" drugs (amphetamines, ect.) and the "bad" drugs (heroine, cocaine, WoW). I bet users of "good" drugs have a higher percentage in lofty positions that the population as a whole.
Belial wrote:I'm just being a dick. It happens.

masakatsu
Posts: 121
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:02 pm UTC

Re: How does one become a famous scientist?

Postby masakatsu » Fri Oct 29, 2010 2:54 pm UTC

Easiest way to become a famous scientist is to do something very wrong. See Milgram
I will not attack your math, just your epistemology.

You think you have it bad, I teach Intro to Project Management to Undergrads.


Return to “Science”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests