Hello forum members,


During the past century, there have been numerous astronomers and scientists who have contributed not only to their field of specialty but gone beyond it and have demonstrated extraordinary powers of insight and scientific prowess. As an impromptu poll and general question:

Who do you feel that person might be (dead or alive)?

I am excluding Einstein because he has (for the most part) achieved a God-like status with most people?



However, I am personally split between five scientists:

Pauling
Bohr
Dr. Weinberg
Feynman
Madame Curie

Does anyone have any thoughts or suggestions?

*********
Note to moderators: Please feel free to move this post, if necessary.

__________________
"The candle flame gutters. Its little pool of light trembles. Darkness gathers. The demons begin to stir."
---Carl Sagan

No Dirac?

__________________
"What you think you thought you saw you did not see." Agent J, MiB - Manhatten Bureau

Are bongo drums good renaissance material? I vote for Feynmann. He was willing to (unknowingly) risk death in the name of science - or at least in the name of skepticism, as reported here: http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/commen...particle2.html

__________________
"Never let the task you are trying to accomplish distract you from the study of computers."

Hello Ara Pacis,

I suppose any Nobelist could fit the bill--but I am attempting to gauge how some people *feel* about the current status of science -- in general?

As it has been noted to me-- how can one decide between so many well-deserving scientists?

__________________
"The candle flame gutters. Its little pool of light trembles. Darkness gathers. The demons begin to stir."
---Carl Sagan

Thank you tashirosgt,


The link that you provided was very illuminating of the nature of Prof Feynman's prowess as a scientist.

__________________
"The candle flame gutters. Its little pool of light trembles. Darkness gathers. The demons begin to stir."
---Carl Sagan

I'd go with Richard Feynman--he knew something of a pretty wide range of the sciences. His physics lectures have sections about biology, chemistry, etc.

__________________
-----
Todd (Bowie, MD, US, North America, Earth, Sol System, Vega region, Local Bubble, Orion arm, Milky Way Galaxy, Local Group, Virgo A Cluster, Virgo supercluster, the universe in which spock is clean shaven)

Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

personal page: http://blog.astrosketches.info

Just knowing a bunch of stuff doesn't seem to fit the meaning of the phrase to me. To qualify as I see it, one would need to not just be familiar with various sciences, but also make real contributions to more than one relatively unrelated field (or have real success as measured in some other way for non-scientific fields, such as Leonardo's paintings).

And I don't think anybody in the last hundred years qualifies, because the way science is done now just doesn't allow it. To have real influence in any field, you need to do research. To do that, you need money and equipment and time not spent working to make a living by some other means. To get those, you need to be an established figure in the field already, with an advanced degree and some kind of employment or other such contract with an established university, government agency, or company (a company which does its own research for commercial purposes). To get any of that, you need to invest a bunch of years of your life in the dedicated pursuit of one field. Even if you're rich enough to be able to fund yourself without working for an income, you still need years of formal education and establishment of your own credibility in the relevant community of scientists in order for whatever results you get to be taken seriously, which ultimately makes your fortune merely a convenience in going through the standard process rather than a way to bypass it.

I think most of the founders / big names of quantum mechanics and field theory, GR, string theory, solid state physics, and a number of other areas qualify pretty easily. As well as many many mathematicians.

What? Tons of scientists do things in multiple fields. Particularly physicists. Lots of physicists make significant contributions to math, biology, chemistry, economics, and pretty much every other field. Even the guys who write for Futurama have advanced degrees! (masters and phds in CS, math, physics, IIRC). And there're a few actors/supermodels out there who've published scientific papers.

It is more difficult, in some ways, to do the variety of things that you could a few hundred years ago, but that's because we know more! Every good science student has had "obvious" ideas while thinking about something that turn out to be well-known. But there are still plenty of scientists who are still able to do this.

__________________
This isn't right, this isn't even wrong.
- Wolfgang Pauli

Henry "Smokey" Yunick.

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

Hello novaderrik,

After reading the wiki for Smokey--I won't be forgetting his contributions to NASCAR any time soon!

__________________
"The candle flame gutters. Its little pool of light trembles. Darkness gathers. The demons begin to stir."
---Carl Sagan

Alan Turing possibly had the finest mind of the twentieth century. Jacob Bronowski was in a league of his own when it came to synthesizing ideas.

__________________
Yonder is Dubhe seen on Earth tonight as it was in the days of Grover Cleveland's presidency whereas this way is Deneb seen as it was in the lifetime of Muhammed . If one somehow travelled to Deneb at very close to c then whenever you looked back you'd measure Earth as closer to you than the distance you would simultaneously measure between Earth and Dubhe.

Howard Hughes

__________________
(By the way, I hate it that so many papers in the areas of planetary science and geology are not easily available to the dreaded "non-subscribers". It is like they are screaming at me: "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH". Good, I feel better now.)

"Quaerendo inventis"

Jack Eddy



"It was one more defeat in our long and losing battle to keep the Sun perfect, or, if not perfect, constant, and if inconstant, regular. Why we think the Sun should be any of these when other stars are not is more a question for social than for physical science."

J. Robert Oppenheimer

see:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Oppenheimer


and, No, I have no Communist sympathies, nor ideologies to support, you have to respect the work the guy did...phenomenal. pete

__________________
A third rate theory forbids.
A second rate theory explains after the fact.
A first rate theory predicts.
A. Lomonosov

"Specialization is for insects." - Heinlein

Having said that, while I prefer the Renaissance approach, myself, it's the specialists who've plunged the depths of human knowledge and contributed so many tidbits which people like me later learn before we assemble those tidbits into new and innovative products, processes, applications, and other societal contributions.

Without the specialists and their tidbits, I'd have nothing to assemble!

__________________
If I set the budget, we'd have Ares and more. Unfortunately, I don't set the budget, and Ares is just too expensive and too far out for us to accomplish our goals within the budget we were given.

If we halt the ISS, all versions of Ares, and transport Orion and Altair aboard DIRECTv3's Jupiter family of Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles, we just might make it back to the Moon by 2020.

To be a modern "renaissance" scientist, in my view it is not sufficient just to be a broad polymath. There should also be an element of the eccentric, better still pseudo-scientific, on top of good scientific work. For this my model is Newton, who managed on top of all his ground-breaking scientific work to take an interest in alchemy and religious theory, for example dating the biblical creation.

A couple of genuine polymaths, with an element of the slightly mad thrown in:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hoyle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Gold

Sir Fred Hoyle always intrigued me. I agree.

__________________
(By the way, I hate it that so many papers in the areas of planetary science and geology are not easily available to the dreaded "non-subscribers". It is like they are screaming at me: "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH". Good, I feel better now.)

"Quaerendo inventis"

Why feel the need to point that out? Would be pure prejudice on the part of anyone would thought Oppenheimer's leftist leanings detracted from his legacy. It would be hard for anyone with intellect in the 1930s not to be effected by events in Spain and Germany.

__________________
Yonder is Dubhe seen on Earth tonight as it was in the days of Grover Cleveland's presidency whereas this way is Deneb seen as it was in the lifetime of Muhammed . If one somehow travelled to Deneb at very close to c then whenever you looked back you'd measure Earth as closer to you than the distance you would simultaneously measure between Earth and Dubhe.

I'll probably get shot down for this, but I don't see any candidates in the above posts who qualify as genuine Renaissance-type Scientists. As I understand it, such a polymath is someone who excels both in the sciences and humanities. Somebody who excels in two directly related (scientific) disciplines is to me not so much of a Renaissance man as one who excels in two totally unconnected disciplines such as maths and Sanscrit. Perhaps I am misunderstanding the OP.

Well, does Physics and Bongo Drums count?

__________________
-----
Todd (Bowie, MD, US, North America, Earth, Sol System, Vega region, Local Bubble, Orion arm, Milky Way Galaxy, Local Group, Virgo A Cluster, Virgo supercluster, the universe in which spock is clean shaven)

Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

personal page: http://blog.astrosketches.info

Sorry for leaving everyone in a lurch...today...

What I have seemingly noticed during my brief lifetime is that those who become so-called "polymaths" --- have always possessed innate (or have been nurtured to express) their ingenuity.

I have personally attended small lectures by Professor Emilio Segre and Professor Douglas Osheroff.

Professor Segre's lecture was to promote his book: Form X-Rays to Quarks. He definitely struck me as an individual who (1) knew physics and lived it (2)...He also was extremely personable and professional--basically a person who you would like to have as a dissertation mentor

Professor Osheroff's lecture came on the heels of his Nobel prize-- and he told us why he wanted to pursue science --about how (he originally intended to be -- I presume -- a pre-med) and much to his chagrin did not like the sight of blood. He seemed extremely professional and approachable. He spoke of how he came across his "aha" moment of *discovery*. And, again he struck me as a person who a lot students would like as a dissertation mentor.

Another individual whose lecture I was privileged to attend was: Dr. Linus Pauling at the Hitchcock Memorial Lectures at U. C. Berkeley...that lecture was extremely informative...but harder to comprehend because of the size and type of audience he lectured to.

I also knew of a colleague (who goes unmentioned)-- who gave me (I believe?) a very good description of what some characteristics of some of these people possess: an idiosyncratic way of approaching, solving and knowing when to abandon a problem.


As far as I am concerned...every person mentioned in this series of posts deserves credit for their major contributions and (definitely) because they have had successes in influencing others to pursue a life in astronomy/physics/technology/etc...


I am sure there will be those who will disagree with me...

Clear skies to all...

__________________
"The candle flame gutters. Its little pool of light trembles. Darkness gathers. The demons begin to stir."
---Carl Sagan

Upon further research Prof. Osheroff did not intend to have a career in medicine at origin of his studies

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/p...f-autobio.html

My apologies to Dr. Osheroff and the bautforum.

__________________
"The candle flame gutters. Its little pool of light trembles. Darkness gathers. The demons begin to stir."
---Carl Sagan

Has anyone mentioned the BA, He's both a scientist and a popular author.

__________________
"What you think you thought you saw you did not see." Agent J, MiB - Manhatten Bureau

Apparently not--but since we seem to be "in his sphere of influence" we are "I guess" his proteges (bad spelling?)

__________________
"The candle flame gutters. Its little pool of light trembles. Darkness gathers. The demons begin to stir."
---Carl Sagan

They do in my book! Hang on... (tap-tap). Did you hear that? Pure bongo frenzy, I tell you!

Well, ok, so I'm a touch mad (eccentric). Isn't that a polymathical requirement?

(cough...) Not to disparage the Good Phil, but he's one of many here on this board who possess cross-disciplinary talents.

__________________
If I set the budget, we'd have Ares and more. Unfortunately, I don't set the budget, and Ares is just too expensive and too far out for us to accomplish our goals within the budget we were given.

If we halt the ISS, all versions of Ares, and transport Orion and Altair aboard DIRECTv3's Jupiter family of Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles, we just might make it back to the Moon by 2020.

Ralf Bagnold - scientist, soldier, explorer, writer.

How can you all forget about Tesla?

Ninety-year old eccentric tinkerer James Lovelock probably fits the bill.

Superorganisms! Just like Da Vinci! That's good!