17 Nov 11
Long version: I got into a friendly argument with a fellow student the other day about who the most influential scientist of all time was. My thought was Isaac Newton. He said Michael Faraday. We debated this for around an hour, went off on many tangents, and learned a few things I think. This process was interesting enough that I would like to continue it and bring more people in. So, who do you think the most influential scientist of all time is, considering only his/her contribution to science, and not necessarily society at large?
Short version:Who do you think the most influential scientist of all time is, considering only his/her contribution to science, and not necessarily society at large?
17 Nov 11
Originally posted by amolv06I agree with you. It is Newton.
[b]Long version: I got into a friendly argument with a fellow student the other day about who the most influential scientist of all time was. My thought was Isaac Newton. He said Michael Faraday. We debated this for around an hour, went off on many tangents, and learned a few things I think. This process was interesting enough that I would like to co ...[text shortened]... time is, considering only his/her contribution to science, and not necessarily society at large?[/b]
He was a brilliant genius, probably more brilliant than Einstein but impossible to prove.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
17 Nov 11
Originally posted by KazetNagorraBut could Newton have done what he did without his scientific predecessors, I doubt it...So it could be argued that the most brilliant scientist was the first scientist..whoever that was.
I would say Newton. He laid the foundation of modern physics, basically.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
17 Nov 11
Originally posted by joe shmoEarly Microbiologists
But could Newton have done what he did without his scientific predecessors, I doubt it...So it could be argued that the most brilliant scientist was the first scientist..whoever that was.
http://www.newspaperarchive.com/SiteMap/FreePdfPreview.aspx?img=108301401
Expand the page, it's at the bottom.
18 Nov 11
Originally posted by joe shmoBefore Newton was Galileo, but you could do that endlessly. Everybody builds on other peoples work at some point. You could go back to ancient Greece. I guess you could say they are all influential, but you have to pick one.
But could Newton have done what he did without his scientific predecessors, I doubt it...So it could be argued that the most brilliant scientist was the first scientist..whoever that was.
18 Nov 11
Originally posted by Metal BrainI think the first and possibly most important for the legacy he left was in ancient Egypt:
Before Newton was Galileo, but you could do that endlessly. Everybody builds on other peoples work at some point. You could go back to ancient Greece. I guess you could say they are all influential, but you have to pick one.
Imhotep, designer of the first pyramids, first physician, he postulated treatments and wrote down the results, starting the whole medical science thing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imhotep
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
18 Nov 11
Originally posted by Metal BrainI would argue that unless the "compared" are of the same time, the comparison is meaningless.
Before Newton was Galileo, but you could do that endlessly. Everybody builds on other peoples work at some point. You could go back to ancient Greece. I guess you could say they are all influential, but you have to pick one.
18 Nov 11
Originally posted by sonhouseExcept he is only the first person on record to do a given thing. But who is to say he was the first, and who is to say what he did was more important than what others did?
Except when there is a real first person to do something, like my Imhotep.
And doing something first, doesn't always make you more influential. Sometimes it is independently discovered elsewhere at a later date, but the influence is wider.
18 Nov 11
Originally posted by joe shmoBut Newton made some really big steps. Of course he couldn't have made his discoveries without the invention of fire, agriculture or the wheel, but is it really relevant to regress so far back?
But could Newton have done what he did without his scientific predecessors, I doubt it...So it could be argued that the most brilliant scientist was the first scientist..whoever that was.
18 Nov 11
Originally posted by KazetNagorraSure it's relevant. Without the wheel, kiss it all goodbye.
But Newton made some really big steps. Of course he couldn't have made his discoveries without the invention of fire, agriculture or the wheel, but is it really relevant to regress so far back?
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
18 Nov 11
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI feel its relevant, you don't have to...
But Newton made some really big steps. Of course he couldn't have made his discoveries without the invention of fire, agriculture or the wheel, but is it really relevant to regress so far back?
I would argue that the leap someone made to make the first written language is comparable to Newton inventing his language (calculus)...but who is credited with that? We don't know? Hstorical recording using language probably wasn't the prime objective for its invention, it was something we slowly found we could use the invented language for. Who was more influential Newton or that other guy? I feel because of the time difference meaningful comparison is not important, other than noting the fact that they both invented a language.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12466
21 Nov 11
Originally posted by joe shmoThe thing is, as far as we know, no single person made that leap. It was gradually evolved from iconic pictures, which were evolved from cave paintings, which were evolved from smudges of coloured earth. All this went gradually, in many places, over the course of centuries and millennia.
I would argue that the leap someone made to make the first written language is comparable to Newton inventing his language (calculus)...but who is credited with that? We don't know?
Newton, OTOH, did make some giant advances all by himself. Standing on the shoulders of giants, yes - but he himself looked further ahead than any of the giants before him did. And after him, except for Einstein - but Einstein has, I believe, not yet had quite the influence on society that Newton had. Of course, Newton has the temporal advantage by a few centuries.
Richard
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
23 Nov 11
Originally posted by Shallow Bluebut all science now will be but a "smuge of color on the earth" when compared with the science of the future ( pending progression )
The thing is, as far as we know, no single person made that leap. It was gradually evolved from iconic pictures, which were evolved from cave paintings, which were evolved from smudges of coloured earth. All this went gradually, in many places, over the course of centuries and millennia.
Newton, OTOH, did make some giant advances all by himself. Standi ...[text shortened]... ety that Newton had. Of course, Newton has the temporal advantage by a few centuries.
Richard