Thread

1. srejk · 1790951720 · focus · HN ↗

   When you look at it holistically, von Neumann was more influential in science and mathematics in the 20th century than either Einstein or Planck. He wasn't as obvious a symbol of the scientific revolution, but his contributions to SO MANY THINGS at a fundamental level makes him stand out to me.

   1. snapetom · 1790951983 · focus · HN ↗

      Definitely my favorite physicist for the same reason you state. The notion that he just went around different fields and said “here’s how math can improve things,” invented some new approach, and moved on to another field to do it all over again just cracks me up.

      1. harpersealtako · 1790955373 · focus · HN ↗

         Nowadays we'd call that "engineer's disease". I wonder how many potential Von Neumanns were discouraged from branching out into other fields by jealous gatekeepers who assume that any interest in their field by "outsiders", especially technical people, is "epistemic trespassing".

         1. lalalandland · 1790955997 · focus · HN ↗

            For every von Neumann you probably have thousands if not millions of crack pots with ideas not worth wasting time on. So I understand the scepticism

            1. hnfong · 1790958775 · focus · HN ↗

               If people are assigned a "gatekeeping" position, they should at least be expected to be able to tell great minds from crack pots. (As opposed to just blindly applying a statistical filter)

               Otherwise why not just replace them with a script (or these days, an AI)

               1. qlte · 1790959391 · focus · HN ↗

                  In this context "gatekeeper" is often defined as broadly as "any individual academic or researcher receiving a cold email".

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.