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. amunozo · 1790961755 · focus · HN ↗

               E.g., economics.

               1. IAmBroom · 1790968549 · focus · HN ↗

                  I've literally never met a person who didn't consider themselves economically knowledgeable.

                  It's like an analog to the fact that almost all people consider themselves funny.

                  1. ahazred8ta · 1790975747 · focus · HN ↗

                     Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has. -- Descartes
                  2. cindyllm · 1790979747 · focus · HN ↗

                     [dead]

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.