Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

There are only two super geniuses of science that I am aware of

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:03 PM
link   


There are only two super geniuses of science that I am aware of.
Lavoisier and Einstein. In both cases these men were blessed the
very rarest of occurrences. A lab assistant that they were both
deeply in love with and who were their wives. Back in those days
finding a woman with a love for science and a knack for being a
lab assistant, weather a chemistry lab or a laboratory of the
mind, was as common as finding a supernova. And the great
many of potential genius died alone and unloved by any woman,
as their wives usually hated their work or were jealous of their
time spent in the lab. It was a different world back then.





I do find it interesting though, that here in the post feminist
world the story is being revised to suggest that those men stole
the work from their wives when for hundreds of years one of the
great laments of science has been about how much genius is lost
because of the rarity of finding a good husband and wife team.

And now that we have generations of empowered scientific
women capable of participating in just such a relationship the
drum beat for castigation of men in general is being whipped up
to a louder and faster beat.

Disgusting if you ask me.

Mike




posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:05 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:07 PM
link   
I don't know about the first man you mentioned but Einstein and his wife had no love. It was a mutually beneficial arrangement where she needed him to get her work published and he needed her to get his name made.

That is the theory anyways.



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:10 PM
link   

mikegrouchy
There are only two super geniuses of science that I am aware of.
Lavoisier and Einstein.


Do the Curie's not count, specifically Marie?
To paraphrase you, a woman blessed with ... a lab assistant that they were both deeply in love with and who were their husband.



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:10 PM
link   
You forgot Michaelangelo, DaVinci and Tesla.
I don't believe any of them had a wife. I know for fact Tesla didn't.

As far as a woman counterpart giving inspiration to said geniuses... I doubt it. They were geniuses before they knew the differences between an "inny" and an "outy".
edit on 6-10-2013 by kimish because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:14 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 


George Washington Carver, Nikola Tesla, Rosalind Franklin were all morons.If they had only married...maybe they could have achieved the status of true genius.



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:22 PM
link   
As already posted by a few persons OP, I think you would need to build a stronger case for this.

Even the assertion about the post feminist movement is contentious for me. I haven't seen a great many male scientists stripped of their achievements or marginalized. Einstein was also a bit of a womanizer, so I'm not sure it is the best example.

I'm open to be wrong though.



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Tinkerpeach
I don't know about the first man you mentioned but Einstein and his wife had no love. It was a mutually beneficial arrangement where she needed him to get her work published and he needed her to get his name made.

That is the theory anyways.


Lavoisier and his wife developed the theory of Oxygen,
and pretty much invented modern chemistry from whole cloth.












Until a liberal movement called the French Revolution,
symbolized by a topless tart, decided to cut his head off.



edit on 6-10-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Ahhh so I need a lab!

Damn it, why did no one tell me this. Us geniuses need a lab in order to procure a woman.

"Get back in the lab, woman!" shall be the new age cry of the masculine genius!

it's probably also because it's where I will keep the ether.



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:31 PM
link   

alfa1

mikegrouchy
There are only two super geniuses of science that I am aware of.
Lavoisier and Einstein.


Do the Curie's not count, specifically Marie?
To paraphrase you, a woman blessed with ... a lab assistant that they were both deeply in love with and who were their husband.


The mention of a mere Genius,
when the subject is Super Genius
seems a tad short of the mark.

Sorry if the wrong impression was given.

Being very precise with every word chosen is important.
One should only write what they mean and mean what they write.

Mike



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:41 PM
link   

kimish
You forgot Michaelangelo, DaVinci and Tesla.
I don't believe any of them had a wife. I know for fact Tesla didn't.

As far as a woman counterpart giving inspiration to said geniuses... I doubt it. They were geniuses before they knew the differences between an "inny" and an "outy".
edit on 6-10-2013 by kimish because: (no reason given)



Did I?
The subject was phrased as "two super geniuses of science.








As to Tesla...


Tesla is quite easily solved with the tools of the
philosopher. By using the approach of what can
we know, what do we know, and lastly what is
it that we do not know, or can't know.

To do this I will tell a little tale of two other
philosophers separated by time n place, the
first being Leibniz and the second being Einstein.
Why relativity?

The following is just a story.


Gottfried Leibniz advocates the Monad. If
one takes a glass of water sprinkles particles
into it and swirls the glass around, then
places the glass down on a table top and
looks straight down into it, we see the
particles swirl around patterning like a small
galaxy. According to the Monad theory this is
because all other inertia has been neutralized
by the swirl and the only gravity left to affect
the particles are those from the stars of our
own universe. Hence they reflect that.

Albert Einstein, on the other hand, advocates
Brownian Motion. If one takes a glass of
water and sprinkles particles into it, but just
let the glass sit undisturbed on the table and
view it from the side, we see the particles
settle. But not all. Some of them move in
random patterns even though the water is still.
This is not because the atoms of water are in
constant motion but the particles are so large.
Like a huge balloon being randomly bounced
around at a concert.




Leibniz' approach contains too many variables
and too many assumptions. Einstein's approach
has fewer variables, is easier to reproduce and
doesn't require some nebulous large unmeasur-
able group of forces like the gravity off all the
stars in our own galaxy.

Tesla's use of the Aether and vortexes within
that Aether is similar to Leibniz' Monad. It is
unmeasurable, and presumed. Great progress
has been made in electricity by using the more
measurable modern approach.

This brings us to Maxwell's equations. Simplified,
consistent results for everyone who reproduces
the experiments, and we wouldn't have modern
electronics theory without it.

So the question is not which one is right, or which
one is closer to reality but which one can we
make progress with, with the tools we have, and
the science available.

Now if someone could build up a set of measurements
for the Aether then maybe Tesla, and the few notes
he left behind can be used.


Mike



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:44 PM
link   

OrphanApology
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 


George Washington Carver, Nikola Tesla, Rosalind Franklin were all morons.If they had only married...maybe they could have achieved the status of true genius.


Black and white thinking and name calling are
not very conducive to constructive discussion.

What is wrong with being a Genius. Maybe not
a super Genius, but genius none the less. Why
do they have to be pushed down past all other
levels into the pit of ... what was the word...
...moron?

Mike


edit on 6-10-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:45 PM
link   
There's plenty more geniuses who, because they were born female, were denied an education, research materials, or laboratories.

HuMans (heh) have wasted more than half of their potential by this slight alone.

And we've all seen what the arrogance and violence of testosterone does to the planet.



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:46 PM
link   
Isaac Newton was perhaps the greatest genius to ever live. There was no functional math that explained the three laws of planetary motion, and when asked to explain them, he invented calculus.

What is really admiral of him, which many people don't know, is that he was so much more than just a physicist and mathematician. He wrote some incredible works on the Bible that are simply fascinating, reading them you really see what a keen grasp he had on scripture, and history.

Isaac Newton stands above all the rest. If he was alive today, just imagine the things he might have given us...well that's not possible, really.

And Einstein, he was brilliant, but he did tend to be unfaithful to his women. He was no sterling example in that arena at all.
edit on 7-10-2013 by Broom because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Pinke
As already posted by a few persons OP, I think you would need to build a stronger case for this.

Even the assertion about the post feminist movement is contentious for me. I haven't seen a great many male scientists stripped of their achievements or marginalized. Einstein was also a bit of a womanizer, so I'm not sure it is the best example.

I'm open to be wrong though.






But I get the sense that more evidence isn't really required in your case.

That one may be more interested in the upside, the positive, the yield.


Please indulge me as I address a small package of fear.


My feeling is that TPTB fear creative teams of lovers for two reasons.
We could quickly eclipse the stagnation our owners have foisted on us,
and they would lose the illusion that giant institutions are required to
do any real science.

Mike



posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 11:54 PM
link   

winofiend
Ahhh so I need a lab!

Damn it, why did no one tell me this. Us geniuses need a lab in order to procure a woman.

"Get back in the lab, woman!" shall be the new age cry of the masculine genius!

it's probably also because it's where I will keep the ether.




I'm openly advocating for the collaboration ...
and the response above is sowing division.

Mike



posted on Oct, 7 2013 @ 12:01 AM
link   

signalfire
There's plenty more geniuses who, because they were born female, were denied an education, research materials, or laboratories.

HuMans (heh) have wasted more than half of their potential by this slight alone.

And we've all seen what the arrogance and violence of testosterone does to the planet.



Exactly!


And I am calling for Super Genius.
Through collaboration. The entire field of chemistry
was invented by it, and all of modern physics.

The team of lovers both of each other and the subject!


I challenge the characterization of testosterone though,
as it denies it's place in the relationship, and does little
more than vilify half the population while simultaneously
stifling science.

How much genius has died alone and unloved?
Why perpetuate the myth that says we must hate men.

Mike



posted on Oct, 7 2013 @ 12:02 AM
link   



posted on Oct, 7 2013 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Broom
Isaac Newton was perhaps the greatest genius to ever live. There was no functional math that explained the three laws of planetary motion, and when asked to explain them, he invented calculus.

What is really admiral of him, which many people don't know, is that he was so much more than just a physicist and mathematician. He wrote some incredible works on the Bible that are simply fascinating, reading them you really see what a keen grasp he had on scripture, and history.

Isaac Newton stands above all the rest. If he was alive today, just imagine the things he might have given us...well that's not possible, really.

And Einstein, he was brilliant, but he did tend to be unfaithful to his women. He was no sterling example in that arena at all.
edit on 7-10-2013 by Broom because: (no reason given)




Sir Isaac Newton
The British Gold Guinea
twenty plus years later the
British go onto a paper currency.

Newton issues a standardized gold coin that turns out to be a little over valued compared to silver. Of course the merchants paid all overseas bills with silver but tried to only accept gold for their goods. As a result silver flowed out of the country. Eventually a famine of silver coins developed.

university of Michigan / The British Silver Famine






Gravity: "Whither thee rays of gravity may bee stopped by reflecting or refracting them, if so a perpetuall motion may bee made one of these ways." - Newton



From Newton's notebook, page 179
Cambrige: Sir Issac Netwon's notebook online


And who is to say if Newton had a lover or not.
Some suspect it was a man, but in those days
it would have been scandal to publicize it.

Mike






top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join