This is part one of what will be a two part series on the most influential scientists in history. While these are not technically the “greatest” scientists, there is bound to be some overlap as the contributions that many of these men and women made to science are among the most important. Be sure to tell us who you think should be on the future list – we already have our second ten, but it might lead to a third or fourth.
“One never notices what has been done; one can only see what remains to be done.”
Polish physicist and chemist, Marie Curie was a pioneer in the field of radioactivity, the only person honored with Nobel Prizes in two different sciences, and the first female professor at the University of Paris. She founded the Curie Institutes in Paris and Warsaw. Her husband Pierre Curie was also a Nobel laureate, as were her daughter Irene Joliot-Curie and son-in-law Frederic Joliot-Curie. Her achievements include the creation of a theory of radioactivity (a term coined by her), techniques for isolating radioactive isotopes, and the discovery of two new elements, radium and polonium. It was also under her personal direction that the world’s first studies were conducted into the treatment of neoplasms (“cancers”), using radioactive isotopes. While an actively loyal French citizen, she never lost her sense of Polish identity. She named the first new chemical element that she discovered (1898) “polonium” for her native country, and in 1932 she founded a Radium Institute in her hometown Warsaw, headed by her physician-sister Bronisława.
“Science is a differential equation. Religion is a boundary condition.”
English mathematician and logician, Turing is often considered to be the father of modern computer science. He provided an influential formalization of the concept of the algorithm and computation with the Turing machine. With the Turing test, meanwhile, he made a significant and characteristically provocative contribution to the debate regarding artificial intelligence: whether it will ever be possible to say that a machine is conscious and can think. He later worked at the National Physical Laboratory, creating one of the first designs for a stored-program computer, the ACE, although it was never actually built in its full form. In 1948, he moved to the University of Manchester to work on the Manchester Mark I, then emerging as one of the world’s earliest true computers. During the Second World War, Turing worked at Bletchley Park, the UK’s code breaking centre, and was for a time head of Hut 8, the section responsible for German naval cryptanalysis. He devised a number of techniques for breaking German ciphers, including the method of the bombe, an electromechanical machine that could find settings for the Enigma machine.
“An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field.”
Niels Bohr was a Danish physicist who made fundamental contributions to understanding atomic structure and quantum mechanics, for which he received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1922. Bohr’s work helped solve the problems classical physics could not explain about the nuclear model of the atom. He postulated that electrons moved in fixed orbits around the atom’s nucleus, and he explained how they emitted or absorbed energy. Bohr mentored and collaborated with many of the top physicists of the century at his institute in Copenhagen. He was also part of the team of physicists working on the Manhattan Project. One of his sons, Aage Niels Bohr, grew up to be an important physicist who, like his father, received the Nobel Prize, in 1975. Bohr has been described as one of the most influential physicists of the 20th century.
“We have no right to assume that any physical laws exist, or if they have existed up to now, that they will continue to exist in a similar manner in the future.”
Max Planck, a German physicist, is considered to be the founder of quantum theory, and one of the most important physicists of the twentieth century. Planck made many contributions to theoretical physics, but his fame rests primarily on his role as originator of the quantum theory. This theory revolutionized our understanding of atomic and subatomic processes, just as Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity revolutionized our understanding of space and time. Together they constitute the fundamental theories of 20th-century physics. His discoveries have led to industrial and military applications that affect every aspect of modern life.
“I love fools’ experiments. I am always making them.”
English naturalist and biologist, Darwin demonstrated that all species of life have evolved over time from common ancestors through the process he called natural selection. The fact that evolution occurs became accepted by the scientific community and the general public in his lifetime, while his theory of natural selection came to be widely seen as the primary explanation of the process of evolution in the 1930s, and now forms the basis of modern evolutionary theory. In modified form, Darwin’s scientific discovery remains the foundation of biology, as it provides a unifying logical explanation for the diversity of life. His 1859 book On the Origin of Species established evolution by common descent as the dominant scientific explanation of diversification in nature. He also examined human evolution and sexual selection in The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex, followed by The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. In recognition of Darwin’s pre-eminence, he was one of only five 19th century UK non-royal personages to be honored by a state funeral.
“Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using his intelligence; he is just using his memory.”
Leonardo da Vinci was an Italian polymath. He was an expert mathematician, engineer, inventor, anatomist, painter, sculptor, architect, botanist, musician and writer. Leonardo has often been described as the archetype of the “Renaissance man”, a man whose seemingly infinite curiosity was equalled only by his powers of invention. Leonardo is revered for his technological ingenuity. He conceptualized a helicopter, a tank, concentrated solar power, a calculator, the double hull and outlined a rudimentary theory of plate tectonics. Relatively few of his designs were constructed or were even feasible during his lifetime, but some of his smaller inventions, such as an automated bobbin winder and a machine for testing the tensile strength of wire, entered the world of manufacturing unheralded. As a scientist, he greatly advanced the state of knowledge in the fields of anatomy, civil engineering, optics, and hydrodynamics.
“All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.”
Galileo was an Italian physicist and astronomer. His achievements include improvements to the telescope and consequent astronomical observations, and support for Copernicanism. Galileo has been called the “father of modern observational astronomy”, the “father of modern physics”, the “father of science”, and “the Father of Modern Science.” The motion of uniformly accelerated objects, taught in nearly all high school and introductory college physics courses, was studied by Galileo as the subject of kinematics. His contributions to observational astronomy include the telescopic confirmation of the phases of Venus, the discovery of the four largest satellites of Jupiter, named the Galilean moons in his honor, and the observation and analysis of sunspots. Galileo also worked in applied science and technology, improving compass design. Galileo’s championing of Copernicanism was controversial within his lifetime. The geocentric view had been dominant since the time of Aristotle, and the controversy engendered by Galileo’s presentation of heliocentrism as proven fact resulted in the Catholic Church’s prohibiting its advocacy because it was not empirically proven at the time. Galileo was eventually forced to recant his heliocentrism and spent the last years of his life under house arrest on orders of the Holy Inquisition.
“The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.”
Tesla was a Serbian engineer and inventor who is often described as the most important scientist and inventor of the modern age, a man who “shed light over the face of Earth”. He is best known for many revolutionary contributions in the field of electricity and magnetism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Tesla’s patents and theoretical work formed the basis of modern alternating current electric power (AC) systems, including the polyphase power distribution systems and the AC motor, with which he helped usher in the Second Industrial Revolution. Contemporary biographers of Tesla have regarded him as “The Father of Physics”, “The man who invented the twentieth century” and “the patron saint of modern electricity.” Aside from his work on electromagnetism and electromechanical engineering, Tesla has contributed in varying degrees to the establishment of robotics, remote control, radar and computer science, and to the expansion of ballistics, nuclear physics, and theoretical physics. In 1943, the Supreme Court of the United States credited him as being the inventor of the radio. Many of his achievements have been used, with some controversy, to support various pseudosciences, UFO theories, and early New Age occultism.
“A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.”
Einstein, a German physicist, is best known for his theory of relativity and specifically mass–energy equivalence, expressed by the equation E = mc2. Einstein received the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics “for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect. Einstein’s many contributions to physics include his special theory of relativity, which reconciled mechanics with electromagnetism, and his general theory of relativity, which was intended to extend the principle of relativity to non-uniform motion and to provide a new theory of gravitation. His other contributions include advances in the fields of relativistic cosmology, capillary action, critical opalescence, classical problems of statistical mechanics and their application to quantum theory, an explanation of the Brownian movement of molecules, atomic transition probabilities, the quantum theory of a monatomic gas, thermal properties of light with low radiation density (which laid the foundation for the photon theory), a theory of radiation including stimulated emission, the conception of a unified field theory, and the geometrization of physics. Einstein published over 300 scientific works and over 150 non-scientific works. The physics community reveres Einstein, and in 1999 Time magazine named him the “Person of the Century”. In wider culture the name “Einstein” has become synonymous with genius.
“To myself I am only a child playing on the beach, while vast oceans of truth lie undiscovered before me.”
Newton was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, alchemist, theologian and one of the most influential men in human history. His Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, published in 1687, is considered to be the most influential book in the history of science. In this work, Newton described universal gravitation and the three laws of motion, laying the groundwork for classical mechanics, which dominated the scientific view of the physical universe for the next three centuries and is the basis for modern engineering. Newton showed that the motions of objects on Earth and of celestial bodies are governed by the same set of natural laws by demonstrating the consistency between Kepler’s laws of planetary motion and his theory of gravitation, thus removing the last doubts about heliocentrism and advancing the scientific revolution. In mechanics, Newton enunciated the principles of conservation of momentum and angular momentum. In optics, he built the first “practical” reflecting telescope and developed a theory of color based on the observation that a prism decomposes white light into a visible spectrum. He also formulated an empirical law of cooling and studied the speed of sound. In mathematics, Newton shares the credit with Gottfried Leibniz for the development of the differential and integral calculus. He also demonstrated the generalized binomial theorem, developed the so-called “Newton’s method” for approximating the zeroes of a function, and contributed to the study of power series. Newton’s stature among scientists remains at the very top rank, as demonstrated by a 2005 survey of scientists in Britain’s Royal Society asking who had the greater effect on the history of science, Newton was deemed much more influential than Albert Einstein.
This article is licensed under the GFDL because it contains quotations from Wikipedia.
Contributor: Mongoose























February 25th, 2009 at 1:34 am
einstien in shorts (Y)
February 25th, 2009 at 1:35 am
the irony….
February 25th, 2009 at 1:36 am
Really, Darwin that low, not even in the top 5. And Copernicus, Hooke, Linneus, Ptolemy and hippocrates are no where to be found, eh? This list has some major flaws.
February 25th, 2009 at 1:47 am
Really, greg, is that necessary? Mongoose never mentioned this was in any specific order and he did mention in the intro that this is a one of TWO PART series… It’s almost admirable how people can twist any situation to find room to complain.
I think this is a great start. I really like these quotes you included!
February 25th, 2009 at 1:56 am
I’ve been meaning to write a list along these lines for ages but I’m far too lazy but I would have split it up into three lists one for most influential physicists, one for chemists and one for biologists.
Having said that, you did a great job and the quotes are a great addition. Your top two was the same way round as I would have done for physicists.
My one issue is Darwin’s position. I’d say he should be number one or maybe two on this list, especially if ‘most influential’ is taken to mean biggest influence on society as a whole rather than influence within the scientific community.
Overall thumbs up
February 25th, 2009 at 1:59 am
Darwin behind Da Vinci & Tesla? Please.
I’d say pretty much all scientifically educated people would consider Einstein, Newton & Darwin as the top 3 (though not necessarily in that order).
Da Vinci’s contributions were awesome, to be sure, but are more contributions to engineering rather than pure science.
February 25th, 2009 at 2:04 am
Have to agree with Carlos.
There should be 3, chemists, physicists, and biologists.
February 25th, 2009 at 2:08 am
Great list Mongoose, im not going to complain of the order like everyone else, just glad you got my top 3 in there!
February 25th, 2009 at 2:12 am
Great list. Some notable omissions (Thomas Edison, Graham Bell) will be debated but you got the list correct. The only thing i would do is swap 9 & 10. Mdm Curie deserves at least one position higher if not more …
February 25th, 2009 at 2:14 am
That Einstein picture made me LOL
He was a sexy guy…
February 25th, 2009 at 2:17 am
Good list I thought einstien was going to be number one
February 25th, 2009 at 2:22 am
Reading towards the end, I was worried if Tesla will be present. Never mind the order, that will be always down to personal science field preference: “Every scientist thinks that his field is the most important. Only physicists know they are right.”
February 25th, 2009 at 2:28 am
Seeing Tesla in the list made my day.
Great list Mongoose. And I don’t think ORDER means anything in this list. It’s all subjective.
February 25th, 2009 at 2:28 am
Did anyone else notice that Einstein is wearing women’s shoes? Weird…
February 25th, 2009 at 2:29 am
Oh – and Tesla definitely deserves top 10 position – whereas the wicked Edison should consider himself lucky to make the top 20!
February 25th, 2009 at 2:32 am
Looking it that way Tesla shouldn’t even be on the list. He actually made something. That doesn’t make him a scientist but an engineer, and if the list really isn’t about the order why are Einstein and Newton so high up?
I just think that what Tesla did is just incomparable to the rest of them and that Einstein is really overrated. What did he really influenced (except propagated a crazy-science-dude look)?
February 25th, 2009 at 2:37 am
cool list..Einstein’s photo above is (sorry..) laughable..but cute..heehee
February 25th, 2009 at 2:39 am
No place for Fermi or Oppenhimer ? They created the nuclear age as we know it.
February 25th, 2009 at 2:42 am
I would agree about Edison. He was more of an inventor and exploiter than scientist.
February 25th, 2009 at 2:45 am
Edison and Bell are more engineer than scientists.
If I had to add a few more names, I would think about Aristotle and Blaise Pascal, nevertheless, good list…
February 25th, 2009 at 3:06 am
Excellent job, Mongoose. And not an easy task, given the difficult criterion of “most influential”.
My own list would include Mendel (genetics), Mendeleyev (organised/structured the Periodic Table), Rutherford (“split” the atom), Watson, Crick, Wilkins and Franklin (DNA). There are, of course, plenty of others who could make the cut.
I also admit to bias…Rutherford and Wilkins were kiwis
And I would likely omit Curie, Bohr, Thuring, Planck, and da Vinci – notwithstanding their genius.
The great Newton should, indeed, be #1. The guy single-handedly founded various branches of science, and had (arguably) the most profound intellect of any human being ever.
February 25th, 2009 at 3:18 am
What is up with those shoes? It was the first thing I noticed in that picture…
February 25th, 2009 at 3:25 am
Kiwiboi – you would omit curie! SHOCKED! lol Without her splitting the atom would have been impossible.
She deserves her place – first woman to get Nobel prizes in two separate field for goodness sake!
I am surprised Mendel was not on this list with darwin. Darwinism is only really powerful when combined with Mendelian genetics. Hopefully he will be on the next one
February 25th, 2009 at 3:42 am
ideas for the next list:
will you be considering the “soft sciences?” or will they get their own list? because if you do, you can’t leave out freud -we wouldn’t even speak they way we do if not for his ideas, his influence on western culture is massive. in a similar vein, alfred kinsey.
back to the hard stuff: avicenna (ibn sina). descartes. gregor mendel for genetics of trait inheritance. crick, watson, & franklin for DNA. louis pasteur. alexander fleming for penicillin. fritz haber & carl bosch for nitrogen based fertilizer synthesis (which is HUGE for world food production). that’s all i’ve got off the top off my head.
nice list and i agree, the quotes add a lot. oh and i typed this offline and am pasting, i see some of these guys in new comments, please consider this seconding their suggestions
February 25th, 2009 at 3:53 am
@xDr: Tesla actually inventing things does not mean he wasn’t a scientist — his inventions were based off of his own theories, and were not, say, practical implementations of already existing theories. Had he written them down and not used them himself, those theories would still have formed the foundation for our modern understanding and usage of electricity, magnetism (and the connection between them), radio, and more. He just happened to also take the extra step of using those theories in a manner which not only supported the theories but provided a practical use for them. He absolutely deserves a top three spot. It would be very hard to think of a scientist whose work had a more overt and direct effect on society.
February 25th, 2009 at 3:58 am
this list should be renamed “most influential western scientists.”
February 25th, 2009 at 3:58 am
In terms of influence, surely Darwin must be bumped a few spots. When you consider the advances in biotechnology that have come about since his big idea… it’s at least as important as us having lights and such. It was about god not being god anymore… that’s big!
February 25th, 2009 at 4:04 am
nice list, just a tiny correction: tesla is actually a croatian scientist (born in smiljan, croatia and educated in croatian capital of zagreb) even though he was a member of serbian (orthodox) minority in croatia. one of his famous statements regarding the ever existing feud between croats and serbs was “i’m very proud of my croatian homeland and my serbian people.” i mean, you wouldn’t call jennifer aniston a greek actress, would you?
February 25th, 2009 at 4:30 am
Always loved that Einstein quote. I have an idea for a list by the way, “Top 10 things Enoooo wants for his birthday by February 27th or he will boycott Listverse” Think about it Jamie, it could quite possibly be the best list on here.
February 25th, 2009 at 4:36 am
joanne: perhaps you could name some non-Western scientists who are more important for their overall influence today than the ones on this list? In previous lists I have given equal consideration to the Eastern scientists and mathematicians – but tell me, what Eastern scientist gave us as great a contribution in the early stages to quantum physics than Planck, Bohr, or Einstein?
February 25th, 2009 at 4:38 am
Enoooo: or you could be dreaming…
February 25th, 2009 at 4:45 am
DoubleT: He was an ethnic Serb who was born in the Austrian Empire – he spent half his life as an Austrian subject and half as American – he can’t really be called Croatian surely
There might have been a lot of croatians where he was born, but his parents were Serbs and both Serbs and Croats at the time were Austrian citizens – there was no such thing as Croatia.
February 25th, 2009 at 4:45 am
Great list, once again!
@22 – Nicosia
What is up with those shoes? It was the first thing I noticed in that picture…
I thought it was just me who noticed it! =D
February 25th, 2009 at 4:50 am
Kiwiboi – you would omit curie! SHOCKED! lol Without her splitting the atom would have been impossible.
cymrae – nobody is denying Curie’s greatness. But if we were to keep tracing back along the lines of “A’s work would have been impossible without B’s, who preceded him/her…” then we would probably end up with whoever it was that invented the wheel, or discovered how to start a fire etc. etc.
When considering which pioneer(s) in the atomic field I would choose, I opted for Rutherford (I also admitted my kiwi bias).
February 25th, 2009 at 4:52 am
The shoes that Einstein is wearing are so feminine that I wondered (as I was preparing the picture for the list) whether it was a joke – and someone had pasted his face on a woman’s body – but it looks pretty authentic. Then again, when wearing white tie, a true gentlemen wears these – which are not the most masculine shoes in the world.
February 25th, 2009 at 4:55 am
cymraegbachgen87: I agree with kiwiboi
Though I must too admit my bias (being a kiwi and the brother of kiwiboi) – but I still think he is right
February 25th, 2009 at 5:00 am
a dream list for ppl for like science.
i too like it
awesome
February 25th, 2009 at 5:02 am
Wow Einstein legs are so sexy. And silky smooth. Wonder if he uses Gillette? Wish my girl had as nice legs as him.
February 25th, 2009 at 5:05 am
Oh and Tesla was Serbian. He didn’t even speak Croation!!!
February 25th, 2009 at 5:12 am
well, jamie, in that case there were no serbs either; at that time they were simply called by their faith: the orthodox. and there never was such thing as “the austrian empire”; actually at tesla’s era that part of croatia was a part of the croato-hungarian kingdom which was a part of the habsburg monarchy. the monarchy itself was a confederation of nations and tesla’s home soil was croatian then just as it is now and his own words that i had posted previously confirm that. it’s painfully hard to follow tumultuous history of the balkans, that’s for sure… and i’m so sorry to bother everyone with it!
February 25th, 2009 at 5:19 am
lalalilo, he was a serb, not a serbian (serb meaning the ethnicity and serbian meaning a citizen of serbia which he never was) and it’s just laughable that he didn’t speak croatian (nobody speaks croation: that word doesn’t exist!) because those two languages are basically the same: all croats perfectly understand all serbs and vice versa. in all his written documents he was using the croatian variant of the language, though.
February 25th, 2009 at 5:34 am
Man, I was expecting a lot more of those “tesla-is-croatian” type of comments.. But it’s still early..
February 25th, 2009 at 5:52 am
All the experts are hitting this list hard! You must feel like a fool for making a top ten list on the most important scientists in history and only putting 10 of the most important scientists in history on it. Sure you are doing a second list with 10 more of the most important scientists in history but I’m sure you’ll only put 10 other of the scientists that are the most important scientists in history on that list too. Even if you put all the scientists we’re so offended about you having left off this list on the next one, I’m bet you’ll leave off some of the most important scientists in history. This list sucks, I could make a better one.
February 25th, 2009 at 5:53 am
How can you leave (1) Ron Hubbard (2)Henry Morris & George McCready Price (3) Phillip E Johnson – the greatest scientists of our generations from this list.
Unfair!
Unfair to pseudoscience
February 25th, 2009 at 5:54 am
i can’t get over einstein-at-beach either! i found that pic in other places, it’s credited as unknown photographer, 1945, and seems legit. so i did some other digging, being curious, and i found this:
http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/exhibition/objectsthroughtime/boots/
scroll down just over half-way to see a sandal like the one’s he’s wearing. this may sound dumb -but were other sandal styles available in 1945? did they make “men’s” sandals? maybe this was the manliest pair around. but i prefer to think einstein just didn’t care!
February 25th, 2009 at 5:55 am
I’m voting that Pasteur will be in the 2nd part.
Interesting list.
February 25th, 2009 at 6:00 am
I remember reading somewhere that the shoes Einstein is wearing is in fact women shoes. The story is something about the shoe seller not understanding Einstein’s accent and therefore though he was asking for a sundial not sandals. When the mistake was cleared up, Einstein was so embarrassed that he just bought the only pair of sandals in the shop that would fit him – apperently he had very small feet. Einstein became really good friends with the shoe seller and therefore he would sometimes wear the sandals as sort of an intern joke between the two of them.
February 25th, 2009 at 6:00 am
so i just compared the sandals, they are similar, not the same (it was the most masculine 1940’s sandal shoe i saw anywhere.)
but he was einstein! all he wanted was the sea and the sand, a salt breeze tossing his hair and his toe-hair…fashion was a small price to pay for such joys glories
43. Kazorek calm down dear, perhaps let your toe-hair down…
February 25th, 2009 at 6:02 am
How about Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch, without whose contributions the whole world could be starving?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process
Check out the book “The Alchemy of Air” by Thomas Hager:
http://www.thomashager.net/
February 25th, 2009 at 6:06 am
14. jfrater: Totally with you, there, Jamie. I immediately thought “hey…those are slingbacks!”. You know, if dressing up in women’s shoes made his productivity better, I’m willing to give him the cross-dressing fancy.
Right in the beginning Mongoose says that this list is only half of the people. If the only argument you have is “you missed X” or “you’re order is bogus”, then it falls flat and it’s monotonous. Trying being original.
February 25th, 2009 at 6:12 am
Shut up lo. You stupid idiot. And I don’t have hair toes!
February 25th, 2009 at 6:22 am
Maybe I’m just being a bit too picky, but i would have included Bernhard Riemann in this List.
Sure, not many have heard of him but his ideas of geometry and the curvature of spaces have lead to almost all significant discoveries in the topic of gravity and shaped a whole new conception of physics.
February 25th, 2009 at 6:27 am
All the terrible rage in me… all in vein.
February 25th, 2009 at 6:28 am
I know little about science but i appreciate Newton because of his influence on the Enlightenment movement.
February 25th, 2009 at 6:38 am
no toe hair kazorek, not even on the big toe? do you shave it or do you wax? and do you know what a joke is?
and i don’t know what “hair toes” are, but i’m very glad you don’t have them, as it seems having them would upset you.
February 25th, 2009 at 6:39 am
Cedestra, those aren’t slingbacks.
February 25th, 2009 at 6:40 am
…and i’d hate to see the comments you leave when you’re not in such a sunny mood….
February 25th, 2009 at 6:47 am
tesla should be number 2 and Leonardo, by far, number 1
February 25th, 2009 at 6:52 am
As a scientist and a world-class nitpicker, I think this is a pretty good list. Can’t wait to see part deux.
February 25th, 2009 at 7:18 am
I really enjoyed the list. I would have to go with Newton as number 1 as well because I really like his cookies! Sorry, I couldn’t help myself.
February 25th, 2009 at 7:19 am
Ha ha. I was joking also. All the posts I’ve made so far I intended on being jokes. So, perhaps I don’t know quite what a joke. I knew the second two I mad were pretty tactless but it never crossed my that you’d think I was actually upset about having toe hair- hair toes I mean.
February 25th, 2009 at 7:20 am
The second I saw the name of the list my immediate thought was “If Newton is not number one well I’ll…”
So you passed the test, and thanks for including Max too.
Edison was a businessman, not so much a scientist. He profited from his employees inventiveness. The only reason anyone knows his name is he marketed himself as celebrity and into the grade school text books – what he did to Tesla, and a lot of his employees was deplorable.
February 25th, 2009 at 7:21 am
And sorry for all the typos. They’re pretty gratuitous today.
February 25th, 2009 at 7:21 am
NICE list. Well done, Mongoose.
As soon as I saw the title, I wondered if Tesla would be among the choices.
There’s a small but significant St. Louis connection to Tesla. In 1893, he made the first *public* demonstration of wireless communication — a.k.a. radio — by using a device for radio reception and transmission. Tesla did his demonstration for the the National Electric Light Association in St. Louis, and repeated the performance in Philly later in the year.
February 25th, 2009 at 7:32 am
61. Kazorek- i don’t know where you’re from, but the typos were leading me to believe english might be a second language, so then i thought hmm, perhaps s/he’s not familiar with the phrase “relax and let your hair down” and didn’t get that i’m referencing it with “let your toe-hair down,” as you seemed so unhappy with the idea.
einstein aired out his toe-hair in his sexy sandals and it doesn’t look like it caused him any grief.
February 25th, 2009 at 7:35 am
What??!?? No Dr. Victor Frankenstein?
February 25th, 2009 at 7:41 am
I hope the 2nd list includes:
Archimedes
Euclid
Ibn Sina
Al Khwarzimi
Ibn Al Haytham
Keppler
Liebniz
Gauss
Riemann
Von Neumann
Don’t like Aristotle and Ptolemy but I guess they had more influence than some of the above.
February 25th, 2009 at 7:53 am
He is kind of mentioned in the #1 text, but Johannes Kepler should be on that ‘other’ List IMO – planetary movement explained did change some thoughts.
…but then, heliocentricy even more so. There you go, Nicolaus Copernikus.
On the ’softer’ side; Freud & Jung spring to mind, and maybe even some ‘old Greeks’ like Aristotle and Socrates. But where they really influential – or just learned.
Influential: Watts, Daimler & Benz. Or Gates & Brin. Engineers change the world – with the groundword done by the scientists.
February 25th, 2009 at 7:54 am
Leonardo DaVinci might be the most gifted man in human history. How many people can claim to have excelled in Math, Science AND Art? Hell, I wouldn’t be surprised if it were discovered that he wrote all of Shakespeare’s sonnets too! (100 years before, of course ;D)
February 25th, 2009 at 7:56 am
I agree with the posters who say boo! to Edison.
February 25th, 2009 at 7:56 am
I humbly submit Pastuer and Salk for part 2.
Also, I’m fairly certain I own shoes like the ones einstien is wearing, only mine are heels. The ’50s are back, people!
February 25th, 2009 at 8:02 am
WOW, Einstein is looking hot at the beach.
Nice legs….and shoes(wtf?)
February 25th, 2009 at 8:03 am
It is sad that there is no any mention of Tesla in The New Yorker hotel. Hi lived and died in this hotel. But you wont be able to find any mention of him in the hotel.
February 25th, 2009 at 8:14 am
it should be at least 5 galieo galilei 4-isaac newton 3-leonardo di vinchi 2-charles darwin 1-albert einstein
February 25th, 2009 at 8:16 am
I agree with this list, but I’ll just remind you of some others for upcoming lists:
Feynman (my personal favorite)
Gödel
Schrödinger
Sadi Carnot
Clerk Maxwell
Von Neumann
Poincaré
Friedrich Gauss
Fermat
Pascal
Hyugens
Laplace
Bernoulli
February 25th, 2009 at 8:24 am
Tesla had really good songs.
February 25th, 2009 at 8:26 am
Seriously, old Sigmund should be up there.
February 25th, 2009 at 8:28 am
Very happy to see Galileo there! I had to do a book report on him when I was in 9th grade…very long time ago! I found him to be the most interesting scientist.
Have to repeat that Einstein has some sexy legs there! Also does anyone else think Newton was has some nice hair?
A previous post mentioned Freud and Jung…If soft science is added as a later list, then count those 2 in.
February 25th, 2009 at 8:32 am
Oh and, I’m expecting Schrödinger next time as “the greatest scientific collector of women”.
Seriously, give the man some credit..
February 25th, 2009 at 8:33 am
To Mongoose: GREAT List! Great Quotes. Great photos. The nit-pickers order is totaly not important.
@67:Nick Excellent additions! Mongoose: Take note!
I’m adding a bit of a teaser for two of the names:
Al-Khwārizmī – Influencer of all mathematics – gave the wastern word the decimal point. He wrote about it in the 800’s. His books were translated to Latin a few hundred years later.
Ali Sina (aka Avicena, ibn Sina) – lived about 1000CE. Influencer of modern medicine – described contagion and the need for isolation, introduced methods of randomized clinical experiments (the core of all medical research), among much more. And (I just learned) described the benefits of aroma therapy.
February 25th, 2009 at 8:46 am
Oh, drat! I come in at #70 and almost all of my suggestions for list 2 are taken! I’m crushed.
Gregor Mendel, Ibn Sina , Nicolaus Copernicus, Francis Crick and company, Louis Pasteur, Jonas Salk, Alexander Fleming, John Snow…in no way is this list complete or in order but those names that fairly leap to mind. I’ve left off so many other worthy scientists I feel ashamed.
February 25th, 2009 at 8:53 am
hey mongoose-
again nice list, i’ve just re-read your introductory blurb and it says this list series will feature “the most influential scientists in history” who might not be “technically the greatest” but whose contributions to science are “among the most important.”
i did this because of all the good suggestions people are making for future lists. can you clarify your criteria at all? i was thinking of it in terms of people whose work has had the greatest direct influence on how people live today with my suggestions at #24, but reading everyone else has me thinking about the difference between “important” and “influential.” so, for the lists you’re compiling, does it matter? just curious.
February 25th, 2009 at 9:01 am
hi segue
it’s tempting to feel the challenge of pointing out the “good ones” first. i was totally feeling the same way, then i decided to see more like we’re all adding votes for them, which is a bit of proof in and of itself as to how many people are influenced by their work, it’s much less frustrating that way
February 25th, 2009 at 9:02 am
i think louis pastuer should be on the next list.
February 25th, 2009 at 9:18 am
I never knew Einstein was a GMILF. You really do learn something new everyday!
February 25th, 2009 at 9:19 am
Yeah, great list for science, how about one on philosophy – I’m sure Aristotle and Shrodinger would make it on there.
February 25th, 2009 at 9:27 am
This has nothing to do with the list but it’s driving me crazy!
On witch list does it say that using 10% of our brain is bul”%&
February 25th, 2009 at 9:27 am
Einstein- Should be E = mc², not E = mc2.
February 25th, 2009 at 9:31 am
83. lo: And one more proof that GMTA!
February 25th, 2009 at 9:33 am
Rory, (27),
“In terms of influence, surely Darwin must be bumped a few spots … It was about god not being god anymore… that’s big!”
Darwin didn’t (and couldn’t) ‘disprove’ God, and I’m sure he wouldn’t thank you for saying he did. It would have upset his beloved Emma terribly. What he did do was undermine some of the foundational assumptions on which existing religious faith was constructed, as various other pioneering scientists have done. This causes ‘religion’ itself to redefine, or at least re-examine its assumptions (or what is acceptable to it). It has also certainly led to a loosening of knee-jerk religious faith and a tendency to relate the phenomenon much more to tangible ‘evidence’. This in turn has led to a loosening of the grip of religious establishments on society and a broad diminution in acceptance of certain aspects of what we might call received religious ‘wisdom’. All this has been exacerbated by parallel developments in education which have given people a greater capcity to think and reason for themselves with mental technique and confidence.
February 25th, 2009 at 9:34 am
Terrific List Mongoose!
I really liked the quotes before each description too.
Especially Newton’s: “To myself I am only a child playing on the beach, while vast oceans of truth lie undiscovered before me.”
The difference between Newton and myself is my quote would be: “To myself I am only a child playing on the beach” Then my thoughts would pretty much stop right there.
February 25th, 2009 at 10:04 am
Johannes Kepler should definitely be on the second list, what with his laws of planetary motion.
Newton said “If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.” Newton owes a lot to Keppler, as it was his planetary laws that led the way for Newtons Laws of Motion.
Not sure why Da Vinci is ahead of Darwin but oh well. Ours is not to reason why.
And I think Richard Feynman deserves an honourable mention.
February 25th, 2009 at 10:09 am
I really want to disagree with Darwin on this list… I can think of plenty of other influential scientists, but I just can’t. Whether you agree with his theories or not you can’t deny he was influential.
February 25th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Oh… and love the Einstein picture!!!
February 25th, 2009 at 10:15 am
Great list, love the quotes.
Like some other bloggers have said, I definitely think Copernicus should be on the next list. He kick started the scientific revolution, by trying to prove his theories with evidence; the basis for all reputable science since.
How about Lavoisier for modern chemistry?
I wonder if anyone of our times will make a list in 20 years time. Hawking?
Time Cop #93, you have confused me! lol.
February 25th, 2009 at 10:35 am
what about Thomas Edison?
February 25th, 2009 at 10:47 am
Time Cop, (93),
“I really want to disagree with Darwin on this list …”
Terribly sorry, old thing. THE Darwin is by way of being dead for quite a while now. We could try to bring one of his living descendents over for you to disagree with, if that would help?
February 25th, 2009 at 10:47 am
Einstein is a sexy beast
February 25th, 2009 at 10:52 am
I love Einstein’s fashion sense those shoes really pull off his shorts. lol *dripping with sarcasm* I’d like that picture of him framed and hanging on my wall so that way when I’m having a bad day Einstein can cheer me up.
February 25th, 2009 at 11:01 am
Other Newton quotes:
“I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.”
“If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.” (like to see similar from Albert)
“I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people.”
“If I have ever made any valuable discoveries, it has been due more to patient attention, than to any other talent”
“I keep the subject of my inquiry constantly before me, and wait till the first dawning opens gradually, by little and little, into a full and clear light”
February 25th, 2009 at 11:05 am
Einstein! What a pair of sexy legs u got!!!!!!
February 25th, 2009 at 11:06 am
A guy at the beach, with messed up hair, wearing short shorts = A Sexy Genius
Now that equation surpasses E=MC2
February 25th, 2009 at 11:07 am
WOW! only white people have ever been influential in the field of science!
Its a pity no non-Europeans have the ability to do anything scientific.
February 25th, 2009 at 11:16 am
@kakazed what about the dude that invented peanut butter? He wasn’t european and he wasn’t white…forgot his name though…anyhooo…Thats science!
February 25th, 2009 at 11:22 am
kakazed:
Tell you what, kakazed–name just three non-European scientists who have had as great an influence on modern science as the ten named here have. How’s that?
February 25th, 2009 at 11:29 am
Randal:
how about i go one better. By Sunday i will email a list to jrafter for this site..
but off the top of my head, Gerber, Ibn Sina and Abulcasis
google it
February 25th, 2009 at 11:30 am
Peanut butter!!!! How isn’t peanut butter great? George Washington Carver was the name…he invented 300uses…hahahaha!
February 25th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Tesla #1!
February 25th, 2009 at 11:37 am
I think Edison tried to weasel his way into this list (possibly with a sucker punch to Tesla) but Einstein showed up and kicked him in him the junk with his snazzy shoes and killer legs – thus leaving Edison to slink off to the Top 10 Exploitive and Opportunistic Jerks list.
February 25th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Well, I feel confident in my good education; I am familiar with every person on this list!
February 25th, 2009 at 11:41 am
kakazed:
wasn’t Ibn Sina more of a doctor than a scientist? I don’t know anything about the other two you mentioned but I remember something in some class once (I’m so good with specifics today) about Ibn Sina writing various texts on medical conditions…I guess thats scientific but I don’t think he’s classified as a scientist per se.
February 25th, 2009 at 11:49 am
Banting? Discovery of Insulin.
Hawking? Popularized theoretical physics.
Sabin? Polio vaccine.
I wouldn’t eliminate anyone from your list, but i’d suggest a top 20, or as someone else mentioned, a top 10 of each discipline – biology, chemistry, physics
February 25th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Shouldn´t the greek mathematician Euclides be somewhere?
And Aristoteles, perhaps not a great scientist, but the most influential ever; not that this was necessarily a good thing. Of course, now we don´t think much of him as a scientist, but he shaped the way science was done and undestood for almost two millenia…
February 25th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
@kakazed
I agree that those three were great scientists, but they just quite aren’t on par with Einstein or Tesla, the father of modern electricity. They might be worth honorable mentions though.
@Kraeg
There is a second list coming with another ten, and possibly even another. Read the paragraph before the first entry in the list.
February 25th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Marie Curie was the first woman to win a Nobel Prize and is the only person (male or female) to this day who has won two Nobel Prizes in two different scientific disciplines (chem and physics).
I move for a chorus of “you go, girl.”
February 25th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
how is it that Francis Crick is not on this list?
February 25th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
George Washington Carver has a bad rep, he was the shit. People wanted him to publish papers and stuff but all he would do is research to help the broke local farmers. He could have been a renowned botanist (or so they say) but he turned down prestigious jobs and research grants. I wanted stick up for him…
Anyways how about Gregor Mendel for future lists, “the father of modern genetics.” He didn’t do a lot, but what he did was huge. George Washington Carver reminded me of him because of the pea pods.
February 25th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Is it an unwritten rule that all great influential scientists have to have unkempt eyebrows?
February 25th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
@ Kazorek there u go! What a humble man indeed…lol…
February 25th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
DoubleT:
Tesla was actually born in Austria. Croatia didn’t exist at all in the 1800s. By ethnicity, Tesla was a Serb. By religion, he was a Serbian Orthodox Christian. His surname was a Serb surname. He described himself as a Serb countless number of times.
He started out as an Austrian Serb and became an American Serb. Period.
February 25th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Oh, I see Jfrater beat me to it. Ignore my last comment and carry on.
February 25th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Deucanon:
Wow! I felt that all the way from here. You actually made the ground tremble a bit.
February 25th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
O RLY?
February 25th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Nah…but it was a powerful…made me wanna stand up and shout
“yeah!!!!!”
February 25th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
George Washington Carver did many things to help farmers make the most of their crops of peanuts and sweet potatoes, but the invention of peanut butter is not one of them. The first patent for peanut butter was given in Canada in 1884, when GWC was a teenager desperately trying to get accepted to college. His story is nonetheless amazing and worth a read.
February 25th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Well Jfrater beat me to it so you might as well laud him too.
February 25th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Great List! Can’t wait for the next 10!
Does Einstein always wear womens shoes?
February 25th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Ohhhkay so maybe not the invention of peanut butter…but he did discover over 300 uses for the damn thing (peanuts)…
Thanx for the info though…and according to wika (might be wrong)..he is credited for the invention of peanut butter
*looks at the peanut butter jar and sighs*
February 25th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Nice list but who’s the old woman in number 2?
February 25th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
@Grey Coat
u…gotta be kiddin me…you really don’t know who she is? Science’s number one hottie?
February 25th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
@Viktobi – I also saw that in Wiki, but there’s more info in the peanut butter listing. I think he is in fact credited with it, but even the US patent (to Kellogg) was before GWC started his research. GWC was so amazing and deserves to be known for more than peanut butter, IMHO.
February 25th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
@zigra
Totally agree with you on that!
just like peanut butter….
On a serious note (rare one for me) his story is pretty amazing and yes he has done alot more than just peanut butter.
Respect just gotta be there for him, and for all the other scientists mentioned who were not on the list….Great list though!
February 25th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
While most of his theories were totally wrong, Aristotle was incredibly influential and should be on this list.
February 25th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
I am really glad to see Feynman’s name coming up so much in these comments. More people need to read his books – they are extremely witty.
February 25th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
kakazed:
Nice try, but come off it. Avicenna and Abulcasis (no, I didn’t have to “Google” anything here, kakazed–I was quite aware who these men were) were, yes, great figures in the field of medicine in the middle ages. But bringing them up in this context is just pure defensive reaching. In no way do they rank with the men and women on this list.
It isn’t that a more inclusive, but far larger list, wouldn’t have made mention of at least one of them. Perhaps they’ll be included on Part Two. But in the top Ten? No.
It isn’t that medicine isn’t a “science” (but in strictest terms, it isn’t) in the larger sense. But in the sense that we refer to “medical science,” neither these men, nor the great healers of ancient Egypt, nor even Galen and Hippocrates, were practicing it as such. They were expounding and practicing–and furthering–the CRAFT of medicine… and in that regard they were influential. In terms of MEDICAL SCIENCE, however, they were not.
This is not just splitting hairs. The fact is that in the field of medicine, whether in terms of craft or science, few INDIVIDUALS have really stood out as greater influences. We speak of Hippocrates because he was the “first,” but even he was preceded by the Egyptian healers of the Old Kingdom. But even they and Hippocrates practiced a kind of medicine that we today would recognize as being more than partly superstition-based.
There are, in fact, few individuals in medicine who have stood out as solitary figures the way the people on this list have, in their fields. And that goes for the people you mentioned.
As I say, nice try, but you missed the mark.
And just who is “Gerber”?
February 25th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
I hope Rosalind Franklin will be included on the second list. Her research was necessary in Watson and Cricks discovery of the double helix of DNA. She never got the credit she deserved.
February 25th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Da Vinci was a brilliant investigator but not a truly great scientist. Why? Because he didn’t attempt to communicate his discoveries to others. Quite the opposite–his notebooks were written in such a way so as to conceal his discoveries and speculations. In my view, a true scientist seeks out the opinions and criticisms of others.
Further, Archimedes deserves a place on the list, in my opinion.
February 25th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Why are there always idiots who come on here and complain someone is missing from the lists? WRITE YOUR OWN FRIGGIN LISTS!
February 25th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
@Davo
Heavens…no need to be so harsh…not everyone here is an idiot you know, and it’s simply called freedom of opinion…hahaha. People will naturally criticise…
February 25th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Tesla. What a guy. The reason he is so underrated is the fact that he kept a lot of his later work hidden, and when a (suspicious)fire burned bown his lab and all his papers, he didn’t bother to write them down again. Is it true that he once plugged a lightbulb into the ground miles from his home and it lit up? Some kind of underground current? I know he didn’t use wires to do this…
February 25th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
@ hjolly: Agree with you! Rosalind Franklin didn’t get the credit she deserved…hopefully she will be on the next list.
February 25th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
Thanks for all the complements and constructive criticism. Many of the scientists people have mentioned were in fact included on my original Top 20 list. It was incredibly difficult to categorize them in a top 10 list as they all had astounding contributions to their respective fields, and I made numerous changes to the order as I compiled the list. I even asked several of my own professors for their opinion to get feedback from a variety of scientific backgrounds.
February 25th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
What about Ben Franklin – electricity an all?
February 25th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
I really liked this list, but it is far too physics-heavy. I would like to see some more biology and medicine! I think most of us would prefer to live longer, healthier lives than understand quantum physics.
And of course, Darwin should be higher on the list.
February 25th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
10. Copaface:
Me too, LOL. What’s with the shoes?!
February 25th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
To all the people who think the Tesla is a croatian are wrong!! True, he was born there but his parents were serbs and he belonged to the serbian orthodox church.
I know this because I am a Serb!
February 25th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Didn`t Gerber invent baby food ?
February 25th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Definitely agreeing with Watson, Crick and Franklin being on a future list! Two of my friends went as Watson and Crick for halloween. They wore their labcoats with a “HI MY NAME IS” tag on them with the names. It was epic, but no one but us bio nerds got it.
February 25th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Corey said:
“I think most of us would prefer to live longer, healthier lives than understand quantum physics.”
Surely you must be joking?
February 25th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Darwin should be lower, his work has less “science” in it than the rest of these.
Also to call Da Vinci an “expert” mathmetician, isn’t that kind of a stretch?
Great list though, love this stuff.
February 25th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
this must have been a really hard list to create, considering how much scientist have contributed to the world. one notable omission, Thomas Edison.
February 25th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
(Wow – key word is “influential” – Man that doesn’t leave much open for discussion)
Since I consider fundamental science, by nature, as the most influential that narrows the list down for me personally, but I won’t go into that.
There’s an underlying story here of great drama and importance. (greatly simplified) -
Max Planck was attempting to merge the equations of lower energy spectrum with the ones used with high energy. He was more or less forced to incorporate statistical math to make his ideas work, and later was criticized for this – until it all started working beautifully, beyond expectation. His results confirmed quantized energy and introduced a new physical constant known today as Planck’s Constant. Einstein took Planck’s ideas further and quantum theory was realized. Planck later pushed for the immediate consideration of relativity, and they became close friends.
But there was a side effect of this that changed physics forever, changed the world forever – quantum physics introduction statistical, probabilistic mechanics to physical reality. Neither Planck nor Einstein cared for this aspect and basically ignored its implications.
Enter young spud Niels Bohr – he on the other hand was fascinated with just this aspect of quantum theory and surrounded with a talented group of young physicists developed quantum mechanics – with all it’s fantastic predictions and contradictions of physical reality. Einstein, who took relativity and surpassed 300 years of Newtonian mechanics, was still mired in classical physics and just could not come to accept randomness in reality. So came the conflict between Einstein and Bohr and many arguments that would come in time. But, don’t think they were enemies, far from it – just two geniuses with conflicting ideas, one who held the elder in the highest respect, and the other who smiled upon the future of physics.
Bohr had an assistant, Werner Heisenberg, who went on to propose his Uncertainty Principle, and ended up heading Germany’s atomic bomb project, while Bohr went to Los Alamos for the Americans.
February 25th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
I wonder if Philip Glass saw that photo before he wrote his opera “Einstein on the Beach”.
February 25th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
#135 Randall:
First I must say that as a policy I do not like to disagree with Randall (it seems that those who do so are either the victim of a blunt instrument or a sharp scalpel – depending on the inclination of his wit).
That being said, Avicenna should be included if for no other reason than he developed, described, and thereby introduced to the world systematic medical testing. This introduction of evidence-based medicine is the basis of most ‘Western’ medical research. And by extension, many of our views of medical testing ethics, as well.
(On a more personal note: I had a discussion with my neurologist just yesterday regarding this topic, when he refused to comment on the validity of yoga, chiropractic, acupuncture, the Alexander technique, etc. as possible treatments for lumbar radiculopathy. His claiming several times that these these are not “evidence-based medicine”, inspired me to look up the phrase last night. Avicenna is, of course, mentioned as the start of “testing medical interventions for efficacy”.)
I think he should be included as an influential scientist.
OK Randall – please tell me where I am mistaken.
February 25th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Mongoose:
I think your list was very well done, and I am looking forward to the next one. I like the fact that you gave each scientist a lengthy paragraph so that we could actually learn something about him/her. Keep up the good work!
February 25th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
First of all Tesla is hard. He should be number one. And fuck Newton for calculus! I hope he is proud to make thousands of high school students fail a class every day
February 25th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
Hang on! I think someone pasted Einstein’s head on Laura Bush’s body!
February 25th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
138. Davo-
maybe people are making suggestions (the ones who actually are making suggestions, not just mindless criticisms) because mongoose’s introduction includes this phrase:
“Be sure to tell us who you think should be on the future list.”
-it’s official, people not reading the intro is my LV pet peeve, but i think it’s the only one.
February 25th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
153. astraya- i thought the same thing (and the counting crow’s song too, not just glass’s work.) i think i want a copy of that picture
February 25th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
149. Mongoose – i think biology vs. quantum physics is a fair point, one that hinges on your definition of “influential” -i didn’t hear back from you on this when i asked for clarification earlier.
are we talking about influence in the further development of science itself? or influence in the daily lives (quality and expectancy) of people as a whole?
is an understanding of space-time or quantum reality more influential to humanity as a whole than antibiotics, vaccinations (for that matter the very understanding of the existence and nature of pathogens), or plentiful food grown with synthetic fertilizers and an understanding of genetic heritability to breed better plants and livestock?
these are all valid questions because they require us to agree on what “influential” means to answer them.
February 25th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
Just to clear things up, jfrater wrote the introduction, not me.
February 25th, 2009 at 8:58 pm
The way you should figure out who is most influential is on a 5 point system. A point for influence in daily life, or 2 points if it is something everyone has (like toast). Same deal for advancing science concepts and all that boring stuff. And a point for awesomeness (Like just about anything Tesla did)
February 25th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Yo J Frats when are you going to make a death metal list?
February 25th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
161. Mongoose-
thanks for the clarification on the intro-
but, especially in light of that, can you answer the question? it’s your list, so what did you want it to be about?
influencing the discipline of scientific thinking? or science that changed lives?
I’m leaning toward the former. in my eyes understanding the origin of the universe is awesome and worthy, but hard to do if you’re dying of malnutrition, sepsis, of food poisoning, but it’s not my list.
February 25th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
-or food poisoning-
February 25th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
What did darwin invent, controversy?
Newton is 1 because, unlike darwin, he isn’t full of CRAP!
February 25th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
Newton … isn’t full of CRAP!
Newton devoted the greater part of his study to alchemy and other varieties of what would nowadays be considered wacko psuedo-science.
February 25th, 2009 at 10:21 pm
Edison and Bell are inventors not scientists so I wouldn’t include them. I would include Faraday prominently and James Clerk Maxwell, Aristotle too, Leibniz perhaps. Surprised by many on the list, such as Tesla and Niels Bohr, they are important by ask the question as to why, Joules, Kelvin,Hooke, Copernicus, Rutherford, Watson and Crick,Hawking, Mendal and so many others aren’t here. I feel this list will be in many parts!
February 25th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
To be honest, I am surprised there aren’t some “older” scientists on that list like Aristotle. Though back in days of Aristotle it was nearly impossible to differentiate between economics, politics, philosophy and science.
February 25th, 2009 at 10:43 pm
As part 1 of a two part list, I have zero complaints about this list. Only kudos, with an extra tip of the hat for good research and the quotes.
I may change my tone after part 2 comes out — there’s some folks I think might be overlooked.
February 25th, 2009 at 10:46 pm
I loved the pictures…
February 25th, 2009 at 11:59 pm
oouchan, (141),
“@ hjolly: Agree with you! Rosalind Franklin didn’t get the credit she deserved…hopefully she will be on the next list.”
Her side-lining has always been a pet bee in my bonnet. However I propose she belongs on a separate list along with, for example, Alfred Russel Wallace, as: Unfortunate OR Overlooked Scientists (or People) Who Aren’t As Famous As They Ought To Be.
February 26th, 2009 at 12:09 am
How did I end as a top commenter again? I thought the standards had skyrocketed.
If no one has said it so far, Jane Richardson. Maybe Not the Most important, but has to be by default a favorite of mine.
February 26th, 2009 at 12:11 am
You’ve replaced me on the top list. Bastard!
February 26th, 2009 at 12:23 am
::::Points and laughs:::::
February 26th, 2009 at 12:39 am
L’il Boots where are you?! We miss you’re infectious personality…
February 26th, 2009 at 12:41 am
your…not “you’re” heheh….brain cramp
February 26th, 2009 at 12:43 am
CurtShmurt: At least, you know about at different spelling.
February 26th, 2009 at 1:24 am
You’ve just dropped off the “Top Commenters” list again.
February 26th, 2009 at 1:54 am
I’ll be fine, I was never that popular any way.
February 26th, 2009 at 2:12 am
Yeah, well Crimanom; I try to keep my punctuation properly english, I cringe sometimes when I read horrible reports or english…my friends always harangue me about correcting or pointing out poor sentence structure…such as this…
February 26th, 2009 at 2:34 am
I won’t often correct friends online, but when they massacre the language when I’m talking to them, I’ll likely correct them. I get so slack that, most of the time, I don’t even correct them when they pronounce the T in often.
I’m one of those pricks.
February 26th, 2009 at 3:14 am
It’s interesting to me how the list mainly consists of physicists (with the exception of Darwin)
While I will agree that being a more fundamental science, physics has more of a chance to be ‘influential’, it seems like chemists and biologists seem to get a bit shafted when it comes to these lists
If interested, check out R.B. Woodward, the man probably deserved 3 Nobel’s and yet gets less name recognition
Also, even among physicists, the omissions of Liebniz and Gauss are borderline criminal
February 26th, 2009 at 3:21 am
I hope Rosalind Franklin will be included on the second list. Her research was necessary in Watson and Cricks discovery of the double helix of DNA. She never got the credit she deserved.
hjolly – not necessarily true, although this is not a black and white issue by any means.
One of the primary participants in the development of DNA structure (Watson) did formally acknowledge (eg. in his book) that Franklin (along with various others) had contributed to this work; but he also inferred that she was not the most forthcoming individual when it came to sharing the results of her own work with others (an alternative – and less charitable – interpretation of this has been that she did not fully understand the significance of some of her own experimental results). Wilkins, and others involved, have also acknowledged her contribution.
Note, too, that when it comes to recognition for a contribution to the development of DNA structure, the name of Wilkins himself is not widely recognised outside of scientific circles. Yet he actually received the Nobel Prize along with Watson and Crick.
As regards Nobel recognition – you must be alive at the time of your Nobel nomination. Watson, Crick and Wilkins received their prize in 1962; Franklin had died some for 4 or 5 years previously.
Finally, I am sure you are aware that the “feminist argument” supporting the view that Franklin was not fully credited for her involvement in DNA structure because she was a female are somewhat tenuous when a little further investigation is undertaken.
February 26th, 2009 at 3:27 am
Science is such a cabalistic discipline…everybody wants to keep their discoveries and theories to themselves. It reminds me of little boys who say,”mine” when another child wants to play with their toys that they have abandoned a long time ago.
February 26th, 2009 at 3:38 am
Also, for those mentioning Richard Feynman, although he is one of my (and many, many others) favourite scientists, I guess you would have to define the term “influential” in order to assess the merits of including him.
Despite any impact he might have had on the development of the physical sciences (he also won a Nobel, of course) his biggest “influence”, I would think, would have been as a character who made the sciences available to the masses; he was a genius, a natural raconteur and something of a renaissance-man; he also saw through the b.s. and told it like it was. Feynman was possibly one of the biggest intellects in modern science, but I’m not sure he ranks amongst some of the names that have been mentioned in this list (and by commenters).
But, because I have so much regard for this guy, I’m hoping some other commenter (maybe a quantuum electrodynamics uber-nerd) can convince me I’m wrong!
February 26th, 2009 at 3:55 am
Benji, I am a huge fan of Gauss but he was focused on pure mathematics and did not delve too deep into astronomy or physics (although he did not ignore them), so I decided not to include him. On a list of top 10 mathematician he would be near the top of the list. As for Leibniz, who ever said he was excluded?
February 26th, 2009 at 4:14 am
Just to satisfy you kiwiboi; you’re wrong.
February 26th, 2009 at 4:15 am
jk
February 26th, 2009 at 5:46 am
Kudos for giving Tesla the respect he deserves.
February 26th, 2009 at 6:25 am
i just got really dizzy reading all these comments.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:17 am
Two words: Cambrian Explosion.
Evolve that one, Mr Darwin.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:20 am
Dr. Frankenstein, anyone? I mean, the guy re-animated life.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:25 am
@Eyegor
Sweety I hate to break it to you…but the dude is entirely Fictional.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:45 am
“Looking it that way Tesla should not even be on the list.”
You’re stupid. Edison and Marconi stoled his patents.
Tesla was the greatest scientist.
Tesla is a brilliant theorist and practice!
Idiot is someone who thinks otherwise….
February 26th, 2009 at 7:51 am
The best scientists: the Russians, French, Italians, Serbs, Jews.
The English and Americans are not worth attention.
They are known only from advertising, and you only know them.
Fools
February 26th, 2009 at 8:00 am
The best scientists: the Russians, French, Italians, Serbs, Jews.
The English and Americans are not worth attention. They are known only from advertising, and you only know them. Fools
Flul – It is you who are clearly the fool. Newton alone would be enough to cement the eminence of British science. And Gell-Mann and Feynman easily come to mind for the US. Of course, there are countless other examples for both nations.
February 26th, 2009 at 8:07 am
kiwiboi:
Why, oh why are there so many idiots on the internet?
Sounds to me like this is another hyper-nationalistic Serb who can’t stand how is wee little country is ignored by history. What IS it with these Balkan types and their ridiculous inferiority complex? And why do they have a culture-wide mancrush on the Russians?
February 26th, 2009 at 8:17 am
Regarding Tesla… from Cecil Adams’ “The Straight Dope” page and books:
“The peak of Tesla’s career came in his early 30s, when he sold his alternating-current patents to George Westinghouse for big bucks. (He later got cuffed out of part of it.) He also did pioneering work in radio and other fields. But thereafter he frittered away his genius and hundreds of thousands of dollars of other people’s money on one hairbrained scheme after another.
By the 1930s he was reduced to making wild pronouncements about death rays and feeding the pigeons near his hotel room. He died alone in 1943.
Many people excuse Tesla’s failures by saying he was too far ahead of his time. I doubt it. His understanding of the medium in which he worked was primitive. He refused to accept the complex nature of the atom and for years denied Einstein’s theories. His problems arose largely from the fact that he was an eccentric who was unable to work with (and consequently to learn from) other people, and the increasing unreality of his ideas shows it.”
Was Tesla treated unfairly at times? Sure. Did he have a lousy business sense? Yup. Did he “give away” some of discoveries? Seems so. Was he a misunderstood genius? No. For every great idea he had, he had five others that were nutty and never would have worked. He also ignored more valid science than actual workable science that he helped create.
He deserves recognition for his early pioneering work in electricity and magnetism, but he’s not the “great unsung genius robbed of his place in history” that all the Tesla nuts and Serbian nationalist whackos make him out to be.
February 26th, 2009 at 8:57 am
Randall,
I know you are going to come up with a pro-Edison essay now. I remember reading one of your treatise on him in one of the older lists.
Looking forward to it again.
February 26th, 2009 at 9:33 am
regarding comment-
“#. “fuck united kingdom””
The source of the reply has evidently been wiped, to the benefit of us all.
However, it prompts me to muse yet again on the wonders of pc. A Serb or Irishman has the right use any language they like to plaster Britain (or more specifically, England) and the British/English. However, they examine with a high-power microscope any comment from the other direction, and utter an amplified squeal of indignant accusation if they detect the minutest tad of (sometimes supposed) discrimination. I could keep on going through much of the entire gamut of pc, national, racial and personal, in this way.
Right now a U.S. philanthropist is working to protect one of the few remaining major pristine pieces of habitat in the world, in southern Chile, for the benefit of Chile and mankind. He has spent a small fortune on his private natinal park, which has full, free access to anybody. Much of the publicly expressed thanks he gets from Chilean nationals for that consists of “Go home gringo”, “Yanqui imperialist” and “Anti-Chilean colonist”. Sad.
It reminds me also of the somewhat equivalent wider ecological situation, where third world countries say that those countries which have already got filthy rich by destroying their environment have no right to complain about them getting filthy rich by destroying their environment.
One wonders if we would be any better collectively if we all the had the equivalent brain-power and insight of the 10 cited in this topic. Or is that simply specialisation, and we are we all ‘just as human’ when it boils down to it? In the case of several of them, I think not. They had cosmic vision.
*housekeeping by Cyn*
February 26th, 2009 at 11:10 am
To clarify the contributions of Newton –“was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, alchemist, and theologian”
You’ll notice it doesn’t list chemistry – why?
Because there was no scientific discipline known as chemistry at that point in time, it came later, from Lavoisier in the late 1700’s.
“The practical aspect of alchemy generated the basics of modern inorganic chemistry, namely concerning procedures, equipment and the identification and use of many current substances.”
You see, Newton had multiple interests, he wrote a definitive manual on mathematics, he proposed the corpuscular theory of light, he explained tidal action of the seas, he built the first reflector telescope (the Newtonian telescope!) – that covers about 5% of his accomplishments. So why alchemy? Because that’s all he had work with when it came to the substances that everything around him were made. They didn’t even conceive of atoms or molecules back in those days.
Other interesting things:
The proper header Mongoose should have used was Sir Isaac Newton, as he was knighted by Queen Anne in 1705.
He was a devout Christian, and studied the ministry for years, but chose against ordination because it would have been under the C of E at that time, which he had disagreements with.
He was invited to join the Royal Society at age 29, and became president of the society in 1703.
He became a member of Parliament (though didn’t really participate).
He became the director of England’s Royal Mint.
This guy makes prolific people look like slugs.
When writing his sins up to age 19 he entered “Threatening my father and mother Smith to burn them and the house over them”
February 26th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Randall: Serbian nationalist whackos? Tesla wasn’t even from Serbia.
February 26th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
And Serb liberals claim Tesla as their own as well. Just keep that in mind before throwing around the “nationalist” label.
February 26th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Deucaon:
Listen twit.
A) don’t EVER contradict me. You’ll almost always be wrong and make yourself look like the fool you are.
B) And you ARE wrong. Tesla was born in a part of Croatia, which was, at the time (along with Serbia) ruled by the Austro-Hungarian Empire. But he was an ethnic Serb, through and through–and is a hero to many nutty-nationalist Serbs. Period.
C) Don’t try me, pinhead. “Liberal” isn’t an automatic preventative to being “nationalist.” Serbs, along with some other Balkan ethnic types, seem to have some serious hang up about their little country. I’m all for being proud of where you’re from–if there’s reason to be. But when people start carrying it to extremes, making a lot of silly and even outrageous claims and statements, then they’re worthy of all the disdain we can heap on them. As are you.
February 26th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
nationalism, dunces´ sweet liquor
February 26th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Whilst I really have no problem with anyone on this list, I do think that it is highly subjective and is obviously causing some dissent in the ranks. Being a geophysicist, I recognise Tesla’s achievements, however like Newton he did revert to pseudo-science and almost alchemic tendencies in his later life.
I really like this list, however there are some real ommissions from it due possibly to ones understanding of the scientific world and who influences whom.
Firstly; where is ARCHIMEDES? Archimedes was the first to introduce infinitesimals which is the foundation of calculus. He described the first infinite geometric progression, computed the area and volume of the sphere and the area of parabola segments, invented a positional numeral system, created the fields of statics and hydrostatics, discovered the laws of the lever, buoyancy, fluid equilibria, density, the center of gravity, etc.
Secondly we have Johann Carl Friedrich GAUSS; students of all technical disciplines are required to take math classes, in particular, analysis, linear algebra and statistics. In all of these fields, essential results and methods are due to Gauss: the fundamental theorem of algebra, Gauss elimination, the method of least squares, the Gaussian distribution of statistics, etc. Furthermore, he made major contributions to astronomy and physics. The basic unit of magnetism is 1 Gauss.
Of course it is hard to compare ancient and more recent breakthroughs, but Archimedes’ work would have more total impact as he also laid the foundations of physics and mathematical engineering. Euclid’s achievements also do not quite match those of Archimedes. Although his book on geometry has been called the most influential scientific book ever, it is a compendium of results by numerous researchers, not just one. Galileo is known as the “father of modern physics”, Newton brought the field to a culmination point through his Principia Mathematica (sometimes called the most influential book in the history of physics) and Einstein provided the next such peak in form of his Theory of General Relativity (the “greatest scientific discovery ever”, according to Dirac). But it was Archimedes who provided the basic tools that made these LATER discoveries possible. Thus his work had more leverage and was more all-encompassing, combining major theoretical and practical advances in a way unmatched by his successors. His achievements also compare favorably to those of other great pioneers such as Leibniz, who laid the foundations of computer science and (with Newton) extended Archimedes’ and Madhava of Sangamagrama’s (14th century) work on infinitesimals and calculus.
Without diminishing the enormous contributions of the science heroes mentioned above, it is fair to say that those of Archimedes embody an even greater conceptual jump size, given his lower starting point defined by the more limited prior knowledge of his era. Of course the work of early pioneers tends to have more time to unfold its impact; Archimedes was lucky to live at a time when a single person could still make world-changing discoveries in quite diverse areas, with little competition by peers, as there weren’t many scientists and inventors back then. But that is also the very reason why Archimedes was so unique and outstanding.
Formal Science was born in Ancient Greece, and Archimedes was its prophet. Give me a lever and a place to stand on, he said, and I can move the earth. And he did – today we still feel his impact through a lever spanning 2200+ years of Archimedes-inspired science.
I dont understand how LOUIS PASTEUR is not on this list; Pasteur, whose work on the germ theory of disease (with Koch) has earned him the title “greatest benefactor of mankind”. As I stated some extremely important ommissions which may make the second list but this list is called the most influential. A bit more research please.
All that are mentioned in this list refined earlier understandings of these great people I have mentioned here.
Now as that took me 45 minutes to write I feel that you deserve a joke. This is not meant to offend but I am sure it will.
What is the smartest thing ever to come out of a womans mouth??
Einsteins penis
Sorry couldnt resist after being so earnest
February 26th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
It’s just a matter of math really –
Take all the fundamental, natural, behavioral, and social sciences and multiply that by theoretical, experimental, and applied scientists and that’s how many opinions you’re going to get.
It’s as simple as that.
February 26th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Funny joke Blue. That ought to piss off a few feminist. You really want to piss off a feminist ? Walk into N.O.W headquarters and say which one of you cupcakes wanna fix me a meal and give me a blow job . ( From the great George Carlin)
February 26th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
I found something very interesting while researching the July 20th to assassinate Hitler recently after watching the film Valkyrie (I wanted to find out the truth rather than the fictional account)
I know this may not sound as if it is to do with this list but Max Planck’s son was heavily involved in the assassination attaemp and he was executed by the Nazi’s in 1945
In 1940, ERWIN PLANCK (son of Karl Ernst Ludwig Marx Planck – better known as Max Planck the great physicist), Popitz, Ulrich von Hassell and Ludwig Beck drafted a “Provisional Constitution” on the assumption that the West’s forthcoming attack would overthrow Hitler. Even afterwards, Planck vainly stayed in the resistance against the régime and was involved in the July 20 plot. This led to his arrest on 23 July 1944, whereafter he was taken to the Gestapo’s Reichssicherheitshauptamt (RSHA) and executed on the 23rd January 1945.
I find this fact fascinating as in all likelihood it was probably Max Planck’s refusal to join the Nazi Party that led to the death of his son. His principals on the regime were that strong.
Amazing human being and rightfully on this list
February 26th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Bigski
Feminism defined:
“Equal rights for fat ugly women”
Copyright Viz (this is a schoolboy comic from the UK which I have no idea if it is still in publication – however it is very perceptive)
February 26th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
Copyright Viz (this is a schoolboy comic from the UK which I have no idea if it is still in publication – however it is very perceptive)
Blue – yep, it is still being published. And who said anything about schoolboys ??!!
February 26th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Kiwiboi – good to know that the erstwhile Viz of my youth is still keeping the young adults involved. Along with The Macc Lads and Roy “Chubby” Brown I think Viz kept me entertained all through my college years.
Now here is something for you:
http://www.adultsheepfinder.com this is a little joke that was set up a few years ago. Need to email and I will tell you all.
February 26th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Great list. Certainly hope that somewhere in the next 10 you will have time to mention Michael Faraday. One of my personal favorites/heroes of that particular time in history. Of humble origins; through hard work and perseverance he succeeded. He was the first to truly conceptualize magnetic fields, his inventions provided the foundations of electric motor technology, he proved that light is affected by magnetism and showed their relationship. He actually named anode, diode etc. Discovered benzene, invented the bunsen burner and a host of other firsts. He was a practical scientist of the first order.
February 26th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
what about bill nie?
February 26th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
216. Mom424: Thank you for remembering to include Michael Faraday! My personal favorite invention of his is the bunsen burner, for it gave me many happy hours in chemistry classes. Really, the bunsen burner was one of the first clues that science was a magical thing. An amazing mystery to be solved. Oh, sure, I had my share of explosions, but they were the result of enthusiastic exploration, not malice aforethought. Yes, chemistry was my introduction to the wonders of science. Then Biology, Physics, Anthropology, and I just kept going. But it was that humble bunsen burner that grabbed me.
Then (much later) it became a favorite Muppet character of my son.
February 26th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
gtkm300: And you’re a stupid skin who is scared of anyone with a bigger dick.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
Hey don’t insult all skins like that, this guy’s just a twat.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
gktm300 – must stand for geek kook twat moron. Not sure what the 300 stands for, but if I divide it by ten I would get your approximate IQ.
What, the Aryan meeting break up early and you decided to come here?
I think that warm feeling in your pants has backed up your intestine and is now spewing out of your pie hole.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
No, I’m certain it stands for racist idiot shit for brains who’s too much of a pussy to think for themselves.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:15 pm
She’ll be gone soon.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
Amazing, you have a 187 IQ and you still don’t understand simple sentence structure or punctuation? I didn’t know they had a coloring section in the IQ test, you must have stayed in the lines.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
Oh and post 228 really showed your brilliant handling of the English language, a true mark of a genius.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
I think it’s funny that the cares so much about what I think that she decided to stick around enough for me to ask if she’ll let me stick it between her butt cheeks.
GLandauer: I said skin not Sharp
February 26th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
Does that mean I can hit it?
February 26th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
I think Brown University needs to be notified that their PhD program turns out racist dorks who can’t spell, can’t put a sentence together, can’t think and have their head up their ass.
Yes, gktm300, not only are you sorry, WE”RE sorry you visited us to give us your pinheaded, douchnozzle, intergalactic ass clown opinions. So go put on some death metal, hit the meth pipe and blow it all out your ass.
February 26th, 2009 at 7:52 pm
Jamie, Cyn, Mom, – post 232 needs to be removed please.
February 26th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
Not sure how you got that Crimanon, but he looks like Elliot Gould after someone hit him with a shovel.
February 26th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
Am I the only one who googles idiots around here?
February 26th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
Tidied. Sorry if some of the comments seem a little nonsensical, a hazard of housekeeping.
February 26th, 2009 at 8:27 pm
gktm300, you may have an I.Q. of 187 but obviously lack any abilty in dealing with people, reality, tolerance, emotions, own sexuality, animals, history, and choice of motorbikes. There is no place in the world for the likes of you.
February 26th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
Thanks Mom.
February 26th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Crimanon; A man with a small penis? and are those eyebrows or caterpillars? Me thinks he is related to that fellow who was waiting for the comet. I’ve deleted the link but saved it in case we need it again.
February 26th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Crimanon: Am I the only one who googles idiots around here?
It keeps you off the streets!
(Must be really, really careful or Crimanon will google me. Just don’t get me confused with the performance bicylist, the world-champion whistler or the multiple murderer. None of them is/are me (or vice versa).)
February 26th, 2009 at 8:37 pm
Mom 424,thanks for removing gktm300’s posts but an even bigger THANK YOU for leaving post #225 up lol!
February 26th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
I think the three scientists that worked at Bell Labs that created the first transistor perhaps should be included. When you think about how society has changed due to transistors and ICs it is mind boggling.
February 26th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
Randall: Insulting my people really makes you seem like are more “enlightened” individual. Fact is that largest airport in Belgrade was renamed the “Nikola Tesla International Airport” during the reign of Boris Tadic and if you think this guy is a “nationalist” then you’re completely ignorant about the Balkans. Bitch about it all you want but even self-loathing liberals claim Tesla. And no, he was born in Austria, not Croatia. When he was born, Croatia hadn’t been around for 800 or so years (since it merged with Hungary) and it didn’t come into existence again until 1941, which is only 2 years before Tesla died. Also, I think you should check your facts because Austria didn’t control Serbia during that time (or ever, as far as I remember). And Serbia was independent during the time of his birth and had been (completely) independent since the 1830s.
February 26th, 2009 at 10:34 pm
Astraya: You’re pretty good about keeping your info close, I think. I didn’t even get a whiff of you until page three and then after that I couldn’t read it or make sense of it.
Sttruth: It’s just not the same without the context.
February 26th, 2009 at 11:56 pm
Wo ist Nicolaus Copernikus?
February 27th, 2009 at 12:18 am
239. siewen
Schrieben Sie bitte auf Englisch. Perhaps Copernicus may be on future lists of Influential Scientists? There are plenty great scientists to fill up another 10 or 20…
February 27th, 2009 at 4:33 am
why arent my comments being published ?? ive read the faq & cant get the problem .. someone help .
February 27th, 2009 at 4:34 am
hehe, ive seen it now :p
February 27th, 2009 at 6:50 am
Deucaon:
Let’s get a few things straight.
A) I do not insult anyone’s people in general, Deucaon. I insult the stupid, dishonest, deluded and biased of all nations.
B) I understand that Nikola Tesla is a hero to many people. And I never said he doesn’t deserve to be recognized for his contributions. But FOR HIS CONTRIBUTIONS—not for things he wasn’t, or things he didn’t do. Why the hell do we have to be dishonest about people like Tesla? (Or for that matter anyone else, including Edison). Why can’t we just admit that he (Tesla) did do some great things earlier in his life, but later on he was downright nutty, and all along he was NOT really a very good scientist. In fact he was in some ways a damn poor one. THAT is the truth. We can still recognize him for the things he DID accomplish—but we don’t need to LIE about him overall. What the hell is wrong with that?
C) You take quite the superior attitude for someone who can’t even get their facts straight. Firstly–Nikola Tesla was NOT born in “Austria.” He was born in, and as a subject of, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which is a very different thing. Austria was a PART of that empire, but Tesla was not born in that part. He was born in the region that once was and would be again, in our time, Croatia. BUT he was an ethnic Serb. All this is backed up by every biography I’ve ever seen or read on Tesla, and in fact, a perfunctory cruise of the internet turned up the following:
“Nikola Tesla was born on July 10, 1856 in Smiljan, Lika, which was then part of the Austo-Hungarian Empire, region of Croatia.”
That was NOT from Wikipedia, but from the web page of the “Tesla Memorial Society of New York.” http://www.teslasociety.com/biography.htm
Secondly, I did NOT say that all people who wish to recognize Tesla for his accomplishments are Serbian nationalists. *I* recognize Tesla for his accomplishments (while also recognizing his deep failings, like any honest intelligent person would for any such public figure) and I am not ethnically Serbian, but a nice mix of English, German, Italian and Greek. Now… what I SAID was that some Serbian nationalists, rather, seem to have a serious goddamned hard-on for Tesla (also, for some odd reason, for the Russians as well) and go around acting like he was the greatest scientist who ever lived–which is patently ridiculous. But nationalist fervor does that to people–it makes them stupid, ignorant, blind and dishonest. Sure, Tesla is the one ethnic Serbian that lots of people know (unless you wanna count the asshole who assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand) so it’s understandable that proud Serbians would want to make a hero out of him. Well people can have their heroes. But be HONEST about them, AS heroes. Admit they had failings. What, does that besmirch your honor, somehow?
And what IS this deal of yours with “self-loathing liberals”? To whom, precisely, are you referring? Again, I made my point before–political orientation doesn’t excuse one from being absurd in one’s insistence on whitewashing the truth about national heroes. I merely said that some whacky Serbian nationalist types are crazy-hyper about Tesla; this doesn’t mean others aren’t as well. Different people have all sorts of reasons for distorting the truth or being willfully ignorant of it. What’s yours?
Lastly, I never said that the Austro-Hungarian Empire ever ruled Serbia. Nice try at trying to pull that particular fast one, Deucaon, but it didn’t work.
Get YOUR facts straight before you come talking to me again, Deucaon. I have better things to do with my time than to clean up the mess you try flinging my way, however unsuccessfully you do so.
February 27th, 2009 at 9:10 am
Thank you, Jamie!
February 27th, 2009 at 9:19 am
231. Struth: I turned him/her, gktm300, yesterday via the Report Abuse button, which I use when applicable. Do you remember when he/she was claiming to be a girl, and now claims to be a guy with an average sized coq?
I knew, and that’s why I wrote that one line post “she’ll be gone soon”, that her sort of hate speech can’t be allowed on this site. There are places for that, but this isn’t one of them.
Thank you for being another part of the solution. Keep it up, please. If I’m the only one complaining about these idiots it may look as if I’m the only one bothered by them.
February 27th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Top Catholic Scientists:
http://sites.google.com/site/apostolicapologetics/falsedilemma
(also some other non scientific contributions, as well as a list at the bottom of other “Great Christian Thinkers”) — Sorta a punch in the face to the idea that Atheism offers an intellectual advantage.
February 27th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Randall: I cant be bothered continuing this charade of a “debate” as I have already debunked you. If we continue this charade then I will just be repeating myself.
February 27th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
Deucaon, you haven’t debunked Randall any more than Joe the Plumber debunked the Democratic Party in the 2008 election. In fact, Deucaon, you couldn’t win a debate with Randall if you were given the first round and a 100 point start.
You’re pathetic, Deucaon. Pathetic.
February 28th, 2009 at 2:04 am
I’m sorry, but people commonly mis-position Newton at the top of such lists. Although Newton should certainly be in the top 5 of any such list, if one thinks through this clearly, one has to conclude that Charles Darwin was mankind’s greatest scientist to date. I wonder if any of you can figure out why that it so?
March 2nd, 2009 at 7:21 am
Robert Oppenheimer must be in the list!!! He’s the father of atomic energy and one day it will save the world.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:39 pm
what scientist dies 150 years before the first ct computer was made and laid out the foundation for he worlds first computer programomputer was made and laid out the foundation for he worlds first computer program
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:43 pm
251: what scientist dies 150 years before the first ct computer was made and laid out the foundation for he worlds first computer programomputer was made and laid out the foundation for he worlds first computer program
****
In what universe does this make a sentence? Or sense?
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:49 pm
I count three distinct sentences, one thought, and ZERO knowledge of structure.
“In what universe does this make a sentence? Or sense?”
Only on Planet Enalp.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:06 pm
253. Crimanon: Thank you, thank you, thank you!
I thought I was losing my grip on reality, on the English language, on basic sanity.
You have given me hope.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:50 pm
what scientist dies 150 years before the first ct computer was made and laid out the foundation for he worlds first computer programomputer was made and laid out the foundation for he worlds first computer program
que!?
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:58 pm
cym, I asked the same question at 252. I still don’t know. Crimanon counted 3 distinct sentences, One thought, and ZERO knowledge of structure, but, like me, no sense.
March 4th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Maybe post 251 doesn`t make sense because look at the name. Maybe something was prohibiting the thought process. Bananas,Popsicles or other phallic shaped objects hanging out of the oral cavity of 251 could have caused typing mistakes ect. Just saying.
March 5th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Ibn al Haytham should be the number one,actually the man invented science,before al haytham science didn’t exist, humanity was in the darkness of the philosophy,he is the father of modern optics inventor of camera, invented the perfect numbers,applied physics to astronomy which lead to the foundation of astrophysics.
March 5th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Planck is sooooooooo HOT , and ya no doubt Albert is the second after Newton .
March 5th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
philosophy is the mother of all sciences, so Socrates should be at least mentioned on the article i think, cause he has been the greatest philosopher of all time.
March 13th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
the list is quite good. but tesla should be the first. newton the first? he said that the speed of gravitation is infinite, that it happends instantaneously. einstein proved him wrong. anyway einstein probably was smarter than tesla, but he made most theoretically work. tesla invented the alternative curent. we have electrical power to our homes because of him. and the radio, and so long. Nikola Tesla shold be the first
April 3rd, 2009 at 8:05 am
Einstein in high heels eh? wow
May 5th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
I would nominate whoever it was that came up with the first working transistor without which most of the electronics today would either not exist or be much bulkier slower powerhungry. could you imagine having computer built of valves that is even as powerful as an old 8086?
May 9th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
The list is damn good, the order id pretty much agree with. Having studied Alan Turing last year, the man was a colossal genius, computation pioneer, i noted how often bill gates constantly referred to Turing in endless aspects of computer science, essentially his reference point.
The one Scientist who i’d argue should be in the list is Michael Faraday, electrogmagnetism and largely made Electricity viable for use in technology. Faraday’s impact was gigantic.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
Oh and all you Serbs and Croats arguing over Tesla.. his museum is in Belgrade, Serbia.. which of course was formerly in Yugoslavia as was Crotia.. therefore both Serbs and Croats (as both former Yugoslavs).. then can share him. Peace.
May 12th, 2009 at 6:52 am
Newton didn’t knew hot gravity really works. =))=))
Einstein is amazing. And he have more findings in gravity than Newton.
June 16th, 2009 at 3:37 am
hello im new i have my ass. very difficult but when i check in this web thank god i have the answers thank you for this web……
June 16th, 2009 at 3:41 am
i didnt know that galileo galeli isnot the real inventor of telescope it’s hans lippershey!!!!!!!!!!!!o thank you all.
June 21st, 2009 at 8:58 pm
The next list should definately include Hawking, Ptolemy, and Copernicus.
June 24th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Friedrich Gauss FTW!!!
June 29th, 2009 at 5:04 am
Impressive post, like it
July 8th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
These scientists that came up with these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Great_Inventions_of_ancient_China
July 17th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
This is unfair. The Royal Society are just a bunch of jerks who like to bombard religion & Einstein in the face at the same time. This list is unrealiable. I mean, Einstein is more popular than Newton. You could say that Newton is an Einstein. Plus the Royal Society are only composed of Brits. That’s the reason why Newton is deemed “influential”. There should be diversity in this survey. What about the guys in the Smithsonian Institute? NASA? The European Space Agency? The National Geographic Society? They should be included in the survey, to. LET THE BATTLE OF THE GENIUSES BEGIN!!!!!!
August 10th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
It’s cool to know that even though science in general opposes the idea of religion, that the greatest scientist ever studied the bible lots and didn’t even care for science as much as he did religion!
September 5th, 2009 at 9:54 am
Tesla was Croatian, not Serbian. Otherwise, great list.
November 19th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Having a nice essentially referred points and thank you for being another part of the solution the only one complaining about these.