Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 324 posts

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann

#171

Post by hgytr »

ironyman wrote: post #164

I've recently been engrossed by the question of how geniuses and highly intelligent people think. There's bits and pieces of information online. What I'd really like to see, though, is (a) geniuses describe their thought process and (b) a smart person voicing is interior monologue while attacking a problem. 1) Do you know of any information like this? Link? 2) Otherwise: do you think in a way that's different (better…

I heard that Tesla could effectively "run" experiments in his mind, not just visualize them. Another pointer is that some "schools of thought" divide the art of thought into ability to visualize and ability to analyze where the latter has to be built upon the former and only when the former is perfected. My personal belief is that being a genius is about the ability to keep in mind many things at a time without losing details.

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann

#172

Post by freyr »

lancebeet wrote: post #130
mvf0 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is that exact documentary you were thinking of [0]. It's really a fantastic documentary on the incredible feats of von Neumann and worth a watch by everyone here. That person you quoted was Edward Teller and the interview can be found at 54:58 [1]. I read somewhere that the young boy asking von Neumann a question at 6:13 [2] is actually Bill Clinton. Can anyone verify this? [0] https://youtu.be/Y2jiQXI6nrE [1] h…

>I read somewhere that the young boy asking von Neumann a question at 6:13 [2] is actually Bill Clinton. Can anyone verify this? The top comment poster on the other video says it's his father, Bill Walters.

Bill Clinton would have been nine years old when this was filmed. The boy in the clip looks a bit too young to have a nine year old kid.

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann

#173

Post by haimez »

spookthesunset wrote: post #170
yellowstuff wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be using "smarter" to mean something different than IQ, but if you mean IQ then you're wrong. Different professions have different distributions of IQ, and programmers are among the professions with the highest average IQ. They definitely skew higher than house painters. https://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/Occupations.aspx Programmers may not be wiser, kinder, or better than anyone else, but on average they are…

[flagged]

Unfortunate use of “to” or the “Krugered” programmers might have listened

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann

#174

Post by rmp33 »

A question to mathematicians: what does your mind look like when you prove a theorem?

There is a comment here, saying that many hard theorems require one to build a complex branch of math and use it to prove a single statement. So I asked myself: what does it really look like to prove a theorem at such level?

I can tell what's going on in a programmer's mind. Software is very much like an imaginary mechanism and software engineers are mechanics. For example, this site is a database connected with a html page, so a programmer literally imagines a big gray building that means the database, another building that means the html page and a pipe that connects them. The database has a few tables: one for user accounts, another for posts like this, another for comments. So a programmer imagines 3 big blocks inside that building that are connected with pipes transferring data. Next to the database there is a controller device that sends and receives messages in the pipe connecting it to the users. This analogy continues to tiny things like classes, methods and variables. The entire HN forum looks like a big multi-dimensional city-like structure with numerous pipes connecting pieces together. Experienced programmers not only organize this city well, but can also predict and eliminate complexity, e.g. they know that if you put that kind of building over there, others will inevitable connect to it tens of pipes and the entire city will be a mess, where you see a pipe and have no idea what it connects to and what will happen if you cut it.

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann

#175

Post by mixmastamyk »

mvf0 wrote: post #74
lqet wrote: post #47

"Von Neumann would carry on a conversation with my 3-year-old son, and the two of them would talk as equals, and I sometimes wondered if he used the same principle when he talked to the rest of us." - Edward Teller See [0] for a demonstration. I watched a documentary from the 80ies a long time ago. A mathematician (can't remember his name) who worked with von Neumann in Los Alamanos was interviewed. He described von…

Here is that exact documentary you were thinking of [0]. It's really a fantastic documentary on the incredible feats of von Neumann and worth a watch by everyone here. That person you quoted was Edward Teller and the interview can be found at 54:58 [1]. I read somewhere that the young boy asking von Neumann a question at 6:13 [2] is actually Bill Clinton. Can anyone verify this? [0] https://youtu.be/Y2jiQXI6nrE [1] h…

No, it’s not Clinton.

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann

#176

Post by mikeyouse »

mirekrusin wrote: post #143
Scaevolus wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a depressing analysis on where all the Hungarian geniuses came from and why they vanished: https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/26/the-atomic-bomb-consid...

He mentions Curie as non-Ashkenazi, but even with her I don't know, she was born Polish with full name "Maria Salomea Skłodowska"(-Curie), her middle name "Salomea", given after her grandmother sounds to me like Jewish origin. I wonder how percentage of Nobel price winners/etc. would look like if you'd really dig deeper few generations or did genetic tests.

Marie's grandchildren are still alive and could presumably be genetically tested to see their heritage if there was any real question.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%A9l%C3%A8ne_Langevin-Joli...

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann

#177

Post by spookthesunset »

daseiner1 wrote: post #161
spookthesunset wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're intellectually gifted (many programmers are) Lets not jerk each other off too hard, eh? Just like everybody in life, in any trade or profession, most programmers are just average people like everybody else. They just happened to luck out and be good at a talent that pays well. Odds are incredibly high you aren't any smarter than somebody who paints houses for a living, fills your prescription, or plays fo…

[flagged]

It's not nonsense. I can't stand people who post crap like "OMG I can program so I have to have a higher than average IQ". And then they link to articles that support their little circle jerk. No. Sorry. You don't. You are average. I'm average. We are all average. Just 'cause you can code doesn't mean you are suddenly god's gift to intelligence. You aren't. Really. Sorry. You are just as stupid as everybody else.

John von Neumann. Dude is a genius. Einstein. Also. you? me? sorry. Doesn't matter if you can code. People can paint cars way better than you. They can make a perfect french fry. They can inspect a clogged sewer line way better than you. They know just the best ways to start an IV. Who is more intelligent?

Just because you can do $PROFESSION doesn't make you above average in intelligence. Period. Full stop. To think any other way (and for somebody to post a link to some BS article supporting their assertion) is completely absolutely 100% arrogant BS. Get off your high horse people.

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann

#178

Post by roca »

wholmezy wrote: post #60
roca wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A real comparison is of course impossible, but of that coterie, Kurt Gödel is a strong contender. As the original post mentions, he singlehandedly destroyed Hilbert's formalist program (which von Neumann was also working on) and von Neumann is quoted as saying he was "in a class by himself". There is the famous letter from Gödel to von Neumann which anticipates the P=NP problem by decades. In a different era, I think…

What is the letter? Sounds interesting.

The first part is actually quoted in the original post. The full letter is here: https://rjlipton.wordpress.com/the-gdel-letter/

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann

#179

Post by spookthesunset »

haimez wrote: post #173
spookthesunset wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Unfortunate use of “to” or the “Krugered” programmers might have listened

Yeah. It really annoys me when people jerk off on forums about how being coder automatically makes them smarter than everybody else. And then, ironically, goes on to link to some BS article supporting their assertion. Way to many devs I meet think that knowing to code means they can understand everything.

They are also the ones who fall hardest to scams (bitcoin), stupid political views (say, ones beginning with L), stupid legal views, stupid social views, stupid financial advice, stupid views on how to rewire a house, rebuild an engine, on basically anything but programming. But obviously their opinion is on whatever topic has to be fact because they program and obviously they have a high IQ (and they have an article to back them up too!!!) (/s).

I generalize, sure... but seriously. This kind of circle jerk is lame and very arrogant. Coding doesn’t make you smart (no matter what BS article somebody digs up to support your assertion). So here I am ranting about it...

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann

#180

Post by roca »

arethuza wrote: post #27
ElFitz wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This quote perfectly illustrates the unparalleled absurdity of contemplating nuclear warfare.

He was hardly alone if favouring a "preventative war" - Curtis LeMay was another advocate - they thought it was the rational thing to do. How someone can rationally advocate the cold blooded killing of millions is, frankly, completely beyond me.

It's easy to construct rational arguments for killing millions in cold blood. Today you could easily construct a rational utilitarian argument for killing billions now to prevent even greater death and suffering later due to climate change.

In fact, it's blanket rejection of the cold-blooded killing of millions that requires (at least for most naturalists/atheists) decidedly non-rational thinking --- i.e., adhering to relevant moral principles while disbelieving in moral realism.

Post reply on HN