71–80 of 89 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure most people wouldn't want live the life of Erdos...
* I'm pretty sure most people wouldn't want live the life of Erdos...* Come on... travelling the world and couch-surfing for years on end, while having no financial concerns at all? I think most people would love to live that life.
All the easy math has been done. People have been working on Mathematics for a long, long time. To "make meaningful and significant contributions to the field" is one of the hardest intellectual tasks a person can do. It is probably impossible for someone at a midpoint in their lives to suddenly develop an interest in math and make a meaningful contribution. Even people who have been immersed in Mathematics their who…
I disagree with most of your points, though you're more qualified to talk on the subject than I am. | All the easy math has been done. How easy are we talking about? While I was in high school, I remember a news article about some other high-school-age kids that happened to a solve a long-standing and relatively simple problem in geometry involving triangles. I can't remember the specifics, nor can I find anything ab…
This raises an interesting empirical question: is there a significant deterioration in brain performance after about 40 years of age or so? Anecdotally it would seem to be the case. The Fields Medal is the highest award in Mathematics and it has an age cap of 40, but the rule hasn't raised controversy because almost all the worthy contenders have been under 40 anyway. However, some people have hypothesized that the dominance of the young is the result of other career and family concerns distracting people in middle age. That could well be the truth, and I hope it is. It would be interesting to know the answer.
Anyone else see the flaw in asking a gifted mathematician about the human brain, merely because they're a gifted mathematician? cperciva is certainly very smart, and may also happen to know a thing or two about the subject...but mathematical ability doesn't necessarily correlate with knowledge of how humans learn or cognitive development.
Yeah, but his answer is in line with what's known about cognitive development.
I just found the question interesting. And it's a common phenomenon. Musicians, for example, even not particularly gifted ones, get this kind of question pretty frequently--"can adults really learn to be good musicians?", "it just comes naturally to you, right?", etc. Humans have funny logic sometimes, I guess, including the people on the receiving end of the questions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've posted this at least three times on Hacker News, but I'm just shocked people haven't read it: http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/weblog/520.html This guy is a statistics professor, and has a lot to say about exactly what "g" is. He even runs experiments! I know the article is a bit long but I promise it's worth reading.
Well, I admit, I just skimmed it, I'll try to read the whole thing later. But near as I can tell, he isn't addressing the validity of g at all, merely claiming it is unproven that genetic differences between population groups is due to genetics or other factors (a claim I don't disagree with).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree with most of your points, though you're more qualified to talk on the subject than I am. | All the easy math has been done. How easy are we talking about? While I was in high school, I remember a news article about some other high-school-age kids that happened to a solve a long-standing and relatively simple problem in geometry involving triangles. I can't remember the specifics, nor can I find anything ab…
> There are a few differences between a grad student and a sufficiently dedicated hobbyist, and none of them are genetic, nor are any of them necessarily bound by a particular age bracket. This raises an interesting empirical question: is there a significant deterioration in brain performance after about 40 years of age or so? Anecdotally it would seem to be the case. The Fields Medal is the highest award in Mathemat…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is "intelligence?" Can we separate it from society's conception of it? Can we state a computational definition rather than a definition in terms of satisfaction of cultural standards? We undervalue a lot of mental attributes - consistency of thought, sensitivity to subtle differences in concepts, patience, self-reflection, the ability to "go meta" etc. which cannot be detected by the rough and rigid abstract pro…
"Intelligence" is a hidden variable g, which comes out of statistical tests of various mental examinations. Basically, give a bunch of people a french test, a math test, a physics test, a driving test, etc. Run statistical tests for hidden variables, and you will discover this mysterious hidden variable 'g'. It is relatively independent of cultural knowledge: i.e., french is nearly independent of g (1), while physics…
Yummy, you have to be kidding us. Either that, or you were drunk when you took the test, or we really need to rethink what the tests are measuring. There is no way somebody with subnormal intelligence is involved in exchanges like this:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're being presumptuous. I'm not saying that I'm "turned off" by the -fact- that I can't get tall(1). I'm saying that this is not a -fact- at all. Even if it -is- a fact, it certainly is much more uncertain/open for debate than the question of whether you can get tall at a late age. I'm saying that the fact that you -claim it is a fact- is what turns me off. Perhaps I was slightly imprecise. I should have s…
There are basically 3 requirements for intelligence that surpass the basic need to survive: DNA, Diet, and Stimulus. DNA limits what structures can develop which is the basic foundation of intelligence. Diet provides the raw materials to crate the structures that DNA is trying to build. Poor diet causes DNA to sacrifice specific objectives to insure survival. Specific toxins like lead also limit the body's ability to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Intelligence" is a hidden variable g, which comes out of statistical tests of various mental examinations. Basically, give a bunch of people a french test, a math test, a physics test, a driving test, etc. Run statistical tests for hidden variables, and you will discover this mysterious hidden variable 'g'. It is relatively independent of cultural knowledge: i.e., french is nearly independent of g (1), while physics…
I've never met a math/physics/eng faculty member with an IQ below 120 (though mine is below 100). Yummy, you have to be kidding us. Either that, or you were drunk when you took the test, or we really need to rethink what the tests are measuring. There is no way somebody with subnormal intelligence is involved in exchanges like this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=216701
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've never met a math/physics/eng faculty member with an IQ below 120 (though mine is below 100). Yummy, you have to be kidding us. Either that, or you were drunk when you took the test, or we really need to rethink what the tests are measuring. There is no way somebody with subnormal intelligence is involved in exchanges like this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=216701
Apparently someone decided the score a bunch of the Caltech faculty on an IQ test, and a surprising number of them turned up with scores < 100. This doesn't prove that the concept is untenable, but clearly some of our tests are missing things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apparently someone decided the score a bunch of the Caltech faculty on an IQ test, and a surprising number of them turned up with scores < 100. This doesn't prove that the concept is untenable, but clearly some of our tests are missing things.
That's interesting... any source?