The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann (2019) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann (2019)

#201

Post by yosito » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:00 AM UTC

allemagne wrote: post #74

adverbly wrote: post #56

Is it just me or does it seem like there something like there were a lot of celebrity-level STEM heroes to come out of the early 20th century. These folks all seemed to work together closely. Maybe these things take time, but it just doesn't seem like there is anything remotely like this going on today, despite far greater access to education and increases in global population. Is it perhaps that the limelight is les…

Matching the impact von Neumann made by himself in the 20th century might take dozens of von Neumanns today.

Or one Katalin Karikó.

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann (2019)

#202

Post by ndr » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:01 AM UTC

throw99909 wrote: post #180

TheTrotters wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scientists become famous partly due to their accomplishments and partly due to their life story. Would John Nash be famous if it weren’t for his tragic struggles with mental health? Would I know about Feynman if it weren’t for “Surely You’re Joking Mr. Feynman”, his safecracking, and the topless bars? Would Stephen Hawking be a household name if he weren’t disabled? WW2 gave a fascinating context to many scientific p…

I would offer Terry Tao as a counterexample. The only thing strange about him is how, well, not-strange he is!

That seems more a point in favor than a counter.

Terry Tao is surely very accomplished, but is he anywhere nearly as famous?

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann (2019)

#203

Post by throwanem » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:03 AM UTC

MagnumOpus wrote: post #182

astrange wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between humans and other apes is genetic, but anything more than that is not. Humans have nearly no genetic diversity because of population bottlenecks, there are barely any interesting differences between us. It's also not that useful to think about. Phenylketonuria is a condition that makes you less intelligent if you drink Diet Coke, and most people don't have the gene for it. But not having phenylk…

Both points you make are massively incorrect. Humans do have massive genetic diversity, in physical characteristics as well as mental ones). In the last decade, GWAS analysis has now lead to the ability to identify the gene combinations responsible for intelligence (as well as height, various cancer predispositions etc), and predictive ability is high (i.e. predicting cohort differences in income, years of education…

> In the last decade, GWAS analysis has now lead to the ability to identify the gene combinations responsible for intelligence (as well as height, various cancer predispositions etc), and predictive ability is high (i.e. predicting cohort differences in income, years of education etc just from genetic material)

That you seem to think GWAS operates at a genetic level, just for a start, leads me to doubt very strongly you will be able to provide any supporting citations for the claims you make here, which are wildly heterodox verging upon eugenicist.

I am no longer close to the field of bioinformatics, though, so perhaps you will surprise me!

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann (2019)

#204

Post by yosito » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:04 AM UTC

hintymad wrote: post #3

I often use von Neumann's quote, "Young man, in mathematics you don't understand things. You just get used to them.", to console myself when I have to read a math book multiple times to really understand something. The quote also has truth in it. I had no problem accepting that 0! = 1 only because I learnt that fact early in school. However, I struggled quite a bit to accept that span({}) = {0}, even though it is not…

For the last two years I've been learning Neumann's native language, Hungarian. It's a very difficult language for an English speaker to acquire (and vice-versa), but this quote could be adapted perfectly to how I feel learning Hungarian, "Young man, in Hungarian you don't understand things. You just get used to them.". I wonder if Neumann had a similar experience early on while learning English, and it shaped his view of mathematics as well.

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann (2019)

#205

Post by Rochus » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:04 AM UTC

croes wrote: post #192

Rochus wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The claim was the first programmable, general-purpose "electronic computer". Zuse's machine was "electro mechanic" (i.e. based on relays instead of tubes).

That seems a little unclear. In the title it says "Eniac: The Triumphs and Tragedies of the World's First Computer" In the outline: "Presents a history of the world's first programmable computer, ENIAC" In the reviews once "Nobody doubts the pair designed and built ENIAC, the world's first fully electronic computer" and another time "This account of how an engineer barely out of college and a physicist with dreams of…

On page 3 of the book: "They built ENIAC, the first digital, general-purpose, electronic computer". It all depends on how you define the term "computer". Not to forget that "computers" at that time were the women who did the calculations; see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer#Etymology. Nearly all computers today are electronic and digital; so ENIAC was one of the pioneers of this development (the Colossus was another one).

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann (2019)

#206

Post by yosito » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:13 AM UTC

deviation wrote: post #8

It staggers me that in an age of incredible innovation and technology- we still have no idea what biologically separates a man like this from the rest of us. I'd like to take the idyllic position of (somewhat irresponsibly) hoping that some level of genius can be fostered and created in anyone from a young age.. But when I read articles like this I feel the compulsive need to sit back in my chair and ponder just how…

> we still have no idea what biologically separates a man like this from the rest of us

I don't think it was a biological separation. Neumann, and his brilliant peers, all grew up in Hungary in the midst of political and ethnic oppression with significant economic and language barriers to overcome. Books have been written about it, and I can't accurately recount the facts. But it seems to me that what separates him and his peers is their perseverance in the face of adversity. Having overcome the very difficult circumstances in which they were born prepared them for great success later in life. It's inspiring, but in some ways it's also survivorship bias, since there were uncountable people who were born in the same circumstances and did not overcome. I think similar things are happening with refugees today. Those who overcome their circumstances often go on to be outstanding examples of genius and accomplishment in their fields.

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann (2019)

#207

Post by ghaff » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:16 AM UTC

globular-toast wrote: post #173

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a crime that such 22 year old memories are locked away in an amazon comment, to be lost whenever amazon deems it necessary to cull comments older than a certain age.

It's not locked away. Copy the text and save it on your disk if you think it's important to you. Publish it on your own blog if you think it's important to everyone. People seem to forget about the "save" functionality included in every web browser for some reason. You should save anything you deem important enough if you fear it might be gone one day. This is no different from acquiring a copy of an important book f…

While I'm generally in favor of preserving digital history, I don't really disagree. In a world where so many utterances and video can be preserved--and just wait until a lot of people are wearing AR glasses everywhere and AI/ML systems can increasingly tag and organize all that recording and associate it with real world identities--I'm not sure we even want everything to be saved even if it were possible.

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann (2019)

#208

Post by yosito » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:17 AM UTC

Synaesthesia wrote: post #129

Some strange political beliefs but indeed an unparalleled genius. (He advocated for immediately nuking the USSR!) His faculty with infinite series and other mathematical tricks was rather amazing.

> He advocated for immediately nuking the USSR!

Considering the oppression that his native country experienced at the hands of the USSR, and the fact that the implications of nuking an entire country weren't really understood yet at that point, this view is hardly surprising.

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann (2019)

#209

Post by MrDresden » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:28 AM UTC

He was beyond a brilliant person, of that is no doubt. And not in anyway trying to take away from that fact, reading the following excerpt from the article..;

"[..] von Neumann both worked alongside and collaborated with some of the foremost figures of twentieth century science. He went to high school with Eugene Wigner, collaborated with Hermann Weyl at ETH, attended lectures by Albert Einstein in Berlin, worked under David Hilbert at Göttingen, with Alan Turing and Oskar Morgenstern in Princeton, with Niels Bohr in Copenhagen and was close with both Richard Feynman and J. Robert Oppenheimer at Los Alamos."

..makes me do wonder how many of the accomplishments he made were due to his own brilliance, or due to both it and the stimulating environments he kept finding him self in.

For my own parts, I see a big difference in my own output, and the quality of that output, when getting the opportunity to interact with high caliber people (knowledgable, emotionally intelligent, inquisitive and open) on a regular basis.

Re: The Unparalleled Genius of John von Neumann (2019)

#210

Post by Koshkin » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 11:29 AM UTC

alexanderchr wrote: post #166

Koshkin wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But he did construct the proof! (So, the argument can only be about what axioms the proof is based on.)

This is not what constructivity means in mathematics.

What I was objecting to was that constructive proofs are somehow easier to understand.