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

Srinivasa Ramanujan

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 51 posts

Re: Srinivasa Ramanujan

#41

Post by mahmud »

ideamonk wrote: post #22
FraaJad wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Snake Charmers" is not a brand image "We" wanted nor created. It is the product of ignorant western minds. Compared to other eastern cultures (chinese and japanese at least) India has suffered from mis-understanding and underwhelming understanding for a long time. You only have to read English literature on India from 18 and 19th century to realize the extent of misinformation generated by the British to legitimise…

Of ignorance - the article mentions "dying of illness, malnutrition and possibly liver infection in 1920 at the age of 32." ... I smell some ignorance on our part - we don't have much goodwill to take care of geniuses. The current state of higher education (with major emphasis on mugging, apart from minute number of good colleges) is killing many more geniuses. I find a 1st year Computer Science student very keen in…

I smell some ignorance on our part - we don't have much goodwill to take care of geniuses.

Why should the extension of goodwill be exclusive to "geniuses"? why not everyone?

Re: Srinivasa Ramanujan

#42

Post by travisjeffery »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #24
travisjeffery wrote: post #4

If you count him as unknown then you might as well count just about every other Mathematician other than Newton as an unknown as well.

I've discovered that John Nash ("that beautiful mind guy") is probably about as well known as Newton. So is "that Numbers guy" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numb3rs ).

No. People don't call Newton: "That gravity guy", people know Newton's name. Every time I go to talk to a non-Mathematician about John Nash and say his name they go: "Who?", me: "The Mathematician from A Beautiful Mind." them: "Oh." Newton is Newton and in terms of popularity, John Nash; "The Beautiful Mind guy" isn't even in his league.

Re: Srinivasa Ramanujan

#44

Post by ideamonk »

mahmud wrote: post #41
ideamonk wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of ignorance - the article mentions "dying of illness, malnutrition and possibly liver infection in 1920 at the age of 32." ... I smell some ignorance on our part - we don't have much goodwill to take care of geniuses. The current state of higher education (with major emphasis on mugging, apart from minute number of good colleges) is killing many more geniuses. I find a 1st year Computer Science student very keen in…

I smell some ignorance on our part - we don't have much goodwill to take care of geniuses. Why should the extension of goodwill be exclusive to "geniuses"? why not everyone?

The system tries to say that 'I'm catering to the needs of _everybody_ by imparting them common knowledge'. But the other way to look at it would be that, the system is trying to produce huge number of people with common skills which isn't anything to be happy about. If the extension of goodwill should not be exclusive to "geniuses", then at least the system should wait till everyone has recognized 'what they want' and let them proceed in the direction of their passion. The industry focussed education system however poses a roadblock in this process. Just as Sir Ken Robinson said - "Do Schools Kill Creativity?" - http://is.gd/4Hby5 I think they do kill creativity and forming geniuses in India.

Re: Srinivasa Ramanujan

#45

Post by ideamonk »

FraaJad wrote: post #35
ideamonk wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of ignorance - the article mentions "dying of illness, malnutrition and possibly liver infection in 1920 at the age of 32." ... I smell some ignorance on our part - we don't have much goodwill to take care of geniuses. The current state of higher education (with major emphasis on mugging, apart from minute number of good colleges) is killing many more geniuses. I find a 1st year Computer Science student very keen in…

If you read my reply again, you will see that I commented on the pre-independance image of India, that of snake charmers. That image is a product of narrow, west-is-superior-in-everything mindset of the 18 and 19th century europe. I largely agree with your comment on present day situation. We can do lot better in promoting Basic Sciences.

But we must find that thin difference b/w when to stop teaching general sciences and let students focus on what they love. As for my computer science course, I'm pretty much frustrated with the enforced chemistry and physics in 1st 5 semesters of 8 semester course. That doesn't make sense. Plus it eats out a lot of time I could've spent over learning new things if I had 4 subjects instead of 6.

The courses in India also happen to be outdated. At my college we do VC++ 6 under HCI --> wtf?!

And computer science grads go through a combined 1 semester course of 'signals and systems' and 'digital signal processing', which again doesn't make any sense to me. No wonder students get below 20/50.

My point is, the time lost due to over-engagement promoted in these colleges could have been spent in 'finding out what one loves to do'.

Since students don't find that time, there is an evident herd mentality when it comes to furthering their careers after a bachelors degree in Computer Science. People end up disrespecting it by trying to do MBA, etc.

Nothing wrong, their personal choice, but I think humanity in this region of world could've given out more inventions and geniuses if students (most of us) didn't have this pattern as the only way of starting our lives.

If only we could too just roam around on road, pick a paper and scribble some maths onto it like Ramanujan used to... if only we all could be unique with the knowledge of what we love...

Re: Srinivasa Ramanujan

#46

Post by pchristensen »

ramanujan wrote: post #26

I probably should pipe up on this thread :) The most amazing thing about Ramanujan is that there are literally multiple Springer Volumes devoted solely to the task of proving the results in his notebooks. See for example: http://bit.ly/iWIQP

Long url: http://www.google.com/products?hl=en&client=firefox-a&#3...

Re: Srinivasa Ramanujan

#47

Post by chubbard »

One of my coworkers used to talk about Ramanujan. He remarked Ramanujan called every prime number a close personal friend. He sort of had this deep relationship with numbers.

Then I saw a documentary on people who could do complex math without the aide of a calculator (e.g. given any large number and tell if it was prime in their head). I thought there might be a parallel between people like this and Ramanujan. The documentary focused on a couple of people who were not savants, but by all accounts normal people. They followed a young British kid. He described how he saw and felt about numbers, and each number had a distinct personality. I found it remarkably similar to the description about how Ramanujan felt about numbers.

Re: Srinivasa Ramanujan

#48

Post by hernan7 »

adamc wrote: post #27
ilkhd2 wrote: post #2

Ramanujan is well known.

I think I first read about him in a Martin Gardner book as a kid. So yeah, not that unknown.

Kind of same here -- I think I first read about him on the Argentinian magazine "Humor y Juegos" (Humor and Games) some time in the late 70s/ early 80s. I guess most people with any interest in recreational mathematics/ puzzles will know of Ramanujan.

Re: Srinivasa Ramanujan

#49

Post by [deleted] »

ivenkys wrote: post #21

Why is this article at the top of the page ? As so many people have pointed out - he is neither an unknown nor has there been any recent incident/discovery which would require a re-iteration of his "geniusness".

[deleted]

Re: Srinivasa Ramanujan

#50

Post by kleevr »

eru wrote: post #33
keeptrying wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Newton was supposed to have been an absolute coward. As a member of parliament the only thing he mentioned, during any session, was a request to open the window. Feynman was a womanizer who was known to sleep with wives of colleagues. His biography "Genius" is a pretty good read by the way. Genius doesnt mean "adventurous" or "virtuous" or "worldly". Its just one facet of a human.

And Newton was also heavy into alchemy and astrology. (Leibniz seemed much saner. But he was probably closer to Feynman in his worldly orientation.)

Netwon also spent a great deal of time attempting to decipher codes in the bible...
Post reply on HN