Wait, I thought alchemy and theology were pretty mainstream back then? How was it risky? Just because they turned out to be wrong, I don't think it was crazy for someone to be studying these things back then. Seems like a modern example would be someone studying something like string theory or dark matter and later we discover these things are wrong... but there is no reason to think that today.
The Risk of Discovery
71–80 of 344 posts
Re: The Risk of Discovery
#72Newton had an epic insight into combinatorics. The calculus work he did during the university quarantine shutdown is great to page through. I wonder how much farther Newton, Gauss, Euler, and Erdos would have gotten if they knew how to code.
Re: The Risk of Discovery
#73> Newton made three bets. One of them worked. But they were all risky. Except it was three: - Optics - Gravitation and mechanics - Mathematics There are many scientists out there who spend a lifetime on theories that turn out to be bogus, but calling it a bet is entirely missing the point.
> Except it was three Maybe he's referring to the bets Newton (somewhat implicitly) made by dedicating time to physics/science as well as alchemy and theology.
I think alchemy at the time was just another domain of science than anything else. To them it was like today's dark matter and dark energy or figuring out cold fusion or reaction-less drives.
These are not really bets, it's all what Newton was, a man's passion, life and legacy.
Re: The Risk of Discovery
#74I find it funny that capitalism requires what is essentially an irrational behavior. It seems to me that big public corporations, which avoid risk, and only buy startups once they have been established, are the rational actors. On the other hands, three guys in the garage doing a startup often do it not because they calculate expected profits, but because they want to do it for other than monetary reasons - typically…
Startups are not much risk, though. You start out without, you try to make something, if it doesn't work out just having the experience as long as it wasn't a total catastrophe makes you hirable anywhere you want or you try again.
The most you might lose is the support of friends and family if your dreams aren't fully realized. Which can be a lot, but that is why the people who have the most to lose don't try startups.
Re: The Risk of Discovery
#75I don't think that studing chemistry (I like to think about alchemy as a precursor of chemistry) or theology should be stigmatized. I understand that it was just an example to support the core idea of the article, but it still leaves a bad taste.
Re: The Risk of Discovery
#76What exactly was Newton risking? An entrepreneur who quits her job and takes out a mortgage to start a business is risking her livelihood. If she fails, she and her family could end up on the street. Newton came from a wealthy family. If he failed in his intellectual endeavors the "risk" for him was to live out his life as an ordinary rich person and only ending up in the more obscure history books.
I think Fredrick Smith (founder of Fedex) is a much better example of someone taking an entrepreneurial and intellectual risk.
http://about.van.fedex.com/our-story/history-timeline/histor...
Re: The Risk of Discovery
#77> Newton made three bets. One of them worked. But they were all risky. Except it was three: - Optics - Gravitation and mechanics - Mathematics There are many scientists out there who spend a lifetime on theories that turn out to be bogus, but calling it a bet is entirely missing the point.
How is calling it a bet missing the point? As a scientist investigating a phenomenon in the natural world, assuming you wish to make a new contribution to your field, you are betting your time that you will both arrive at a new understanding of your subject matter and also be the first to do so.
If you just bet that for example string theory is a good enough field for research then you'll be deeply disappointed if it turns out to be nothing but a mirage.
These people live for research. They can work on anything (because interests them) and no matter if it has earth shattering consequences or small breaks they can still be happy during the process, so calling it risky or dangerous is laughable.
Re: The Risk of Discovery
#78Sorry, Newton didn't "make bets", he was not a Silicon Valley VC. He worked on problems that he found interesting and that he believed would reveal eternal truths established and maintained by God.
Please don't get stuck on semantics. When you decide to take a longer route because you think there will be less traffic, you "make a bet". You "make a bet" by deciding to go to college instead of straight into the working world. Anywhere there is a decision to be made with uncertain outcomes, you "make a bet". It doesn't have to be about money, although it often is.
Look at Newton's Early life (0) and we can see that he did not 'make a bet' with his life. Though he managed to get into Cambridge on a scholarship (an element of luck), he was considered 'undistinguished as a Cambridge student.' His 3 really big accomplishments (optics, gravitation, calculus) were generated when he was on break for 2 years from Cambridge due to plague. The question we then must ask is: what would he have done otherwise? It's a 'bet' if there is an element of risk, though it seems this discussion is more about what different English speakers use the word 'bet' to mean. What were the downsides to just poking about with math and lenses in your 'free' hours? Maybe he missed out on some farming/church duties or he traded this time to do Optics instead of gossiping. I don't know. What did young mid-17th century celibate Englishmen do in those days while hiding from the black death? Tennis? Point is, he wasn't really risking anything but a little bit of time spent in the mid 1600's English countryside that he had to spend out there anyways. A 'real bet' would have been staying at Cambridge despite the plague to work on Optics with the professors, as the risk there was quite clearly your life.
(0) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_life_of_Isaac_Newton
Re: The Risk of Discovery
#79What exactly was Newton risking? An entrepreneur who quits her job and takes out a mortgage to start a business is risking her livelihood. If she fails, she and her family could end up on the street. Newton came from a wealthy family. If he failed in his intellectual endeavors the "risk" for him was to live out his life as an ordinary rich person and only ending up in the more obscure history books. I think Fredrick…
I may be mis-understanding the authors intent, but I don't see him as saying that Newton risked wealth or comfort, rather that he risked time-spent on fruitful endeavors.
Re: The Risk of Discovery
#80What exactly was Newton risking? An entrepreneur who quits her job and takes out a mortgage to start a business is risking her livelihood. If she fails, she and her family could end up on the street. Newton came from a wealthy family. If he failed in his intellectual endeavors the "risk" for him was to live out his life as an ordinary rich person and only ending up in the more obscure history books. I think Fredrick…
He was risking his time and attention in studying it. The opportunity cost is nontrivial, especially if you have the kind of IQ Newton had.