I was truly humbled today

sedm1000 said:
You know more now than Newton ever did.

There were not so many people back then practicing science. It was easy to stand out. Newton probably wasn't even that bright. Gravity... seems pretty obvious....
Click to expand...
How about calculus? The laws of motion? He is certainly one of the finest thinkers in human history. Newton wasn't just a physicist (the original physicist? ;)), he was also a mathematician, philosopher and a genius to boot. To say he probably wasn't even that bright is insane.

As for there not being many people who practiced science, that would be because "science" as we understand it today didn't exist. One didn't learn "science" and the word wasn't coined until the 19th century, if I recall correctly (Cambridge university started a "natural sciences" course in around that era, a course which was somewhat shunned by the upper classes of the time who viewed scientific studies as being more vocational - such snobs preferred to study classics). Most "scientists" as we now call them were philosophers, usually well off men who had plenty of time to sit around and think about the world around them :)
 
sedm1000 said:
You know more now than Newton ever did.

There were not so many people back then practicing science. It was easy to stand out. Newton probably wasn't even that bright. Gravity... seems pretty obvious....
Click to expand...




Then explain why people like Richard Feynman and Albert Einstein had such enormous respect for Newton? They had the same benefit of hindsight as you, but a far better appreciation of how far ahead of everyone else he was.


M
 
Killerkebab said:
How about calculus? The laws of motion? He is certainly one of the finest thinkers in human history. Newton wasn't just a physicist (the original physicist? ;)), he was also a mathematician, philosopher and a genius to boot. To say he probably wasn't even that bright is insane.
Click to expand...

I couldn't have put it better myself.

Quite a few great advances seem obvious afterwards. That doesn't mean they were obvious before.

As for there not being many people who practiced science, that would be because "science" as we understand it today didn't exist. One didn't learn "science" and the word wasn't coined until the 19th century, if I recall correctly (Cambridge university started a "natural sciences" course in around that era, a course which was somewhat shunned by the upper classes of the time who viewed scientific studies as being more vocational - such snobs preferred to study classics). Most "scientists" as we now call them were philosophers, usually well off men who had plenty of time to sit around and think about the world around them :)
Click to expand...

I think it's fair to say that many of the natural philosophers were in fact scientists. The word "science" wasn't used in the modern sense, but the concept of it was.
 
Jonny69 said:
I was at a conference at the Royal Society today. It was my first time there and I was in such a hurry to get there I didn't really give it much thought until during one of the seminars when I suddenly realised what it meant, as a scientist, to be in such a place.

Founded in 1660 there had been already been some 50 years of cutting edge British science taking place when Isaac Newton took charge in the early 1700's.

On display outside the conference room was a handwritten draft of Newton's Pricipia Mathematica, in Latin, in Newton's own hand. I suddently realised I was in the presence of true greatness and I felt completely humbled. I don't think I've ever felt that way before, but it was a truly good feeling :)
Click to expand...


Remember though newton was an incredible snob and would probably be offended that a commoner like you was allowed to study his work :p
 
I think I did a job at the Royal Society, it's on one of the streets opposite the Ritz? If it was the same place then even for me (A level physicist) it was quite an experience, what was even more impressive was doing the AV for a presentation given by Jane Goodall, a remarkable woman.
 
Jonny69 said:
I was at a conference at the Royal Society today. It was my first time there and I was in such a hurry to get there I didn't really give it much thought until during one of the seminars when I suddenly realised what it meant, as a scientist, to be in such a place.
Click to expand...

So how does one qualify to call themselves a "scientist"? (legitimate question, not sarcastic).
 
You should have a science degree, working in the industry as a researcher/analyst of some variety.

This would be the minimum requirements from an industry perspective.

Academics would state, you are not a scientist until you have completed a PhD.
 
iraiguana said:
You should have a science degree, working in the industry as a researcher/analyst of some variety.

This would be the minimum requirements from an industry perspective.

Academics would state, you are not a scientist until you have completed a PhD.
Click to expand...

I have a Masters of Science degree and I work as an equivalent of analyst. Am I a scientist by that definition? I think it needs to be more specific!
 
Surely a scientist is ANYONE that has a vested interest in our advancement of scientific understanding of the universe around us? Granted that with science being so advanced in the current times that a degree is more than likely needed to have a decent enough understand to help progress out knowledge.

I was having a similar rant in one of our chat rooms at work, that as a society we are heading downhill due to having idiots like Rooney and Jedward as role models for kids instead of people working to advance civilisation. The media has far too much power over society, I don't think they care about the effect they are having.
 
Jonny69 said:
I was at a conference at the Royal Society today. It was my first time there and I was in such a hurry to get there I didn't really give it much thought until during one of the seminars when I suddenly realised what it meant, as a scientist, to be in such a place.

Founded in 1660 there had been already been some 50 years of cutting edge British science taking place when Isaac Newton took charge in the early 1700's.

On display outside the conference room was a handwritten draft of Newton's Pricipia Mathematica, in Latin, in Newton's own hand. I suddently realised I was in the presence of true greatness and I felt completely humbled. I don't think I've ever felt that way before, but it was a truly good feeling :)
Click to expand...

You should try a church
 
iraiguana said:
Academics would state, you are not a scientist until you have completed a PhD.
Click to expand...

I know plenty of doctors and academics and none of them have ever questioned my credentials as a sceintist because I fail to hold a doctorate.


If pressed I would suggest a 'scientist' is anyone who employs the scientific method with enough rigour to prove or support a conjecture to the satisfaction of thier peers. This definition is regardless of qualifications.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom