| 
January 31st, 2006, 10:38 AM
|  | Global Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 11,177
Country: Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,779 Times in 3,073 Posts
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by SkanderH Lukasiewicz
Kolomogrov ??
And how about some more contemporary scientisits
Nash
Penrose
Wolfram?? | Nash  he is an economist, he does not get the honor of joining that list. I gave some classical mathemations in the previous posts. No one responded  Still waiting. | 
January 31st, 2006, 03:19 PM
|  | Global Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 11,177
Country: Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,779 Times in 3,073 Posts
| | I waited long enough, I am placing Dirichilet on the list. Unless of course someone objects. (Check the first post for a completer standing). | 
January 31st, 2006, 08:22 PM
| | Newbie | | Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| | About Nash Nash was a mathematician. He only got the Nobel prize in economics because there is no Nobel prize in math and his new mathematical ideas were applied to economical problems. He worked on game theory and algebraic manifolds as well as decision theory.
Check his web page http://www.math.princeton.edu/jfnj/
He certainly doens't deserve to be looked down upon just because he did some applied mathematics!!
Anobody else agree with Nash as a candidate
Last edited by SkanderH; January 31st, 2006 at 08:29 PM.
| 
January 31st, 2006, 08:37 PM
|  | Global Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 11,177
Country: Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,779 Times in 3,073 Posts
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by SkanderH Nash was a mathematician. He only got the Nobel prize in economics because there is no Nobel prize in math and his new mathematical ideas were applied to economical problems. He worked on game theory and algebraic manifolds as well as decision theory.
Check his web page http://www.math.princeton.edu/jfnj/
He certainly doens't deserve to be looked down upon just because he did some applied mathematics!!
Anobody else agree with Nash as a candidate | I will only place Nash on the list, if others agree. I do not see him as a great mathematician, but that might be because I do not know much about him. | 
January 31st, 2006, 08:40 PM
|  | Global Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 11,177
Country: Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,779 Times in 3,073 Posts
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by topsquark Oh! and let us not forget "The Fabulous" Bernoulli brothers who made so many contributions that no one can remember which one did what.
-Dan | Maybe we can place Johann Bernoulli on that list? | 
February 1st, 2006, 12:16 AM
| | MHF Contributor | | Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,631
Country: Thanks: 8
Thanked 416 Times in 398 Posts
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by SkanderH Nash was a mathematician. He only got the Nobel prize in economics because there is no Nobel prize in math and his new mathematical ideas were applied to economical problems. He worked on game theory and algebraic manifolds as well as decision theory.
Check his web page http://www.math.princeton.edu/jfnj/
He certainly doens't deserve to be looked down upon just because he did some applied mathematics!!
Anobody else agree with Nash as a candidate | Nash? von Neumann? Albert Einstein?!
Man, Einstein! and he is not there?
That list is a farce, to say the least.
Not being a racist, I see no Arab, Indian, Chinese in there. Those 3 races have great Math people. Then, and even now at present, and in the future. | 
February 1st, 2006, 12:26 AM
| | Newbie | | Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| | About middle eastern, indian and chinese math Quote: |
Originally Posted by ticbol Nash? von Neumann? Albert Einstein?!
Man, Einstein! and he is not there?
That list is a farce, to say the least.
Not being a racist, I see no Arab, Indian, Chinese in there. Those 3 races have great Math people. Then, and even now at present, and in the future. | You are right, the list is to western-centric (if there is such a word). I don't know much about Chinese and Indian math, but al-Khawarizmi should definiltely be included in the list, he invented algebra (ilm al-jabr) and algorithms.
Last edited by SkanderH; February 1st, 2006 at 12:26 AM.
Reason: mistakes and no title
| 
February 1st, 2006, 01:49 AM
|  | Grand Panjandrum | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: South of England
Posts: 12,190
Country: Thanks: 770
Thanked 3,953 Times in 3,191 Posts
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by ticbol Nash? von Neumann? Albert Einstein?!
Man, Einstein! and he is not there?
That list is a farce, to say the least.
Not being a racist, I see no Arab, Indian, Chinese in there. Those 3 races have great Math people. Then, and even now at present, and in the future. | Ramanjuan is at least on the candidates list.
RonL
__________________ Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.
Giordano Bruno | 
February 1st, 2006, 02:22 AM
| | Newbie | | Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| | Ramanjuan Can you tell us more about Ramanjuan? | 
February 1st, 2006, 01:28 PM
|  | Global Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 11,177
Country: Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,779 Times in 3,073 Posts
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by CaptainBlack Ramanjuan is at least on the candidates list.
RonL | Agreed, Ramanjuan is on the list. 3 more left! Look at the first post for the latest updates.
Let me just remind the voters that I am making a poll for math. Not for physics nor for applied math, that is something else. Yes, I agree that Einstein knew a lot of math. The math involed in General Relatively is intense use of Riemann's theories, which is complicated stuff. However, Einstein did not do anything for the work of math. Yes, it is true he was one of the greatest scientist, but not at all close to a mathematician. Again this poll is purely mathematical.
Last edited by ThePerfectHacker; February 1st, 2006 at 01:43 PM.
| 
February 1st, 2006, 01:40 PM
|  | Global Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 11,177
Country: Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,779 Times in 3,073 Posts
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by SkanderH Can you tell us more about Ramanjuan? | Yes, Ramanjuan was the greatest Indian mathematician. He was born in 1887 and died in 1920 in United States. Ramanjuan was extremely close friends with Godfried Harold Hardy, a number theorist. Hardy describes Ramanjuan like a person which he has never seen before. Ramanujuan ability to see complicated solutions with ease was one of his unusual abilities. Later in life Hardy compared Ramanjuan to Euler and Jacobi (the greatest algorists). When Ramanjuan was a young he read a difficult book on pure math called "Synopsis of Pure Mathematics" it mostly consisted of complicated problems with no proofs, Ramanjuan mastered it easily. When Ramanjuan died notebooks of his remained. The notebooks contained some on the most strange identitites ever seen, mostly involving continued fractions. It is still unclear what steps Ramanjuan took to create these identities. An interesting fact, Ramanjuan found the quadtric formula at the age of 15! (not factorical  ) | 
February 1st, 2006, 06:16 PM
| | Newbie | | Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| | AL Khawarizmi I reiterate that Al-Khawarizmi, should be on the list, he is considered "the father of algebra". | 
February 1st, 2006, 07:38 PM
|  | Global Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 11,177
Country: Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,779 Times in 3,073 Posts
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by SkanderH I reiterate that Al-Khawarizmi, should be on the list, he is considered "the father of algebra". | The "father of algebra" is Diophantus of Alexandria now that is a name which I can place on that list. | 
February 1st, 2006, 08:08 PM
| | Newbie | | Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
| | the father of algebra Quote: |
Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker The "father of algebra" is Diophantus of Alexandria now that is a name which I can place on that list. | Given that the very word algebra comes form the title of Khawarizmi's book
"al-Kitāb al-mukhtasar fi hisab al-jabr wa’l-muqābalah"
al-jabr --> algebra (al-jabr is arabic for completion or correction)
I do not see how the honour goes to Diophantus instead (unless you beleive the racist rehtoric that the arabs "only" copied greek mathematics, which is flat wrong).
Mathematical historian Gandz gives this opinion of Khwarizmi's algebra:
"Khwarizmi's algebra is regarded as the foundation and cornerstone of the sciences. In a sense, Khwarizmi is more entitled to be called "the father of algebra" than Diophantus because Khwarizmi is the first to teach algebra in an elementary form and for its own sake, Diophantus is primarily concerned with the theory of numbers." S Gandz, The sources of al-Khwarizmi's algebra, Osiris, i (1936), 263-77. | 
February 1st, 2006, 11:19 PM
|  | Grand Panjandrum | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: South of England
Posts: 12,190
Country: Thanks: 770
Thanked 3,953 Times in 3,191 Posts
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by SkanderH Given that the very word algebra comes form the title of Khawarizmi's book
"al-Kitāb al-mukhtasar fi hisab al-jabr wa’l-muqābalah"
al-jabr --> algebra (al-jabr is arabic for completion or correction)
I do not see how the honour goes to Diophantus instead (unless you beleive the racist rehtoric that the arabs "only" copied greek mathematics, which is flat wrong).
Mathematical historian Gandz gives this opinion of Khwarizmi's algebra:
"Khwarizmi's algebra is regarded as the foundation and cornerstone of the sciences. In a sense, Khwarizmi is more entitled to be called "the father of algebra" than Diophantus because Khwarizmi is the first to teach algebra in an elementary form and for its own sake, Diophantus is primarily concerned with the theory of numbers." S Gandz, The sources of al-Khwarizmi's algebra, Osiris, i (1936), 263-77. | He gets my vote to go on the candidate list. I also suspect that other
Islamic candidates are missing from the list because their works are not as
well known in Europe and the Americas as they deserve.
The same must of course be true of pre 20th century Chinese and Indian
mathematicians.
RonL
__________________ Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.
Giordano Bruno
Last edited by CaptainBlack; February 1st, 2006 at 11:28 PM.
| | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:49 PM. | | |