Most influential/impactful scientist post-Newton?

File: Leonhard_Euler.jpg (108KB, 461x602px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 461x602px

Euler

http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Euler.html

>>8810708
this is a good answer

its a good question op, but note this is subject to change over time

some branch of maths that may seem irrelevant today could be inadvertently laying the groundwork for a paradigm shift 100 years from now.

>>8810708
Euler is my favourite mathematician, but was he a scientist? Did he ever do some empirical work?

>>8810729
That's sort of regardless to the question in the OP.

Meaningful conclusions drawn from empirical data can only arise if there is some language that can communicate that data as implicative of these conclusions. That statement is borderline recursive, but I'll assume you understand the point I'm trying to make.

That can come about through one of two ways, out of necessity for lack of a framework with which to translate data to meaningful conclusion, or through the use of a previously existent framework which will work for said data.

If we've been able to make many important conclusions from a specific mathematician's framework, I'd argue that they are, at some arbitrary level, responsible for those conclusions.

>>8810729
I don't know if he did experiments but he did mathematical physics (physics was not separated from math then after all).

easily james maxwell

newton>maxwell>einstein

>>8810729
Navier-stokes for fluids are a generalisation for the euler equations with viscosity

he also did some work with solid state physics (some torque equations bear his name)

>>8810705
You all know it was Darwin. Just say Darwin, and we can all go home.

File: motl_16.jpg (87KB, 487x650px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 487x650px

>>8810705
motl

any other answer is just a meme

>>8810705
For math probably Hilbert, Weyl, or Grothendieck. I'm not sure about how influential von Neumann actually was because people here mostly push his intelligence.

For physics it'll definitely be one of the pioneers of quantum in the early 20th century. My vote goes to Dirac.

File: frvkrkgvrg.jpg (36KB, 460x306px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 460x306px

How is this even a question? witen...

>>8810705
>Who has propelled science and mathematics in general further than anyone else?

Willard Gibbs. His genius was peerless.

>>8810789
He was a founder of modern Biology but according to /sci/ life sciences are not sciences because they are not solving math problems every day.

Einstein

Contributed to so many fields in physics and worked with many different people.

File: haberflow.gif (10KB, 394x281px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 394x281px

>>8810705
From practical point of view, it's either John Maxwell, who unified the theorems on electric forces and magnetism, providing the bedrock for all modern invention that involves electricity or it's Fritz Haber of the Haber processes who invented the way to fixate non bioavailable N2 from air into ammonia (fertilizer) providing the path for industrial revolution on human agriculture and allowing the Earth to sustain billions of people. Back in the day you need to use animal shit and natural soil overturning for fertilizer, but these days fertilizer are so cheap because of Haber processes.

However Fritz Haber is kind of buried on the wayside because he's also a Nazi scientist

>>8812591
Haber was born to a jewish family and left germany after hitler's rise to power. He's hated because of his involvement in germany's chemical weapons program during the FIRST world war.

>>8812599
Oh yeah sorry I take it back, I remembered incorrectly.

However he's still the inventor of chemical weapons

Faraday