What would their IQ be like?

File: mochizk11.jpg (155KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1024x768px

Realistically speaking, how will Mochizuki's legacy fare, say 100 years from now?

>>9024184
He will be regarded as the Gauss of the 21st century.

File: 1499288268544.jpg (32KB, 400x382px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 400x382px

>>9024174
Where is Edward Witten

File: 625_big.jpg (183KB, 640x445px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 640x445px

>>9024174
A Hobo blocks (you)r path.

t. Grigori Perelman

>>9024184
Probably not too good. It's been so many years already and his papers still aren't verified. But still, there are three cases

Case 1: Before he dies his theory is recognized as revolutionary and he gets to do a bunch of talks all over the world now triumphant and making a new for himself. So when he dies he will be a legend and remembered forever.

Case 2: He dies before anyone understands his papers but eventually someone understands them and the papers become mainstream but now the ones getting most of the credit are the people pushing the theory further and no mochizuki himself, but he still gets a mention in some books from time to time.

Case 3: He dies and his papers never go mainstream. But 100 years in the future someone independently rediscovers all of his findings but in a time where more people are able to understand them and then that guy becomes a math superstar field medalist and no one remembers Mochizuki until 500 years after when someone finds Mochizuki's blog and then edits the wikipedia page for the guy who rediscovered IUT and adds "A degenerate case of IUT was actually first discovered by japanese mathematician Shinichi Mochizuki" but then no one really reads those notes on wikipedia so no one ever remembers Mochizuki.

Case 3 is most likely.

File: tao2.jpg (18KB, 320x480px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 320x480px

>>9024174
>>9024184

t. Green–Tao theorem

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_Tao#Green.E2.80.93Tao_theorem_and_compressed_sensing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green%E2%80%93Tao_theorem

File: bog3.jpg (56KB, 328x328px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 328x328px

>>9024174
Bogdanov Twins are above them all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_and_Grichka_Bogdanoff

File: Capture.png (87KB, 542x346px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 542x346px

>>9024184
>I'm doing fine.
http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/anpi-kakunin-jouhou.html

>>9024174
every single one of them is smarter than you OP and all of them would facepalm because you were retarded enough to make such a dumb pic

>>9024227
If you could beat the shit out of one of them who would that be

>>9024274
Nye

>>9024274
galois right before his duel so he can't attend it

where is Grothendieck

>>9024284
demi-god-tier, do you not have eyes?

>>9024287
Why is Neil Degrasse Tyson "shit tier" i heard some people say he has an understanding of physics that rivals Einstein's?

that Tyson is our generation's Einstein

hmmm... interesting, thought their would be controversy with Von Neumann vs. Ramaujan's ranking

although it's probably fair to say that ultimately, Von Neumann did alot more than Ramanujan which justifies the decision

list is missing David Hilbert

as much as I admire Von Neumann and Ramanujan

Hilbert was the best mathematician of the 20th century

>>9024292
>Tyson

>there are more transcendental numbers than irrational numbers
>there are "five levels of infinity"

>>9024174
Replace Shakespeare with Boltzmann

>>9024323
the "five levels of infinity" is stupid

but isn't the first point right about the transcendental numbers

>>9024326
actually i would put Gibbs ahead of Boltzmann

>>9024331
>but isn't the first point right about the transcendental numbers
if you're talking about them as a subset of each other, yes because there are irrationals that aren't transcendental

but the conversation was about cardinalities, so no

>>9024174
Who is the Pajeet below Neumann?

File: RamanujanSrinivasa-Color300px.jpg (20KB, 300x400px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 300x400px

>>9024419
The Smartest Pajeet in History. The Mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan.

One of the 1st Pajeets which studied abroad, in UK, Trinity College, Cambridge
He lived during the British Raj (British Rule of India)

There is a Movie about this Pajeet
https://youtu.be/oXGm9Vlfx4w
>The Man Who Knew Infinity

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Knew_Infinity_(film)

>>9024174
swap pajeet and euler's spots and its perfect

>>9024219
Oh thank god, he's still okay
>>9024278
You're doing good work anon
>>9024300
Like Galois, Ramanujan died before really hitting his stride, Hardy can attest to this. If he had lived as long as Von Neumann and had proper training at an earlier age you could then make a case for him being on Von Neumann's level, same with Galois.
>>9024292
>Why is Neil Degrasse Tyson "shit tier" i heard some people say he has an understanding of physics that rivals Einstein's?
>that Tyson is our generation's Einstein
His understanding of physics is nowhere close to Einstein's, he hasn't even published anything in nearly 10 years (13 publications in total, a good post doc would have more than that).

>>9024479
ehhh

Ramanujan's story has been kind of over romanticized, mainly of course for his poverty

He was undoubtedly a brilliant mind, but alot of what he did was rediscovering already established mathematics, of course he did it with his own ingenius methods, but alot of what he did was already known.

He didn't really build a new foundation of mathematics the same way Grothendieck

I don't mean to dismiss him as a great mathematician, he certainly was, and its true that he never got to live his potential

but i just don't think the mathematics he was doing would of been seen as a game-changer

think ofd

Where's Tesla?

>>9024543
That's completely fair to say, though to the point about him rediscovering a lot of what was already known that's why I mentioned that had he had a proper education from early on he would've then learned about the results and been able to build on them, not retread old ground (though It's also important to note that many of the things he discovered were pretty important material in number theory). Also given that right after he died there was a veritable revolution in number theory I can't help but think that had he lived longer he could've participated and done amazing work.

>>9024557
I almost see Ramanujan as the Anti-Grothendieck in a way or at least the "yang" to Ramanujan's "yin

Grothendieck was focused more on the abstract, the big idea....he lacked certain technical skills (like thinking 57 was a prime) but he was still able to build a huge foundation for a new type of math

Ramanujan was the technician the man that knew how to work the operations to create beautiful ideas.. I don't really see him as focusing on the "bigger picture" but more dealing with each part of the pie with extreme concentration and skill

they had different minds, different abilities in a way

File: poincare.jpg (108KB, 620x348px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 620x348px

>>9024174
Why is my scifu Poincaré placed so low?!

>>9024607
was Poincare smart?

Why is Darwin so low?

>>9024623
Cousin fuckers lose a level

>>9024582
True, Grothendieck did say that he liked to let a problem percolate in the back of his mind until the solution became clear whereas Ramanujan got his ideas in a flurry of inspiration.

is this an iq ranking or scientist/mathematician tier ranking?

>>9024840
brainpower

>>9024853
both?

>>9024634
Einstein also married his cousin too though?

>>9024867
How fast is their brain, so IQ then.

>>9024878
isn't iq about pattern recognition

Were the hell is George Washington Carver?

he should be on that list

OK first of all, Feynman is definitely smarter than Einstein.

Also Lagrange is just "good" tier? Funny.

Maxwell is smart, but he's not on par with the other demi-gods. At least, not if we're comparing intelligence.

File: 1493854993619.png (1MB, 1464x2124px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1464x2124px

Better list imo

File: 00101.png (2MB, 1700x2324px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1700x2324px

>>9024952
HAHAHA That's actually one I made a few months ago

That image is complete garbage, judging intellect based on achievements. Why do Galois and Grothendieck rank so low, why is Tesla even there? Where is Edward? Where is Kolmogorov or Landau, Erdős?

>>9024184
If there is no significant error, it will become essential tool of higher mathematics. But first those two people who understand IUTeich have to do another miracle, finding a way to explain it to other mathematicians.

>>9024977
I keep hearing about this grothendieck, what did he even do?

>>9024174
>Musicians in the same list as scientists and mathematicians
Why?

Most of those men have the phenotype Ashkenazi women crave

>>9025009
Not much. Just made a niche bastard branch of mathematics useful to such extent that basically all modern mathematics use it. Noteworthy, he did so with amazing elegance and simplicity, almost decieving simplicity. He single-handedly transformed an almost useless theory into arguably the most influential one.

>>9025056
but didn't Grothendieck go crazy and started ranting about the devil

shouldn't that take away from his mathematical legacy in some way, for being a nut?

>>9025025 lol

>>9024174
Where the FUCK is Boltzmann

Isn't ramanujan essentially the Einstein of mathematics the greatest mathematician of the 20th century

>>9025476
Are you murican by any chance? Metaphores are obviously not a concept you understand.

>>9026523
#yesallamericans

>>9026516
Nah, not even close, he didn't make great contribution to mathematics. Nevertheless, I bet he could if he received proper education and didn't die that early. I'd call Grothendieck or Hilbert Mathematic's Einstein, the latter failed greatly with formalism(which could be something like Einstein's GR for mathematics, we have foundations crysis instead that hasn't been solved yet). Von Neumann was great without a doubt, but he could be thought of more like an applied mathematician(no one denies his contributions to pure mathematics as he was a polymath, really smart dude)

Is Mochizuki a meme or the real deal?

It boggles my mind that there is apparently nobody on earth who can process what he is doing even in these modern times.

>>9026652
i can, just have better things to do

>>9026652
>It boggles my mind that there is apparently nobody on earth who can process what he is doing even in these modern times.
Nobody on Earth can process what Deepak Chopra is saying either, that doesn't make him a genius.

>>9026652
Actually there have been a number of people who have understood his proof like Ivan Fesenko, hell they've even written introductions to the subject, thing is the field is incredibly esoteric and not many people really care enough to wad through the large amount of background material and the abstraction to really understand what's going on, part of this is because Mochizuki is being kind of a dick by not going around and explaining his new ideas like the vast majority of mathematicians do, so experts just had to decipher it themselves. Mind you this theory took Mochizuki decades to complete, seems a little unfair to blame mathematicians for taking some time since they have to figure it out themselves while doing there own research (which is their top priority). It also doesn't help that the way in which IUT is written is very nonstandard, making more difficult to read (some might think intentionally as one of his friends was able to distill some of the core ideas in a far more readable fashion after several months while Mochizuki has been working on this for years)
tl:dr most mathematicians don't have the time or desire to study and this is partly due to Mochizuki not being a team player and also weaving far too much prose where there should be math.

>>9024174
>Shrodinger

He he done anything relevant in his life apart from his quack theory about cats?

Where is Perelman ? Or Edward Witten ? They're definitely up there.

>>9026551
so this Grothendieck guy must of been the real deal, i seen him being mentioned alot here

File: the dandelion sage.jpg (202KB, 630x943px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 630x943px

>>9026851
he's a wizard.
currently in the underworld fighting the Devil

>>9024206
>his work can't be verified becouse nobody understands it
why not just ask him?

>>9024174
No Oppenheimer or Von Braun.

>>9026652
I have absolutely no clue about any of this. I don't study STEM and never have.

Can someone explain why this Nip is so highly praised? Surely this must be hyped up.

>>9024174
Where is Aquinas?

>>9027479
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-universal_Teichm%C3%BCller_theory

>>9027499
>Teichmüller

This is why I can't stand researcher-fags. Everyone is so desperate to plant their race flag. Pink says, "Newton was a genius". Pajeet says, "But Indians discovered calculus. A chink discovers something and it ends up with a pink name. You fags need to admit that your praise of all these "legends" is so racially motivated.

>>9027508
he named it that himself because it based of off Teichmüller theory

>>9024219
why does this exist? do people want to kill him?

where is george washington carver

File: 1494800702328.jpg (27KB, 565x596px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 565x596px

>one chance at life
>born a 140 IQ compsci uberbrainletto
It's not fair.

>>9024952
>>9024969
Asuka is dumb as a brick, tho.

>>9024174

Can anyone explain the supposed genius of Mozart? I know nothing about music theory or why that is a criteria of being a genius.

>>9024174
>no Noether

>>9027816
>Noether
Well, she's smart but she's no Gauss.

>>9027771
>140
At least you're not 111 like me

>>9027771
She graduated at 12

Carl Gauss is a meme

he didn't do anything important, yet many would consider him the greatest mathematician ever

IQ is a meme, and the only reason /sci/ cares about it so much is that anon can claim "muh IQ" without having any other tangible evidence of intelligence.

Also OP's tiers are fucking stupid.

>>9027771
>tfw 160 iq out of shape college dropout


iq doesn't mean jack shit

>>9027920
no they are not

von nuemann really was the one above all

>>9027929
I'm not even arguing with the Von Neumann placing. I'm referring to placing Euclid, Fermat, and Euler in different tiers. Same deal with Shakespeare, Mozart, and Beethoven. Trying to rank them all on some comprehensive list is hugely autistic.

>Has Plato, Aristotle, Goethe and Shakespeare but no Christ Jesus
t. atheist brainlet

>>9027905
>university degree in an unspecified field
>doesn't seem tech savvy or interested in anything STEM-related
>is still in high school
>understands jackshit about how the geofront and/or evangelions work (doesn't know her mother is in the robot, despite even basic nerv tekkies knowing)
>doesn't listen to music
>doesn't draw
>doesn't read or write
>doesn't understand psychology
Doesn't make sense. It's probably some supr speshul robot piloting degree or some other pleb shit

Ramujan was a genius, but I doubt he could beat Tesla or Archimedes.

Also where is Copernicus, Swedenborg, and John Stuart Mill?

>>9024431
Nice, finally a decent curry man

>>9027948
>no Jésus
His scientific and philosophical work was quite narrow overall, pal

so who would most mathematicians say was "greater"

Grothendieck or Ramanujan?

>No Sagan anywhere

As conceited as Isaac Asimov was, he said there were two men outright smarter than he was, one being Carl Sagan

>>9024174
>Shakespeare rated at the same level as the likes of Tesla and Da Vinci
>above a bunch of great physicists including freaking Einstein

Top fucking kek. Who made that terribad ranking, was it you op?

>>9027925
>tfw when you have low iq, then lie about your iq so that the claim that iq is meaningless (made for you to feel good about yourself) gains credibility, all on a mongoloid basket dance board.

javascript:quote('9029405');

In terms of native talent, no one surpasses Ramanujan except Euler.

In terms of overall mathematical accomplishment (after Euler of course) perhaps Hilbert.

>>9027777

Because nowadays, being a Classical Pianist means you play stuff written by others. Back then, it meant you wrote your own damn music.

Tesla is way overhyped.

He wasn't even a fucking scientist. He was a fucking engineer. And he didn't do anything that any other engineer wouldn't have done in his shoes. It's not like we wouldn't have figured out how to build a grid without Tesla.

>>9029639
so Hilbert has greater accomplishments than Ramanujan

>>9027917
Stfu stupid nigger without gauss statistics would be only used for calculating probability of coin tosses

>>9024184
>retard tier

>>9027920
If IQ is a meme then so is the theory of evolution and climate change. You don't get to conveniently pick your facts anon.

>>9024431
Literally who? What has he done for science? I know none of his works. Also, that film looks like some SJW race mixing propaganda like all other neo-Hollywood shit

Also, when there's a billion of you, there's just bound to be a smart one eventually. One that doesn't shit on the street and worships animal gods