All the low-hanging fruits of science and mathematics have already been discovered. You've got to work a hundred times as hard as Newton to get a hundredth of the fame.
>>17009517To get the fame.........Fidna fame yo
>>17009517Since I know this conclusion was made from years of analysis involving countless lab techs, please publish under "Anonymous et al"
>>17009517People don't do science for fame, if you wanted fame you would just go into industry and become rich instead. If you want fame and still decide to pursue science then don't worry you were never going to become famous anyways.
>>17009521sounds like cope for not being famous
>>17009517>The mind of a Jew, always transacting always trying to establish a reputation. If he thinks he can a nickel, he goes for a dime.
>>17009526"Giving tree", *&* "taking Jew"."That which your right hand takes."Because they have two right hands. One takes what is offered...the other takes what is left.
>>17009517OK, and? You also get to enjoy all those discoveries which is pretty cool. Do you think Newton would rather live back then or now? He would rather live now, purely because of everything he could learn.
>>17009517Correct, and anything else is cope. Although I don't think lack of fame is the problem, but lack of progress.
>>17009517The AI runs over the area with a giant Roomba anyway for the low-hanging fruit. But I hear next season they will have crop pickers.
What would Newton be if he was alive now? Probably a Trucel.
>>17009517>If I were alive during newtons time I'd have beaten him to the punch Lol. Lmao even. These were not "low hanging fruit" if the only people capable of grabbing them were literal one in a billion geniuses. This is a phrase egomaniacal faggots coin when they amount to failures. Plot twist: if they were alive in newtons time they'd say all those previous guys like Archimedes and Galileo grabbed the low hanging fruit and left them nothing.
Not even close lmao. This board is filled with pseuds
Walking into a thread, replying to a post without saying which post, is like walking into a supermarket, jerking off and shouting fuck you while pointing in a random direction.
>>17009590This.>all those amazing discoveries by absolute geniuses were akshually obvious in retrospect, I totally would've figured them outI really can't believe people tell themselves stuff like this. I've actually been seeing this "low-hanging fruit" statement a lot lately and it seems to be said by the uninspired and unimaginative coping with the fact that they simply lack the brains or inspiration to make even the slightest impact. How would you even possibly know if everything's been "picked?" It's not a conclusion reached through leveled analysis, but pure ego, which partly indicates why the people who say it are just not good scientists.
>>17009517You're supposed to stand on their shoulders to reach the higher fruit....Duh
>>17009529QM would break Newton's brain.
Newton was also known for sending counterfeiters to the gallows to be executed. Maybe you could expand on that aspect of his work.
actually modern people are more lazy, rather more scattered, things are not harder, but they are more complicated, discoveries take more time, needing more discipline,
>>17009608This may not be common knowledge on reddit, but usually it's assumed that you're replying to the op by default
>>17009517All of these famous names from the past are simply normal, run-of-the-mill autists who were never subjected to modern public schooling. The purpose of modern public schooling is literally to "nip" little geniuses in the bud to prevent them from upsetting the current status quo. Some pitiful few geniuses do slip through on occasion despite everything society does to alienate and absorb them, but they are like occasional shooting stars when what we should be seeing is a whole firmament of stars. We should be inundated with geniuses and titans whose names would go on to reverberate. We're living in the world where business majors and finance-bros have just decided to identify up-and-coming Isaac Newtons and get them on personality-shredding psychotropic medications and then put their names on secret unofficial blacklists on various human resources contract companies. Oh, yes!
>>17009775>The purpose of modern public schooling is literally to "nip" little geniuses in the budno, not even close you lil schizo lol
>>17009622But there are way more people now and much more have access to education. There has to be many more Newton level geniuses now due to shear quantity. Although, despite this it feels like it takes more people or technology to make less progress. I'm just some layman so can you explain this? Are we just putting the old guys on a pedestal? Are their individuals today making as much progress as they did that aren't being recognized?
>>17009794>more people or technology to make less progressWhat? I can't tell if you're joking or not. Go to arxiv or bioarxiv and look at the last week of preprints, there is more novel math, physics, and biological research there than you could possibly understand in a lifetime. This is undoubtedly the most scientifically active period in human history thus far
>>17009517Newton didn't even eat his own damned apple. If he did he would have realized that the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (which links integration and differentiation as inverse operations) applies to ALL change and as such is a phenomenological and metaphysical principle.This failure has everything to do with the required conceptual framework to understand this not being substantially present in Newton's time. Western philosophy and thought has historically privileged permanence and timelessness since the Greeks, who totally missed discovering calculus because of their permanence obsession. This is confirmed by hundreds of years of intellectual badasses who have failed to truly understand calculus. The 20th century saw a shift in the sciences from substance models of phenomenon (The Cartesian-Newtonian clockwork universe) to modeling in terms of systems that has made thinking about calculus in its true totality easier.
>>17009794I realized recently that good science is actually a creative endeavor fueled by intelligence of course but also passion, curiosity, and critical thinking. When people say there is more education and technology today so there should be more groundbreaking discoveries it seems similar to saying that people are more educated today so there should be more great novels; but since there aren't, all the good stories must have been told by now. Science of course differs in that there is probably a finite amount of knowledge as opposed to stories, but I think the capacity for great art and great science both require some intangible qualities that for whatever reasons modernity isn't as capable as cultivating in people. I rarely see scientists challenge paradigms; rather, the name of the game seems to be taking an existing paradigm and just incrementally collecting finer and finer data using advanced technology, hoping an algorithm spits out something profound.
>>17009590>>17009622No scientific discovery is fundamentally different today, there isn't some symmetry between Archimedes's and Newton's times and Newton's and our times. Newton was at the forefront of creating the scientific method itself, which was a tool that allowed for systematic analysis of the natural world.This way of thinking is summed up in this quote: "I have not as yet been able to discover the reason for these properties of gravity from phenomena, and I do not feign hypotheses. For whatever is not deduced from the phenomena must be called a hypothesis; and hypotheses, whether metaphysical or physical, or based on occult qualities, or mechanical, have no place in experimental philosophy. In this philosophy particular propositions are inferred from the phenomena, and afterwards rendered general by induction"Newton was able to describe how gravity worked without being bogged down in the why. Then this method was applied to all sorts of things, with mathematical rigor, and all the low fruits fell. There simply isn't an equivalent priority shift that could occur now that would suddenly open up the world to analysis like the scientific revolution did. We have known unknowns, like dark matter, and we know it would take an exorbitant amount of time and money to even attempt to study them. We have pushed our selves to the limit, the only way forward is technological breakthroughs with physics we already know, to then study new fundamental physics.
>>17009522>laughs in Perelman
>>17009841Most breakthroughs since Newton have included explanations of the why. Newton or Einstein today would likely be looking at the irreconcilability of our physical models and proposing alternate frameworks rather than stubbornly clinging to an imperfect way and insisting it's the only way.
>>17009517there are still low hanging fruits in experimental physics/chemistry/engineering. You are mostly just trying out ideas from the 60s etc. with modern tools and it works very well due to increased control and precision. See example neural networks simple concept has been around for a long time but only modern hardware could truly harness it.
>>17009771owned
>>17009771depends on the the board and/or general
>>17010030This, the science industry is no longer focused on discovering new models but on incrementally improving current ones. This is more economical because discovering a new model that actually works and bringing its precision and predictive power up to speed with the current paradigms is a huge endeavor, but with enough energy and motivation it will surely be done again in the future.Maybe we can expect AI to attack problems this way if it pans out and changes up the economics of intelligence.
>>17009780He has a point. Shut up and listen to him.
>>17009841>>17010030This. For example relativity is treated like the Bible by physicists. But it's exactly what holds them back.
>>17009529Nah modern newton would be a fucking OF simp gooning 24/7, dude was a virgin with no outlet
>>17009517>You've got to work a hundred times as hard as Newton to get a hundredth of the fame.I seriously doubt any scientist is working as hard as Newton
reminder that newton wrote principia mathematica during the bubonic plague when he put himself on lockdown. each and every single one of you had the same opportunity newton did during your 2021 lockdown, and what did you do with it? nothing. because you're not the genius you think you are.
>>17010030At the level of the fundamental physics, there really isn't a "why", there will probably always be unknowns no matter how far we dig. Newtonian gravity was cutting edge fundamental physics, and Newton described it without explaining why masses produced gravity. Same thing happened with electricity, the whys got filled in later after the phenomena were described. This was all thanks to the scientific method. When Einstein created special relativity, you can draw parallels to today with how at the time they were struggling to reconcile mechanics with electromagnetism, like how we are struggling with QM (really QFT) and GR. So he created a new model with a few basic postulates and over time it was tested and proven. The problem with this comparison is that to test any new model that combines QFT and GR, it would require energy levels we simply can't produce yet, and extreme cost to create the devices needed. String theory, loop quantum gravity, etc, etc all that shit ARE people trying to be Einstein and reconcile different models. But currently it's just busy work until there can be experiments done. This is the point of low hanging fruit, even if you make a model in your room all by yourself, and even if it somehow correct, no one can prove it. Way back in Newtons time the theorists could do experiments in their room, then it moved to shops and labs, and then those labs got more and more advanced until now the most cutting edge equipment (like the LHC) is worth billions of dollars. >>17010071Plenty of physicists have tried to create new, deeper theories. Hell I would say the large major of physicists think GR needs to be reconciled with QFT, rather than the other way around. But without the ability to do meaningful tests, all these models are just math. That's why it's a high up fruit, you can't just go to the leaning tower of pisa anymore and drop shit off to discover mass
>>17009517theres still a lot of low hanging fruit left its just being cloaked
>>17010311Unknown unknowns aren't low hanging fruit
>>17010313Known unknowns that can easily be found are, and there are plenty of those
>>17010381The current known unknowns require technology we currently don't have, and which would require an absurd amount of money to create. It's an experimental problem
>>17009529>"Why are there hindoo outside of my quarters selling buckets of vomit?"
>>17010384Are you pretending to be someone from the 1950s? Genome and bulk transcriptome sequencing is comically cheap making GWAS possible, scrna-seq is done by every half decent lab now, cryo-em is cheap, crispr lets you do gene knockout and knockin experiments for cheap even on non-model organisms. Stop pretending to be retarded and get to work
>>17010386>Bio I'm not talking about biology retard. "Low hanging fruit" is almost always in relation to fundamental physics and sometimes mathematics
>>17010449Then say "fundamental physics research", I'm not a mindreader. There is an ungodly amount of low-hanging fruit in almost every single scientific field and breakthroughs are constantly happening. Maybe in a century most of the low-hanging fruit will have actually been picked, but by then technology will have improved too.
>>17010454Low hanging fruit is that which AI surfaces through context cross products less than order n.
When you have AI at your disposal, high-hanging fruit becomes low-hanging fruit.
>>17010083>during the bubonic plagueI didn't know Isaac Newton lived in the 1300s
>>17009590you have to admit that "an apple will fall from a tree to the ground" seems like it's pretty obvious and it's amazing nobody discovered that until newton. i think i could have figured it out t b h
>>17012290https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Plague_of_London
>>17009590Except Hooke and Leibniz also discovered many of the same things Newton did. So yeah, OP is right. Once the right conditions are met in a civilization, then basic scientific theories can emerge in that environment.>Plot twist: if they were alive in newtons time they'd say all those previous guys like Archimedes and Galileo grabbed the low hanging fruit and left them nothing.Discoveries from Early Modern scientists like Newton lead us to space in a few centuries. The same cannot be said by some ancient genius like Archimedes.>>17009775Public schooling didn't even exist for most of the world in the 1700s. Most people in premodern times with superb intelligence used that for agriculture, business, warfare, or religious matters. In fact Newton was very close to becoming a farmer if his uncle didn't keep him in school.
>>17009775>>17012428>Public schooling didn't even exist for most of the world in the 1700s.Yeah that's why they discovered so much during that time period and birthed the modern world, then they mentally shackled everyone with mass state indoctrination and you got 2 world wars and total materialist nihilism causing monstrosities.Being allowed to think for yourself without big brother breathing down your neck was too dangerous and produced too much wealth, discovery, happiness and freedom for the plebs so they banned it and forced you into the schule box.I hope we can immediately learn from the millions dead that mass state indoctrination caused and return to private decentralized education voluntarily engaged in like the Greeks did. Then being knowledgeable and having understanding can once again be respected in society and cause human flourishing.
>>17012473>like the Greeks didi.e enslave a third of your population, have most children work 12 hours a day in the fields, have the majority of your population be illiterate, and limit higher education to a tiny group of elites, just in case anyone can't read between the lines
>>17012494That was a virtual utopia 3000 years ago you absolute fucking idiot, you'd be lucky if someone taught you to read let alone establish an entire stone building solely for the purpose of education and geometry.Stupid communist pro-ignorance moron, I am pro voluntary education for elite clubs and pro excluding barbarian knowledge destroyers like you.
>>17012545>entire stone building solely for the purpose of education and geometrye.g. a modern school>for elite clubsYou would not be an elite. You would either be a slave or, if you're lucky, a barely-literate member of the middle class>barbarianWe're both barbarians, english is a germanic language
>>17012473No, it's more like, most people were too busy surviving, but the few that could focus on very abstract topics were able to get educated and come up with shit like gravity or invent steam engines. And ever since the Industrial Revolution, the masses have been educated and brought us exponential growth since then. Just compare the world from 1600-1800 to 1800-2000.It's literally why I said earlier a lot of premodern intelligence was used for agriculture, business, warfare, or religious matters. Since that was directly connected to survival. But now since everyone is educated those intelligent people can use their minds for engineering, medicine, or scientific research. Rather than figuring how to survive the next winter or the best fortification against the barbarians.
>>17012545if you think ancient greece was a utopia, then you're an idiot who deserves to live in ancient greece.
>>17012553>>17012606>>17012644Whatever pseuds, education will be decentralized by AI whether you like it or not, humanity will flourish whether you like it or not, the ideology of the early 20th century will be destroyed whether you like it or not, us philosopher elites from all walks of life will make sure your soul crushing anti-life technocracy is humiliatingly defeated and we are proud of it.
>>17009517>fameBruh there are objectively better fields for indulging in homosexual faggotry.
>>17009517Idc about fame I want knowledge I crave more
>>17009517Intelligence and technology and engineering are all S-curves, but "heckin love science" won't ever see it.>There simply can't be diminishing returns on human progress!
>>17012802>technology is an S-curve
