In another word, who solved more problems than another couldn't solve???

 

Maybe unmeasurable, who is the smartest??

 

Albert

they were from two different eras, comparision doesnt make ssense... but what the heck... i'd go with newton... cos he develped the important part of maths known as calculus and he did other stuff, which einstein cannot touch.

as bloodhound said; they developed different things in different eras and are therefore hard to compare.

 

why is this in 'astronomy and cosmology' section?

I'd go for Newton as the better scientist and Einstein as the nicer human.

why is this in 'astronomy and cosmology' section?

well spotted, I never noticed either (must be the Christmas Cheer *Hic*)

moved now.

 

as for the question, HOW do you Quantify something like that?

Newtons worked with a wider variety of subjects. From Gravity to Optics to Calculus. He did a lot of research on the human body as well, especially with the eyes. Einstien proved some of Newton's Theorys wrong, but does that mean he's a better scientist? I don't know.

from what i understand from reading hawkings the universe in a nutshell, einstein would be nowhere without equations and theories from other great physicists.

Newtons worked with a wider variety of subjects. From Gravity to Optics to Calculus. He did a lot of research on the human body as well, especially with the eyes. Einstien proved some of Newton's Theorys wrong, but does that mean he's a better scientist? I don't know.

 

dont know about einstien proving newton wrong, i would rephrase that as "newtons being a specific case of einsteins" or "eintein expanded newton"

from what i understand from reading hawkings the universe in a nutshell, einstein would be nowhere without equations and theories from other great physicists.

 

yeah, maybe, but we wouldnt be anywhere without einstien so we are all helping each other really.

haha, what about pauling? schrodinger?

who was it that said something about "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants"?

 

eitherway, that`s what most all of them have done, and each one reaching a little higher every time

who was it that said something about "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants"?

 

eitherway' date=' that`s what most all of them have done, and each one reaching a little higher every time [/quote']

 

Newton said that. But yeah, you cannot compare these two people who lived in such different times.

i supose science is really about sharing information in a way, otherwise we wouldnt be anywhere without colaboration. but think about how many people in the world know the equation e=mc2, but they dont know what it means, nevermind what it stands for.

Newton said it of Hooke, but he was being sarcastic. Hooke had a malformed posture.

cos he develped the important part of maths known as calculus

 

So did Liebniz.

This is sort of off-topic, but there's a great exhibit on Newton at the New York Public Library. It has original manuscripts, diagrams, art all about Newton. If you get a chance, I highly recomend all to go see it.

how come new york has that stuff? i thought england should have the originals.

 

jakiri: unfortunately this is not a eintstein vs newton vs liebniz thread

I'm pretty sure they're on loan.

here: http://www.nypl.org/research/newton/

but oh well, dont know...

 

If you go to here: http://www.time.com/time/time100/

 

What can you say about Einstein?

The reason he won this distinction is because he was the first scientist/celebrity. He was idolized and was a symbol of the era. He was asked to be the president of a country! He was better liked then Newton, he was more absent-minded and lovable. His crazy hair, peircing eyes and smile made him the perfect man to embody science.

 

But does this mean he was a smarter person or better scientist? I don't think anyone can give a conclusive, objective answer.

jakiri: unfortunately this is not a eintstein vs newton vs liebniz thread

 

I never suggested that it was; merely that Einstein's work was revolutionary, whereas Newton's most used piece of work was replicated at the same time.

 

And of course that we use Leibniz's notation (I always spell his name wrong first time round).

nope.... newtons definition of a fluxion or "derivative " was more rigorous than libniz's. liebniz used the vauge concept of "infinitesimals", while newton had the precise form in terms of limits...

 

yes lebniz's notation is more superior, but newton has more substance.

nope.... newtons definition of a fluxion or "derivative " was more rigorous than libniz's. liebniz used the vauge concept of "infinitesimals"' date=' while newton had the precise form in terms of limits...

 

yes lebniz's notation is (blagh) but newton has more substance.[/quote']

 

That doesn't change either of the facts that it was replicated, and this comparison is rather silly.

 

more superior

 

Most excellent!

Classical age of physics is the period before 1900, which Newton took the lead. But after 1900 which is the modern physics Einstein took the lead.

 

Newtwon=Einstein