Source : « The Great Scientists: From Euclid to Stephen Hawking », from John Farndon

I.d.k. why i thought that Euclid, and perhaps also others, were around Plato or before, just wanted to share, what a time.

B.t.w., we know about ChatGPT, some about Sam Altman, but nothing about the researchers, and the same goes for every other technology, it’s a choice of society 🤷(, causes&consequences).

Edit : Transcript :

All the same, if anyone wanted a proper education, Alexandria in Egypt was the place to go, and here Archimedes went as a young man.
At the time he was there, the city was the greatest centre of learning in the ancient world. Although the museum or university there was barely 20 years old – the city itself had been founded by Alexander the Great just half a century earlier – it already held an unrivalled library, containing at least 100,000 scrolls, including all of Aristotle’s priceless personal collection.
It was here that the great Euclid taught geometry, that Aristarchus showed that the Earth revolved around the Sun, and that Hipparchus made the first great catalogue of constellations, categorizing stars in terms of their brightness. And it was here that, much later, Ptolemy wrote the Almagest, the most influential book about the nature of the universe for 1,500 years.
Euclid was probably dead by the time Archimedes was there, but Archimedes undoubtedly met Eratosthenes, the brilliant thinker who measured the circumference of the world to within 4 per cent of modern figures, and made a measurement of the year’s length as precise as any until barely half a century ago.

Edit : Now that i think about it, conquering Persia&Egypt&… probably helped them in developing these knowledges/sciences

  • soumerd_retardataire@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
    0·
    1 month ago

    It’s much more so the work you do that’s important, not the idea itself.

    Yes and no, i’m not talking about technicians(, even though in a team of technicians there’s still some persons better than the average), but about scientists emiting theories, there’s a reason why theorems or units of measures have the name of a person, and the book cited in the selftext is another justification : some scientists are known in their field for being important(, some are important/known mostly because of their positions, but others because of their groundbreaking ideas/discoveries).
    But sure, it’s a teamwork, only in a few fields such as mathematics can you find a lone person who can attribute h.er.im.self all the merit. If that’s your point then it’s compatible with mine, and i’ll agree that a team in which one believes to be superior to the others makes a poor team.

    As for the other argument, i don’t want to have someone good at that kind of performance, i’m not talking about entertainment but about someone passionate about h.er.is field of study, who cares if s.he is in front lf the camera for the first&last time of h.er.is life, it could eventually be prepared beforehand, but i’m not talking about the guests invited by Lex Friedman, such as Neil deGrasse Tyson or other popularizer/showmen, they may be scientists as well but i wasn’t talking about them.