Mathematician/STEM'ers with superhuman intelligence

Alexander Grothendieck

>It's still impressive, but I think stories of him (and many others) have been vastly over blown.
Whoa you're a brainlet.

nah hes right, fag

actually I think it went more like
>Hardy mentions 1729
>pajeet mumbles something in his beard that this number came up in some high school exercise problem
>few days later
>found the odd-numbered exercise, solutions says it's *that* number!

Agreed. These are very "deep" thinkers

>Since then I've had the chance, in the world of mathematics that bid me welcome, to meet quite a number of people, both among my "elders" and among young people in my general age group, who were much more brilliant, much more "gifted" than I was. I admired the facility with which they picked up, as if at play, new ideas, juggling them as if familiar with them from the cradle—while for myself I felt clumsy, even oafish, wandering painfully up an arduous track, like a dumb ox faced with an amorphous mountain of things that I had to learn (so I was assured), things I felt incapable of understanding the essentials or following through to the end. Indeed, there was little about me that identified the kind of bright student who wins at prestigious competitions or assimilates, almost by sleight of hand, the most forbidding subjects.

these are grothendieck's words so I don't think he belongs in this category

Even if he wasn't the fastest, that does not take away from his accomplishments. Really shows how "genius" is less important than many think.

as a non-genius, non-brainlet, this gives me hope

plus.maths.org/content/ramanujan. He knew 1729 because he had been working on it.

AG was a genius. He suffered from Dunning–Kruger effect.

He did fail exams and nobody really thought he showed any aptitude for mathematics though.

...

black science lady

IQ: -1/12

he wasn't even recognized during undergrad lmao

Expect people who take Ramanujan's work seriously aren't beta faggots

>too based to even subconsciously spend a bit of brain power on gay math competitions
ahaha math olympiad fags BTFO

scribd.com/doc/233602815/Barnetts-Identity-Pdf1
I know you're memeing but he really is above einstein

you mean imposter syndrome or whatever? that quote doesnt sound like dk to me

Sounds like to me you cannot read in-between the lines and take things very literally, which is normal for autist.

Since you are autistic what this means is AG didn't give credit to himself, he saw himself as dumber than he was. Perelman said something similar about himself, doesn't negate the fact they were/are geniuses.

Inferior mathematicians early opinion of him and his failure of exams has no meaning when it comes to the mathematical research he did. Sorry you are so feeble minded. Same thing happened with Smale.

is this real? if it is what fucking loser for naming a near trivial re-derivation of a known identity after himself.

Actually wait never mind I've been memed

You, my son.

"If I see farther it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants."

No one has superhuman intelligence. All of these men had good professors, good parents, good discipline and motivation, etc.

This is one of the largest myths of the western world that has to die. No one does things alone. All the work of scientists and even ordinary people is built on communities and cooperative goals.

Sometimes I wonder to what degree they're cognitively different from the rest, and how they think. Do they process information in a fundamentally different way, or just quicker? Did they get as far as they did by sheer force of intelligently applied will and a bunch of luck, or are they simply superior form birth and circumstance?

There's so many arguments and counter-arguments for both sides that I don't know what to think of it anymore, I simply hope for the best and try to reach their level.

"If I have seen farther than others, it's because I'm knee-deep in dwarfs"
Sure people cooperate... but some of them are dwarfs. The giants guide and lead the research, the dwarfs just assist and follow along.

>dwarfs

A shortage of dwarfs

>dwarfs

How is it superhuman if they were just human?

Richard Feynman
he surely is high above average. In addition to his high perfomance in mathematics and physics, he was also a brilliant instructor. His teaching strategy concentraded on understanding the principles and applying them in experiments. This was quiet a new system to the general population.

i would have written that if i were so eloquent. my feels exactly

Kek
Took me a second

>these are grothendieck's words so I don't think he belongs in this category
You're a moron.

>Grothendieck had very few books; rather than learning things by reading, he would try to reconstruct them on his own. And he worked very hard.
>A general theory of duality for locally convex spaces had to be worked out: Schwartz and I [Dieudonné writes [9]]had started its study for Fréchet spaces and their direct limits, but we had met a series of problems we could not solve. We therefore proposed them to Grothendieck, and the result turned out to exceed our most sanguine expectations. In less than a year, he had solved all our problems by very ingenious new constructions; then, with the techniques he had developed, he started to work on many other questions in functional analysis.
www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Grothendieck.html

He was an absolute beast.
Who cares if he wasn't good at math competitions.
He was trained himself to become a deep thinker, not a competition monkey.
Think about trackers and distance runners.
You don't have to be as fast as Von Neumann to be an outstanding mathematician.

>He was
He had.

He had an absolute beast?

>He was trained himself
He had trained himself

Sorry I had too much caffeine and I can't think straight.