Which deceased mathematician would make the greatest contributions to modern mathematics if they were magically resurrected and allowed to study all of the discoveries that were made after their death?
>Archimedes
>Leibniz
>Euler
>Gauss
>Ramanujan
>Von Neumann
>Other
Galois or Green.
Grothendieck, he just died recently so he'd still be up to date.
His autism would hinder him from doing mathematics though.
>one of the best and most prolific mathematicians of recent times
>his autism would hinder him from doing mathematics
surely you know he spent the last years of his life eating dandelion soup, battling the devil and wondering what is the definition of a metre
Considering he's being resurrected I assume we're talking pre-dementia Grothendieck
57
hillbert
>Newton not on list
>can't into fluxions
I recommend Euler, bcoz resurrect him with
sight restored, show him Internet porn, tell him
"all this is yours, merely solve these Clay
Millennial problems."
Neither. They would all be masturbating to porn like we do.
None of them. Math has already developed past the point where one genius can make significant contributions in "all of math". There are already math geniuses working that are 10x as smart as any of those listed, so bringing any of them back won't really change anything. Maybe just disappoint.
>one genius can make significant contribution
...so there is no Perelman?
look at my four next words after the quote
Gauss.
t. college freshman
Pure math is pretty pointless these days. Bring back the god of applied math.
Applied math must be the confiest of job, you learn all the cool math stuff and apply it on a wide range of subject, which gives you even more idea for your mathematics.
"I've got 6 million dollars for pornography now, woohoo! Got any more of those millennium problems?"
If you don't think von Neumann you got some learning to do.
Archimedes, Gauss, Galois, Euler would be equal.
Galois would probably be the most groundbreaking one. He had a totally unique way of thinking.
>resurrect a great classical mathematician
>introduce him to set """theory""" and """real""" numbers
>he kills himself
>there are current geniuses smarter than any of those
kek who? mochizuki?
We should dig up their bones and clone them from their dna.
Problem with modern aproach in mathematical problems is the following: since the foundations of mathematics that took place in early twenties, we have no more room for original thought as it was the case until late nineteenth century. So any of these geniuses would be useless since they wouldn't follow common thought.
Imagine if Plato was born today
>Any other answer than Gallois
Godel
Archimedes perhaps even plato
Newton probably would be interesting
has to be neumann
>my four next words
...were nonsense, therefore ignored.
>newton resurected
>because he's raised in modern times he realizes religion is bullshit
>devotes all his time to math and science
>invents super calculus
> thinks calculus is advanced math
> is a fedora
> must be an engineer
That oiler guy is mad stoopstoop
>Ramanujan
No disrespect to this guy, but what did he contribute to math other than pi equations? His work in number theory seems pretty useless desu
>newton resurrected
>because he's raised in modern times he realizes religion is bullshit
Living in modern times wouldn't change a thing because he'd still live in seclusion
Gotta go with von Neumann or Archimedes. They were each way - W A Y - ahead of peers and no reason to think they wouldn't be again. I'd even toss Feynmann on this list before some of these clowns. I wish Galois had lived longer so we'd know if he'd had more than one good idea.
I don’t understand how this comment is constructive, or encourages the reader to think more deeply about anything. It appears to me that this comment’s only purpose is to display the cleverness of the author. Unfortunately, despite the collective efforts of the commentariate, we do get infiltration from those who are apparently determined to give the impression that they are incapable of parsing an entire piece of writing and reading it as a whole.
As has been previously noted (regular readers will be aware) we (that’s the “Royal we” — fellow commenters, occasional contributors such as myself and the moderator team) are engaged in an ongoing attempt to keep the quality of comments at its former impeccably high standard. Sadly, this is more of an effort than it should be.
And as a scientist, it is rather tiresome having to try to explain to the occasional numpty who happens across a post basic reading comprehension skills, how to follow an argument when it is constructed long-form and the ability to master data interpretation.
And I’ve just caught up on all the subsequent comments on this page. All the other commenters have managed to make coherent and intelligible contributions that furthered my understanding or gave me something to think about, because they took the trouble to type more than a single sentence. I don’t agree with everything that’s been said in other comments. Quite the opposite in a couple of cases. But at least I understand what was expressed and the intention behind it.
von neumann was simply the greatest german mathematician ever
>Ramanujan
>what did he contribute to math
Lrn2number-theory fgt pls
Read the entire post next time, faggot
calculus is basic shite
super calculus isn't
>what did he contribute to math other than pi equations?
He's a meme.
To this day he motivates pajeets to study CS
Ramanujan did insane feats of mathematical wizardry, but because of his education he didn't learn what mathematics is really all about, and instead just came up with autistic identities all day.
If he was raised in Europe he probably would have been a prolific problem solver, like Erdos.
That's how you start a war
I agree, fuck the quest for purity.
Archimedes. His ideas are still relevant today. Law of the lever = Virtual work principle.
Group theory functional analysis representation theory would all be within his domain. He had an eye for symmetries.
The dead can't be magically resurrected, worthless thread.
Come help me out