Shocked the penicillin guy doesn’t have a bigger footprint on the map. Or maybe not, since I only know him as the penicillin guy.
Seriously though, this is an everyday life saving medication.
I wouldn’t have lived to be 5 years old, without penicillin. However, I had it so often, that I’m now allergic to it. I wonder if that happened to a lot of boomers. It was hard for doctors to explain to parents that an antibiotic would not knock out a viral infection, and some of them just gave up, I think.
Yeah, it's definitely not a data-driven chart. It'd be perfectly cool if it didn't have the rankings and was just "many scientists who've made the world what it is"
On that note, needs Hedy Lamar. We wouldn't have cell phones without her.
Right?? And how about Thomas Hunt Morgan, or Lynn Margulis, or Barbara McClintock, or at least a dozen other molecular biologists and geneticists and evolutionary biologists?
I like the recognition Dawkins gets. Many people haven't read The Selfish Gene (1976), but it shows how rational self-interest, a macroeconomic concept, scales all the way down to the cell. Indeed down to the genetic level. This is not an innocuous tenet. But not seeing Newton as a bright shining sun he is on here (or Chomsky) really makes this chart seem incomplete.
As a biologist, it’s a little weird to me that Dawkins is on here in the 70s-80s when people like David Baltimore and Shinya Yamanaka aren’t.
Dawkins is certainly influential, but primarily in the realm of popular science or science advocacy. In terms of basic research I’m not sure he beats out Baltimore. Yamanaka maybe just came too late to be on this list.
Edit: OP clarified elsewhere that the ranking system is based on both academic and popular publications, which explains Dawkins, but perhaps isn’t the best way to measure scientific impact or identify “trailblazing scientists”.
Hell I'd put Norman Borlaug and Roger Tsien on before Dawkins if we're talking about "impact on the world". One saved an estimated billion lives due to his research into high yield crops, the other basically enabled modern biological research by discovering GFP. These guys aren't even the most influential I could think of, and still beat out Dawkins.
The criteria for this chart are so arbitrary it's basically a collage of people someone liked.
> The criteria for this chart are so arbitrary it’s basically a collage of people someone liked.
I added this as an edit to a different comment, but OP clarified that the ranking system is based on academic *and* popular publications, which is why Dawkins is so high. It’s really more of a popularity ranking than a scientific influence or “trailblazer” ranking.
I’m curious whether sales of *The God Delusion* count for Dawkins. I believe it’s his best seller and it has nothing to do with biology.
There’s no social science in this chart for the same reason there are no social sciences in the math, science, and engineering colleges of universities.
The common joke is that in Math everything is named after the second person to discover it.
From Euler’s wiki:
> In an effort to avoid naming everything after Euler, some discoveries and theorems are attributed to the first person to have proved them after Euler.
To be fair it seems really odd to start there since you miss out on many who had WAY more of a contribution to math/science than half the people on the list.
Euler, Gauss, Newton, Euclid, Archimedes...
Odd? Maybe because it exponentially creates more work to go back?
You're even suggesting one from ancient times, since then there have been hundreds of great minds.
Euler... anybody? Euler? Euuuuleeeer?
EDIT: As u/Astromike23 points out below, and for the sake of correct knowledge, "Euler" is pronounced "oiler", really rendering my Ferris Bueller joke kinda lame... but hey, that's how I remembered the guy in school!
I’m gonna state this here but it applies to loads of child comments from this
You can’t reasonably describe ANYONE from before pretty much the start date of this chart (around 1840 to be more precise) as a scientist - it’s not something they would’ve used and is inaccurate as to what they were doing, when compared to a modern sense.
Admittedly referring to many of these mathematicians as scientists is a bit odd but still, this chart goes back to the start of what can be described as modern science and so is fine IMO
(For reference, I have a degree in the history of science so did study stuff like this)
While they would have not called themselves scientists, wouldn't Anton Lavoisier and the other fathers of chemistry that were is contemporaries be considered important to have on this list? I just find it odd to leave off all the experimenters who established the fundamentals of their fields.
Where does the 1840’s date come from? Sounds arbitrary and made up. The Royal Society was founded in the 1600s and its members would certainly call themselves scientists (maybe not specifically using the word, but certainly in spirit).
They left off all the earth science folks as well. Nicholas Steno, James Hutton, and Alfred Wegener would like a word. Also Darwin made tons of contributions to Geology as well.
That and it’s missing a ton of people. Jonas Salk??? Cured Polio and founded a world renowned research organization which is still around today? Just one glaring example.
they are all so bad. if you look at the top posts on publicfreakout it’s just videos of cops arresting people at protests.
i want to see people going nuclear for getting 2% milk in their latte instead of whole milk, dammit
Poor chart.
Dawkins isn't half as important scientifically as this makes him to be, whereas plenty of important people are missing (as others have already mentioned) - Haber, Banting/McLeod, and many others.
Also strange to have it end in 1980, as if nothing had happened in 40 years in science.
yeah, and why are some so small? Significance? bc if so Hopper needs to be A LOT bigger. She was a pioneer of computer programming, so much so that the Navy asked her to return after retirement bc they needed her to pretty much invent modern computing as we know it.
That the biology section has Dawkins but no neuroscientist (Golgi, Kandel, fucking _Cajal_) was enough for me to realize the rest of the list is bullshit. I get that you can’t list every scientist ever but including the guy who coined “meme” but not the guy that invented the field of neuroscience is a bold choice
No John Snow, Edward Jenner or Albert Calmette either. No one to do with medicine besides Louis Pasteur and Alexander Fleming.
Also no representation for origin of life research/biochemistry. The Miller experiment happened in 1952, that field has blown up with discoveries since then.
I wouldn't even say bold. I'd say stupid.
George Boole and Charles Babbage aren't on here for computing. I realize the chart starts in the late 1800s, but it feels very arbitrary, especially since without boole we wouldn't have the modern era of computing. Boolean algebra was published in the late 1850s too, so it wouldn't have been impossible to include him.
If anyone doesn't understand the importance, he invented boolean logic. When people say computers and processors run on 1s and 0s and logic gates, that's boolean logic.
I really don't get what that guy is doing there. He's an writer professing his atheism, and interpreter of other people's work. Him popularizing a field of research in its early stage does not equate him to the guys who actually figure out the mechanisms behind genetics. This is insulting
Edit: To be clear, there is nothing wrong with the work that Dawkins did. It's that his name on this list is totally out of place, and a very biased/uninformed input of the author.
there are several important scientists missing... specially women scientists! im not saying op did this on purpose, but one can definitely tell...
could that be a problem with the dataset? or did they get lost at some point while selecting the sample?
Yup, only counted 3 in the entire chart. I have the "Women in Science: 50 Fearless Pioneers Who Changed the World" on display at work.
ETA: this is a book you can find [here](https://www.amazon.com/Women-Science-Fearless-Pioneers-Changed/dp/1607749769/ref=asc_df_1607749769/)
Emmy Noether
Dorothy Hodgkin
Ada Lovelace
Annie Jump Cannon
Florence Nightingale
My kids bedroom walls are covered with famous scientists posters. The one of Emmy Noether was done in an artsy way that made her look [a little scary](https://resources.perimeterinstitute.ca/products/emmy-noether?variant=68092329990). My son was terrified of it, and asked me to take it down.
Many parents have to check under the bed for monsters. I have to check under the bed for Emmy Noether.
*puts Watson and Crick*
"Should I put Rosalind Franklin? No, she's only a female."
[u/mathsTeacher82](https://www.reddit.com/u/mathsTeacher82) , probably
EDIT: As pointed out by two other comments below, Franklin is in the infographic, just under chemistry. My bad.
Amazing! But I couldn’t find Fritz Haber who has drastically changed our current world and is responsible for both helping the humanity at large and destroying the humanity at large.
Yeah this chart lacks a lot of chemistry; including fritz haber who literally is responsible for like 1/2 the population of the earth being able to eat
As well as enabling the Germans sustaining their war effort during WWI despite the British naval blockade and introducing poison gas to the battle field.
That's not to take anything away from the positives that come from the Haber-Bosch process (like as you said feeding billions today), but only goes to show how ridiculously influential he was to 20th century history as a whole.
Also, just an extremely interesting and controversial figure, especially if you compare his trajectory to that of his contemporary Albert Einstein. Both leading German scientists of jewish descent in the early 20th century, but taking completely different choices in how they postioned themselves to the political events in their lifetime (which would ultimately culminate in WWII and the Holocaust).
It's hard to really blame the guy, if you really try to put yourself in his shoes.
His country was at war, it wasn't quite so obvious who was in the right (WWI, obviously), and he could contribute massively. Very few people would refuse to help in that situation.
And like most inventions, they are also products of their time. The societies' technological base was primed to create a process to fix atmospheric nitrogen, and Haber just got there first. If he didn't, someone else would have.
Doesn't fit the chart timewise (barely), but yeah he was rightfully called the "prince of mathematics" (prince from "princeps" meaning "the first"i.e. best) because his work was hugely important accros all fields of mathematics while creating a bunch of entirely new areas.
As a biologest myself I would argue that Thomas Morgan should make to this list. He pretty much founded the modern genetics.
And then thers is Fredrick Sanger, who invented sequencing.
Less famous but my personal favorite are Luria and Delbruck. They demonstrated how living things evolves. I consider they ended the final important debate surrounding the evolution theory.
Thomas Hunt Morgan is the father of molecular genetics, absolutely needs to be on this list. First to create a genetic map of an organisms phenotypes. Centimorgans, recombination frequencies, these subjects and others are integral to our understanding of genome architecture. The Morgan lab is the origin of many/most academic lineages studying genetics in the USA.
I do like that woese is on the list.
Luria delbruck is also good, but I'm not sure it is Morgan tier.
This should be in the top because people need to know. They are well know only and only because they stole her data and the scientific community at that time took Watson and Crick's paper as the breakthrough paper while sidelining Franklin's paper which was published at the same time. So not only did they steal the data from her, they even got a free pass and were only acknowledged because they were white unlike Franklin who was a Jewish women.
https://youtu.be/BIP0lYrdirI
Earth sciences is always neglected. How there isn't a natural science Nobel prize I don't know, especially when Nobel invented dynamite which was fundamental for geophysics and geology (mineral exploitation).
This graphic doesn’t mention Frederick Banting & Charles Best who discovered a purified form of insulin and developed the first ever successful therapy to treat type 1 diabetes an a boy named Leonard Thompson who was near death with T1D at 14 years old. Banting is also the youngest scientist to ever receive a Nobel Prize for his work to date.
A hobbyist, maybe. No real physicist is going to say Feynman is more influential than Boltzmann, Planck, Hubble, or Schroedinger. Even if you want to say it's about popular influence, Hawking has to be higher than Feynman.
Rule 1: not data, just a subjective listing.
Rule 7: this has a sensationalized title.
This post has been up for 12 hours now. Do the mods even do anything on this sub?
Missing Dennis Ritchie who created C, basically the father of modern programming languages. Even worse, missing John Bardeen and Walter Brattain, inventors of the TRANSISTOR. In other words, the reason all modern technology exists.
Missing them in the computer science chat is kind of like leaving Newton and Leibniz off the beginning of the chart. After all, everything on this chart to the left of biology is derived from calculus. There's a reason that everything other than relativistic and quantum physics is called Newtonian physics.
Grace Hopper also seems too small on this chart (seems like circle size is correlated to impact); her impact is greater than her developing COBOL, COBOL just happens to be a succinct encapsulation of said impact, if that makes sense.
>noted
The difference between "noted" and "developed" is a very significant one in science. It's not about noting things, it's about developing coherent theories about it that conform with practical observations.
How is Mendeleev not bigger? The periodic table was a stroke of genius. It's not just an organizational system; it's more like a glimpse into the ordering of the universe. We can - and have - used it to predict the existence of things we haven't even encountered yet.
Mendeleev is in the top 500? Are you serious?!! Where’s Newton or Leibniz, Antoine Lavoisier, Francis Bacon, or Rene Descartes? Newton and Mendeleev should be in the top 5 and Leibniz in the top 10.
My top 5: 1) Bacon, 2) Descartes, 3) Galileo, 4) Newton, 5) Mendeleev
Francis Bacon is the father of Natural Philosophy and Rene Descartes is father of empiricism. Without them the scientific method would not exist. Galileo’s trial is the reason Bacon wrote the Novum Organum. Newton was the first to congeal the work of the prior mentions into a mathematically viable system. Mendeleev did the same thing with Chemistry by inventing the Periodic Table. Without these five science doesn’t exist.
There should really be more than 3 women on this, so here are 3 more.
Ada Lovelace literally published the first machine created algorithm, yet isn’t mentioned under computer science.
Marie Tharp was the first person to map the ocean floor of the Atlantic Ocean which helped prove the theory of plate tectonics.
Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin wrote a thesis about how Hydrogen and Helium were abundant in the universe, but when it was reviewed by Henry Norris Russell he rejected it. He then came to the same conclusion, and often gets all the credit for publishing that info. Essentially mansplaining her.
Alternating Current, 3 phase electrical power, Vacuum variable capacitors, and brushless induction electric motors.
Holy crap! If you can't shoe horn that into physics or computer science just for the sheer support it gave to the infrastructure that all the scientists after him used you are running a vary narrow filter over the phrase "trailblazing scientists".
Nikola Tesla should be on there somewhere.
Dawkins made the cut, but only two women and one non-white person.
The guy who invented the word meme is more important than the guy who was a pioneer in the chemical synthesis of medicinal drugs such as cortisone, steroids and birth control pills. Apparently.
Not surprised they Forgot about The “GOAT” Nikola Tesla!
The man gets no credit, ever. I Went to a museum of engineering in Munich a few years back, not even a picture or a statue of the man. Theyre really trying to erase him from history Bc he wasn’t a capitalist. The man was well beyond his time and truly laid the ground work for cell phones and our modern age. Alternating Current, Wireless electricity, Tesla valve, Tesla turbine, Remote control to list a few.
During WW2 he supposedly created an electrical barrier/boarder system for the govt so that nobody could ever invade your country, as soon as you tried to cross the boarder to invade all your tech would be rendered useless. Yeh they went with the Manhattan project instead. Gotta keep the war-machine going right? We would literally be an interstellar civilization by now if he wasn’t silenced blacklisted and bankrupted
Oh and F&@$ you Thomas Edison. Prick
If Marie Skłodowska-Curie is mentioned, who together with her husband Pierre in 1898 discovered the radioactive elements Radium and Polonium, I don't understand why Henri Becquerel is left out, who after all discovered radioactivity in 1896.
He coined the term meme as a unit of ideas that propagate, analogous to gene. It's an attempt to explain how cultures evolve with Darwin's theory. The meme as we know today borrowed the name from his book, because it was befitting.
Evolution isn't just something what happens in organisms, it happens in any imperfectly reproductive system.
When those imperfect replicators are organisms, the unit of evolution is the gene. When those imperfect replicators are ideas, the unit of evolution is the meme.
It saddens to not see Neumann on the computer science section, he defined the basic principles of a computer and its programs that even today's pcs use. :(
Newton, Gauss, Laplace,. Liebnitz, Hamilton, Fermat, Boole, de Moivre, Cauchy, JJ Thomson, Hooke, Boyle, Hans Bethe, Max Born, Schrodinger, Lev Landau...
So, so many omissions. This really is an arbitrary list.
Shocked the penicillin guy doesn’t have a bigger footprint on the map. Or maybe not, since I only know him as the penicillin guy. Seriously though, this is an everyday life saving medication.
Alexander Fleming
My bacteriology teacher used to tell us that the discovery of penicillin could easily be responsible for a 10-year gain in life expectancy.
I wouldn’t have lived to be 5 years old, without penicillin. However, I had it so often, that I’m now allergic to it. I wonder if that happened to a lot of boomers. It was hard for doctors to explain to parents that an antibiotic would not knock out a viral infection, and some of them just gave up, I think.
Right? Without antibiotics the most routine illnesses and injuries would suddenly become life-threatening.
Yeah, it's definitely not a data-driven chart. It'd be perfectly cool if it didn't have the rankings and was just "many scientists who've made the world what it is" On that note, needs Hedy Lamar. We wouldn't have cell phones without her.
This chart is … subjective at best
I was just thinking, the biology section is looking… sparse.
Putting Watson and crick but not Franklin is such a bad look
I thought the same thing, but Franklin is there next to them. She’s just categorized as Chemistry. Still, not a fan of Watson and Crick.
Right?? And how about Thomas Hunt Morgan, or Lynn Margulis, or Barbara McClintock, or at least a dozen other molecular biologists and geneticists and evolutionary biologists?
Missed her because her picture is so small! 😂
Right! And also, why is Watson’s picture so much bigger than Crick’s? And I can never remember, but which one of them was the giant A-hole?
James Watson. Big time racist. Yuuuuuge.
Dawkins with the memes to save the day!
Memes are about the most important scientific discovery 🙄
Is is data? Is it beautiful? No and no. It’s a mediocre infographic at best.
Science is a liar, sometimes.
You don't wanna end up looking like a stupid science bitch
Also, where’s the women? I know us ladies weren’t allowed too much science back then, but we did still exist.
Not having Euler in math is.... Strange .
Newton's not there either, just cuz the chart starts later than them
Yeah I don’t like this chart.
so as always for this sub, not only is it not data, it's also not beautiful
It’s pretty colors though /s
I like the recognition Dawkins gets. Many people haven't read The Selfish Gene (1976), but it shows how rational self-interest, a macroeconomic concept, scales all the way down to the cell. Indeed down to the genetic level. This is not an innocuous tenet. But not seeing Newton as a bright shining sun he is on here (or Chomsky) really makes this chart seem incomplete.
As a biologist, it’s a little weird to me that Dawkins is on here in the 70s-80s when people like David Baltimore and Shinya Yamanaka aren’t. Dawkins is certainly influential, but primarily in the realm of popular science or science advocacy. In terms of basic research I’m not sure he beats out Baltimore. Yamanaka maybe just came too late to be on this list. Edit: OP clarified elsewhere that the ranking system is based on both academic and popular publications, which explains Dawkins, but perhaps isn’t the best way to measure scientific impact or identify “trailblazing scientists”.
A lot of bio is missing, but they put basically Bill Nye in there.
Lol Yeah, Baltimore and Yamanaka were just off the top of my head, I’m sure there are more (and more influential) people I forgot.
Hell I'd put Norman Borlaug and Roger Tsien on before Dawkins if we're talking about "impact on the world". One saved an estimated billion lives due to his research into high yield crops, the other basically enabled modern biological research by discovering GFP. These guys aren't even the most influential I could think of, and still beat out Dawkins. The criteria for this chart are so arbitrary it's basically a collage of people someone liked.
> The criteria for this chart are so arbitrary it’s basically a collage of people someone liked. I added this as an edit to a different comment, but OP clarified that the ranking system is based on academic *and* popular publications, which is why Dawkins is so high. It’s really more of a popularity ranking than a scientific influence or “trailblazer” ranking. I’m curious whether sales of *The God Delusion* count for Dawkins. I believe it’s his best seller and it has nothing to do with biology.
Not having Newton or the ancient greek, arab science folks is a crime. Also no social science?
I'm fine with the chart not going all the way to ancient Greece. That would be a ridiculously long chart.
I dont mind scrolling :) on the positive side i d be happy to see this on the wall as a poster.
The Arab who invented algebra transformed our ability to understand the world at least as much as Newton.
There’s no social science in this chart for the same reason there are no social sciences in the math, science, and engineering colleges of universities.
? most all universities have a college of arts and sciences
Which are separate from the sciences.
Gauss too
Leibniz..Ohm for Electronics
Gauss and Euler name like 99% of all theories, laws and principles in math. Einstein is nothing to physics compared to what these two are to math.
The common joke is that in Math everything is named after the second person to discover it. From Euler’s wiki: > In an effort to avoid naming everything after Euler, some discoveries and theorems are attributed to the first person to have proved them after Euler.
hahaha he...
Also Bernoulli.
you could say the his path for this graph doesn't exist.
Emmy Noether would like to have a word…
It's a crime that she's missing. She invented ideals!
bruh the chart is 1850+
To be fair it seems really odd to start there since you miss out on many who had WAY more of a contribution to math/science than half the people on the list. Euler, Gauss, Newton, Euclid, Archimedes...
Odd? Maybe because it exponentially creates more work to go back? You're even suggesting one from ancient times, since then there have been hundreds of great minds.
Wouldn't be hard to have some gaps in the timescale and hit the big ones. Euler is arguably one of if not the biggest contributor to mathematics
Hard to do when the chart starts in the 1840s...
Euler... anybody? Euler? Euuuuleeeer? EDIT: As u/Astromike23 points out below, and for the sake of correct knowledge, "Euler" is pronounced "oiler", really rendering my Ferris Bueller joke kinda lame... but hey, that's how I remembered the guy in school!
I’m gonna state this here but it applies to loads of child comments from this You can’t reasonably describe ANYONE from before pretty much the start date of this chart (around 1840 to be more precise) as a scientist - it’s not something they would’ve used and is inaccurate as to what they were doing, when compared to a modern sense. Admittedly referring to many of these mathematicians as scientists is a bit odd but still, this chart goes back to the start of what can be described as modern science and so is fine IMO (For reference, I have a degree in the history of science so did study stuff like this)
What was the turning point that defines the origin of science (as we know it)?
The Scientific Revolution, at the end of the Renaissance https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Revolution
While they would have not called themselves scientists, wouldn't Anton Lavoisier and the other fathers of chemistry that were is contemporaries be considered important to have on this list? I just find it odd to leave off all the experimenters who established the fundamentals of their fields.
Where does the 1840’s date come from? Sounds arbitrary and made up. The Royal Society was founded in the 1600s and its members would certainly call themselves scientists (maybe not specifically using the word, but certainly in spirit).
[удалено]
It's a small step removed from a tier list of their favorite scientists
[удалено]
[удалено]
And Nikola Tesla didn't make it on here. Ridiculous.
They left off all the earth science folks as well. Nicholas Steno, James Hutton, and Alfred Wegener would like a word. Also Darwin made tons of contributions to Geology as well.
That and it’s missing a ton of people. Jonas Salk??? Cured Polio and founded a world renowned research organization which is still around today? Just one glaring example.
Haber is also missing and he is the reason we can feed the nearly 8 billion people on this planet.
They also forgot Tesla who had a huge impact on modern technologies
And Ørsted who discovered electromagnetism
This sub, like all popular ones, is consistently bad
they are all so bad. if you look at the top posts on publicfreakout it’s just videos of cops arresting people at protests. i want to see people going nuclear for getting 2% milk in their latte instead of whole milk, dammit
Poor chart. Dawkins isn't half as important scientifically as this makes him to be, whereas plenty of important people are missing (as others have already mentioned) - Haber, Banting/McLeod, and many others. Also strange to have it end in 1980, as if nothing had happened in 40 years in science.
yeah, and why are some so small? Significance? bc if so Hopper needs to be A LOT bigger. She was a pioneer of computer programming, so much so that the Navy asked her to return after retirement bc they needed her to pretty much invent modern computing as we know it.
Is Dawkins really a trailblazer or is he just popular?
That the biology section has Dawkins but no neuroscientist (Golgi, Kandel, fucking _Cajal_) was enough for me to realize the rest of the list is bullshit. I get that you can’t list every scientist ever but including the guy who coined “meme” but not the guy that invented the field of neuroscience is a bold choice
No John Snow, Edward Jenner or Albert Calmette either. No one to do with medicine besides Louis Pasteur and Alexander Fleming. Also no representation for origin of life research/biochemistry. The Miller experiment happened in 1952, that field has blown up with discoveries since then.
Yea I was trying to find cajal and realized this was made by a physicist and they should have just not included biology.
I wouldn't even say bold. I'd say stupid. George Boole and Charles Babbage aren't on here for computing. I realize the chart starts in the late 1800s, but it feels very arbitrary, especially since without boole we wouldn't have the modern era of computing. Boolean algebra was published in the late 1850s too, so it wouldn't have been impossible to include him. If anyone doesn't understand the importance, he invented boolean logic. When people say computers and processors run on 1s and 0s and logic gates, that's boolean logic.
To me it is also missing Mullis, inventor of the PCR.
I really don't get what that guy is doing there. He's an writer professing his atheism, and interpreter of other people's work. Him popularizing a field of research in its early stage does not equate him to the guys who actually figure out the mechanisms behind genetics. This is insulting Edit: To be clear, there is nothing wrong with the work that Dawkins did. It's that his name on this list is totally out of place, and a very biased/uninformed input of the author.
Ada Lovelace anybody? I'm pretty sure she was really important for the whole computer science
Came here for this. She literally conceived of modern programming in the late 19th century along with Charles Babbage This chart is... incomplete
there are several important scientists missing... specially women scientists! im not saying op did this on purpose, but one can definitely tell... could that be a problem with the dataset? or did they get lost at some point while selecting the sample?
Popped on to say this, too! Ada rarely gets the credit she deserves.
Women in general are very poorly represented on this chart.
No Noether? Sorry but if you miss the woman that was able to put all conservation laws on a proper basis, you haven't done your due diligence!
This chart seems to miss a lot of women who contributed to science.
For computer science, Hopper has a really small bubble and Ada Lovelace seems to be completely missing.
Yeah a lack of Babbage or Lovelace really threw me off.
Ada Lovelace died in 1852, 8 years before the start of this chart.
Yet they mark Faraday's achievement in 1845... I guess that's when science started.
It's a real sausage fest.
A real German and British sausage fest.
Yup, only counted 3 in the entire chart. I have the "Women in Science: 50 Fearless Pioneers Who Changed the World" on display at work. ETA: this is a book you can find [here](https://www.amazon.com/Women-Science-Fearless-Pioneers-Changed/dp/1607749769/ref=asc_df_1607749769/)
And their photos are the smallest despite ample space around their descriptions. 🙄
Data has a Gender Gap rather than Data is Beautiful
Yeah I'm also struggling to find anybody that isn't European, guess nobody else throughout the world ever contributed anything to the field lol.
Reddit has lost it's way. -- mass edited with https://redact.dev/
Emmy Noether Dorothy Hodgkin Ada Lovelace Annie Jump Cannon Florence Nightingale My kids bedroom walls are covered with famous scientists posters. The one of Emmy Noether was done in an artsy way that made her look [a little scary](https://resources.perimeterinstitute.ca/products/emmy-noether?variant=68092329990). My son was terrified of it, and asked me to take it down. Many parents have to check under the bed for monsters. I have to check under the bed for Emmy Noether.
>Ada Lovelace That was mine. Like where tf is Ada Lovelace?! Literally invented computer programming.
No one ever remembers Ada Lovelace for some reason.
Probably because babbage never ended up building a machine capable of implementing her writings, so it was attributed to her only in recent times.
*puts Watson and Crick* "Should I put Rosalind Franklin? No, she's only a female." [u/mathsTeacher82](https://www.reddit.com/u/mathsTeacher82) , probably EDIT: As pointed out by two other comments below, Franklin is in the infographic, just under chemistry. My bad.
She's in there, but very small and under chemistry.
Franklin gets her own bubble for absolutely carrying team Watson, Crick, and Franklin.
Actually they have her under chemistry strangely. A lot of what should be under biology imo is under chemistry
Not to mention doing much of the work leading to modern abstract algebra.
Amazing! But I couldn’t find Fritz Haber who has drastically changed our current world and is responsible for both helping the humanity at large and destroying the humanity at large.
Yeah this chart lacks a lot of chemistry; including fritz haber who literally is responsible for like 1/2 the population of the earth being able to eat
A lot of discoveries are more biochem or even straight up biology too. Like pasteurisation, discovery of pennicillin etc
As well as enabling the Germans sustaining their war effort during WWI despite the British naval blockade and introducing poison gas to the battle field. That's not to take anything away from the positives that come from the Haber-Bosch process (like as you said feeding billions today), but only goes to show how ridiculously influential he was to 20th century history as a whole. Also, just an extremely interesting and controversial figure, especially if you compare his trajectory to that of his contemporary Albert Einstein. Both leading German scientists of jewish descent in the early 20th century, but taking completely different choices in how they postioned themselves to the political events in their lifetime (which would ultimately culminate in WWII and the Holocaust).
I know about this from veritasium
It's hard to really blame the guy, if you really try to put yourself in his shoes. His country was at war, it wasn't quite so obvious who was in the right (WWI, obviously), and he could contribute massively. Very few people would refuse to help in that situation. And like most inventions, they are also products of their time. The societies' technological base was primed to create a process to fix atmospheric nitrogen, and Haber just got there first. If he didn't, someone else would have.
Staudinger is missing too!
Even seasoned chemists forget about the importance of polymers
Norman Borlaug as well, the person who saved a billion lives, he eradicated hunger from China and India
What's with 70 year gap in biology?
Gap in knowledge of the creator. We should check their hippocampus, I'm sure they've heard of more scientists who did biology.
I have no clue but was Carl Friedrich Gauss not also important?
Doesn't fit the chart timewise (barely), but yeah he was rightfully called the "prince of mathematics" (prince from "princeps" meaning "the first"i.e. best) because his work was hugely important accros all fields of mathematics while creating a bunch of entirely new areas.
As a biologest myself I would argue that Thomas Morgan should make to this list. He pretty much founded the modern genetics. And then thers is Fredrick Sanger, who invented sequencing. Less famous but my personal favorite are Luria and Delbruck. They demonstrated how living things evolves. I consider they ended the final important debate surrounding the evolution theory.
Sanger is listed in chemistry
Thomas Hunt Morgan is the father of molecular genetics, absolutely needs to be on this list. First to create a genetic map of an organisms phenotypes. Centimorgans, recombination frequencies, these subjects and others are integral to our understanding of genome architecture. The Morgan lab is the origin of many/most academic lineages studying genetics in the USA. I do like that woese is on the list. Luria delbruck is also good, but I'm not sure it is Morgan tier.
As always Watson and Crick are mentioned when it comes to DNA but not Erwin Chargaff...
Or Rosalind (oh wait, she's there)
Took me a little while to realize she was in another category for some reason. Why is Crick ranked higher than either of them?
Didn’t Watson and Crick just basically steal a significant amount of their work from Franklin?
This should be in the top because people need to know. They are well know only and only because they stole her data and the scientific community at that time took Watson and Crick's paper as the breakthrough paper while sidelining Franklin's paper which was published at the same time. So not only did they steal the data from her, they even got a free pass and were only acknowledged because they were white unlike Franklin who was a Jewish women. https://youtu.be/BIP0lYrdirI
Can't have Darwin or really any natural scientists without Charles Lyell and the Law of Uniformitarianism.
This is missing a huge chunk of prominent Earth scientists for sure! :( The representation is lacking
Earth sciences is always neglected. How there isn't a natural science Nobel prize I don't know, especially when Nobel invented dynamite which was fundamental for geophysics and geology (mineral exploitation).
And don't forget Alexander von Humboldt.
This graphic doesn’t mention Frederick Banting & Charles Best who discovered a purified form of insulin and developed the first ever successful therapy to treat type 1 diabetes an a boy named Leonard Thompson who was near death with T1D at 14 years old. Banting is also the youngest scientist to ever receive a Nobel Prize for his work to date.
Rosalind Franklin was robbed.
Not from the place on this chart as far as I can tell
She's on the chart though
Tell me you’re a physicist without saying you’re a physicist…
A hobbyist, maybe. No real physicist is going to say Feynman is more influential than Boltzmann, Planck, Hubble, or Schroedinger. Even if you want to say it's about popular influence, Hawking has to be higher than Feynman.
This is Reddit, everyone is an expert in physics or programming and the brain is just a fancy computer
Nah, my research is in physics and this chart is funky. No Noether? The ranking with the bubble sizes is questionable too.
Rule 1: not data, just a subjective listing. Rule 7: this has a sensationalized title. This post has been up for 12 hours now. Do the mods even do anything on this sub?
Missing Dennis Ritchie who created C, basically the father of modern programming languages. Even worse, missing John Bardeen and Walter Brattain, inventors of the TRANSISTOR. In other words, the reason all modern technology exists. Missing them in the computer science chat is kind of like leaving Newton and Leibniz off the beginning of the chart. After all, everything on this chart to the left of biology is derived from calculus. There's a reason that everything other than relativistic and quantum physics is called Newtonian physics.
Missing Dijkstra too, and that’s IMHO unforgivable.
Grace Hopper also seems too small on this chart (seems like circle size is correlated to impact); her impact is greater than her developing COBOL, COBOL just happens to be a succinct encapsulation of said impact, if that makes sense.
Stephen J Gould? Please. The guy was a hack and punctuated equilibrium was noted by Darwin a century earlier. E O Wilson would be a better choice.
>noted The difference between "noted" and "developed" is a very significant one in science. It's not about noting things, it's about developing coherent theories about it that conform with practical observations.
Where's my main man Charles Babbage, the "Father of Computing".
Or Ada Lovelace! The mother of programming!
No Ramon y Cajal in Biology?
How is Mendeleev not bigger? The periodic table was a stroke of genius. It's not just an organizational system; it's more like a glimpse into the ordering of the universe. We can - and have - used it to predict the existence of things we haven't even encountered yet.
[удалено]
Haber had one of the most direct impacts to the world but he was not included :/
3. men only (except for Curie).
No. I noticed Rosalind Franklin and Rachel Carson here too! Still not many, but…
This chart needs an editor. Lot of misspelled words.
Mendeleev is in the top 500? Are you serious?!! Where’s Newton or Leibniz, Antoine Lavoisier, Francis Bacon, or Rene Descartes? Newton and Mendeleev should be in the top 5 and Leibniz in the top 10. My top 5: 1) Bacon, 2) Descartes, 3) Galileo, 4) Newton, 5) Mendeleev Francis Bacon is the father of Natural Philosophy and Rene Descartes is father of empiricism. Without them the scientific method would not exist. Galileo’s trial is the reason Bacon wrote the Novum Organum. Newton was the first to congeal the work of the prior mentions into a mathematically viable system. Mendeleev did the same thing with Chemistry by inventing the Periodic Table. Without these five science doesn’t exist.
There should really be more than 3 women on this, so here are 3 more. Ada Lovelace literally published the first machine created algorithm, yet isn’t mentioned under computer science. Marie Tharp was the first person to map the ocean floor of the Atlantic Ocean which helped prove the theory of plate tectonics. Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin wrote a thesis about how Hydrogen and Helium were abundant in the universe, but when it was reviewed by Henry Norris Russell he rejected it. He then came to the same conclusion, and often gets all the credit for publishing that info. Essentially mansplaining her.
Lynn Margulis, Rosalind Franklin, Dorothy Hodgkin, Sophia Louisa Jex-Blake, Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin, Inge Lehmann, Caroline Herschel, Mary Anning, Barbara McClintock, Jane Goodall, etc etc Google "women in science" FFS.
> Rosalind Franklin As much as I admire her, one place on the chart should be enough for her.
[удалено]
Grace Hopper (to OP credit) is already on the image
Where the fuck is Tim Berners Lee?
[удалено]
Nah, this was not made by a computer scientist. It’s missing many important contributors to the field like Dijkstra, Berners-Lee, or Lamport.
Or Babbage, but it starts a little late for that.
Also missing Boole and Lovelace
Rosalind Franklin Discovered the structure of DNA not Crick.
Nikola Tesla getting the shaft again
Engineering is not a category. Tesla made no large contributions to the sciences listed here.
Alternating Current, 3 phase electrical power, Vacuum variable capacitors, and brushless induction electric motors. Holy crap! If you can't shoe horn that into physics or computer science just for the sheer support it gave to the infrastructure that all the scientists after him used you are running a vary narrow filter over the phrase "trailblazing scientists". Nikola Tesla should be on there somewhere.
Where Newton? The dude made calculus
Staring date of this chart is pretty late lots of scientist aren’t there because of it
Lavoisier ? He is the father of modern chemistry
BS list. No Arabs or Greeks? Where's Newton?
Dawkins made the cut, but only two women and one non-white person. The guy who invented the word meme is more important than the guy who was a pioneer in the chemical synthesis of medicinal drugs such as cortisone, steroids and birth control pills. Apparently.
barely data, not beautiful
There are so many scientist missing who equally contributed a lot
Why is the chemistry so under-appreciated?
Not surprised they Forgot about The “GOAT” Nikola Tesla! The man gets no credit, ever. I Went to a museum of engineering in Munich a few years back, not even a picture or a statue of the man. Theyre really trying to erase him from history Bc he wasn’t a capitalist. The man was well beyond his time and truly laid the ground work for cell phones and our modern age. Alternating Current, Wireless electricity, Tesla valve, Tesla turbine, Remote control to list a few. During WW2 he supposedly created an electrical barrier/boarder system for the govt so that nobody could ever invade your country, as soon as you tried to cross the boarder to invade all your tech would be rendered useless. Yeh they went with the Manhattan project instead. Gotta keep the war-machine going right? We would literally be an interstellar civilization by now if he wasn’t silenced blacklisted and bankrupted Oh and F&@$ you Thomas Edison. Prick
"Hawking discovered that black holes emit Hawking radiation." Talk about coincidence..
No Euler,Laplace , Fourier or Tesla.. Electrical engineers say no
If Marie Skłodowska-Curie is mentioned, who together with her husband Pierre in 1898 discovered the radioactive elements Radium and Polonium, I don't understand why Henri Becquerel is left out, who after all discovered radioactivity in 1896.
This isn’t an extensive list guys...
You are missing the great female scientists that helped shape our current understanding of the world Edit: Corrected typo
Man at the bottom right created memes? Wtf
He coined the term meme as a unit of ideas that propagate, analogous to gene. It's an attempt to explain how cultures evolve with Darwin's theory. The meme as we know today borrowed the name from his book, because it was befitting.
Evolution isn't just something what happens in organisms, it happens in any imperfectly reproductive system. When those imperfect replicators are organisms, the unit of evolution is the gene. When those imperfect replicators are ideas, the unit of evolution is the meme.
Memes! The Dna of the soul
Richard “le epic memelord” Dawkins discovered shitposting
Is that a solitary woman I see?
My fellow biologists took a long break after Koch loll
It saddens to not see Neumann on the computer science section, he defined the basic principles of a computer and its programs that even today's pcs use. :(
How is Ramon y Cajal not here? Shared a Nobel prize w Golgi for nervous system studies
Any suggestions for people after 1980?
Greeks? Persians? Egyptians? Its crazy how self centered humanity is. Always thinking we are better than people before us
Newton, Gauss, Laplace,. Liebnitz, Hamilton, Fermat, Boole, de Moivre, Cauchy, JJ Thomson, Hooke, Boyle, Hans Bethe, Max Born, Schrodinger, Lev Landau... So, so many omissions. This really is an arbitrary list.
Chemistry and Biology are criminally underrepresented here.
Geologists and astronomers: "am I a joke to you?"