There are only two super geniuses of science that I am aware of

I think the OP has a point...

Maybe nagging is the mother of all invention.

From all accounts Einstein was an absentee father and a hole husband.

If he was a genius, he would never had gotten married in the first place. And not put those close to him so much misery.

Mason patented the threaded glass jar with a metal screw-on lid. This provided a perfect seal and made it possible to preserve all kinds of foods that would previously spoil. The Mason jar became a huge hit everywhere, though Mason himself scarcely benefited from it.

Inventor of the Mason Jar died alone, unloved, and forgotten

In 1858, Mason invented a square-shouldered jar with threaded screw-top, matching lid, and rubber ring for an airtight seal – the Mason jar. Until the 1830s, long before refrigeration and hothouse gardens, many fruits and vegetables had been available only seasonally, but the recent development of jars had made canning a practical alternative to drying, pickling, or smoking to preserve food.

Prior to Mason's innovation, jars had a flat, un-threaded top, across which a tin flat lid was laid and sealed with wax. It was messy, unreliable, and unsafe – if the wax was not applied properly it allowed deadly bacteria to thrive in the jar.

wikpedia / John Landis Mason

He was married with six daughters,
but he died in poverty in a NY
tenement house in 1902. Alone.

Mike

" What are we having for diner tonight. All the food done gone spoiled "

" why are the cloths falling off the line. I want an answer "

" you finished with that equation yet. My relativity's are coming over "

thedeadtruth
I think the OP has a point...

Maybe nagging is the mother of all invention.

thedeadtruth
" What are we having for diner tonight. All the food done gone spoiled "

" why are the cloths falling off the line. I want an answer "

" you finished with that equation yet. My relativity's are coming over "

Heh.

Mike

Mathematically talented, she and composer George Antheil invented an early technique for spread spectrum communications and frequency hopping, necessary for wireless communication from the pre-computer age to the present day.

wikipedia / Heddy Lamar

She invented the idea of the Radio Controlled torpedo,
which got a U.S. patent.

She died alone and in obscurity.

Mike

Well at least I now have a logical reason why no-one wants me and I have no friends.

I am a genius.

But seriously...

I always considered a genius someone who has an epiphany or eureka moment where there was no real pre-knowledge. Kind of like an actual invention as opposed to an innovation process.

I think real geniuses find it hard to articulate their ideas due to them being so far ahead.

Eg... An expert is just learned. A genius has no peer.

thedeadtruth
I think the OP has a point...

Maybe nagging is the mother of all invention.

This is my point.

The difference is: it isn't nagging. To call it 'nagging" makes you dismissive of real concerns that your spouse has. I figure that if she is saying it, it matters to her. If it matters to her, then why not act? If the only reason I have for not acting is, essentially, laziness, I am an unworthy husband. Laziness should never be a reason I ignore something that matters to my wife. And I expect the same in return (which I get).

Its what is known as "submitting to your spouse". When you do so, you really do find that you are happier. She is happier with you, and you take pride in this (and if you don't, then you are different than me).

If you have a wife that is mathematically gifted and prone to abstract thought....imagine the benefits. Mine....she is smart, but not a dreamer. But she has the right saying to get through to me every time I really need it.

reply to post by mikegrouchy

Untold generations of genius have died alone, unloved

You're a genius now?

Well, then, genius, a word in your ear:

An interesting thought about gender and little kids based on personal observation.

Psst: that isn't a blog post at all. It's a thread post in a forum for people who think they're asexual.

Who else but a 'marriage counseller' who has never been married could imagine that people who think they're asexual can have anything meaningful to say on the subject of sexual relationships?

reply to post by mikegrouchy

I have been faithfully married to the Same woman since I was 17 and 3/4's, thirty years last May.

Citation needed.

reply to post by mikegrouchy


Listen dude what exactly has got you all riled up about this subject. It's a proven fact that the smarter you are the more likely it is you will be alone, and baring this whole super genius thing. If it even exists, but lets say that it does and there is somebody so super dam smart out there. Well what exactly would he or she have in common with other people?

Like I said earlier, generally birds of a feather flock together and the secret to a long lasting relationship is not having to many hurdles to overcome, that and a great deal of blissful ignorance. So what exactly is your point on this? I mean you seem to go on about it. But what about your wife? Since you said you were, or are married, how is her skills in the science. Don't tell me she is lacking in the scientific protocol methods? Like I said the majority of people, are not the people you listed and linked.

But since were on the subject. Here a site with some more people who died alone, Including one of my favorite artists/poem writers Emily Dickinson. I would not call them supergeniuses, but none of them were exactly on the scale or medium of there times. Really the science of this phenomenon is easily explained, it can even be mathematically equated, or it can be expressed in two words. People are People.
some smart and famous people who died alone

Astyanax
reply to post by mikegrouchy

 

You're a genius now?

So you say.


Mike

galadofwarthethird
reply to post by mikegrouchy

 

Listen dude what exactly has got you all riled up about this subject. It's a proven fact that the smarter you are the more likely it is you will be alone, and baring this whole super genius thing. If it even exists, but lets say that it does and there is somebody so super dam smart out there. Well what exactly would he or she have in common with other people?

My choice for philosopher is Jane Austen.

Jane Austen
"Pride and Predjudice"

One of the ten most important books of the 20th century. Seriously.

It carried a vast number of British "Dough boy" soldiers
through the trenches of WWI and it change the future
of mankind when they returned to England.

This is the first documented instance in the Western
world where the subject of soldiers, and what to do
with them after war is addressed, and not just
by men.


The depth of influence this book has had on shaping
the modern world, and the people in it, has yet to be
fathomed.


Mike

Christiane Vulpius
Goethe’s mistress and wife
whom he married in 1806
after 18 years together . . .
when she died in 1816,
he “wept bitterly.”

"The soul that sees beauty may sometimes walk alone."

-Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

reply to post by mikegrouchy

I have heard of her, cant say that I remember reading anything from her did not even know she was a philosopher, I mean I heard somewhere that she was, I think. Its funny how some things are only peculiar and effect people in certain times and places. I suppose if you were to take a count or ask around everybody would have a book or certain person which influenced them greatly. Yet for the majority that seems to be situational, at that place in that time it really was something. It may even influenced them to there whole outlook in life. Take that same thing and apply it to somebody else or at a different time and in some cases it becomes completely mute.

What I am saying is, take a kid at a certain age and maybe some piece of writing would have greatly influenced them. Yet take that same piece of writing and give it to somebody else in a different situation or even the same kid in a different situation and its an alright book, but nothing worth re-reading. And in fact I know many people in the real world who are doing just fine for themselfs who have never read a book in there life's, other then what they made them read at school when necessary. One such guy being my sisters husband, the dude is in construction makes pretty descent money, much more then me in fact, and he knows what hes about that's for sure, when it comes to that and such thing.

But beyond that? Nope negative, and yet he and people like him will get much farther even with all that as specialization is not going anywhere soon, our whole society and mindset runs on it. Also and I heard him brag more then once about how he never read a book in his life when he saw me reading something. In fact for some people if its not on the TV, or in daily chatter, it does not exist. And there are many and much more people like that then those who would think Jane Austin has any kind of meaning, and as you know. Majority rules.


But i see you dont like answering questions eh? I dont know man, maybe people just assume to much about people. Whats in a name anyways? Yet when in doubt its always best to ask, and even when you dont get an answer, you get the gist of an answer. Sometimes even by not answering, that is itself in itself an answer.

But hey maybe one day i well read that book "pride and prejudice and see what everybody is talking about" But I confess I could not stand the movie, or what little of it I tried to watch. I do not think the book would be any different for me. But you never know.

Its funny, but without writing none of this would matter, and in many cases its just carrying old things around, and there comes a point were you just say to yourself..."OK all of this is just junk, why am I even carrying all this # around" Other then the amusement factor, or a niche, its all kind of mute and meaningless you know. It all just has its days in the sun, and what makes people think there favorite writer or philosopher is any different then the things modern day celebrities are saying daily on the news. In a few hundred years we could have whole cultures clubs quoting Madonna and Brittany Spears for all we would know.

As for Jane Austin or Pride and Prejudice...I am pretty sure it can be fathomed, yet who would want to do that? Whoever he or she is, I am quite sure they just may write a book about it. Which only leads me back to a Nietzsche quote I remember.

I will have to look it up, as I cant quite remember it. But ya!

And I quote.
"Whoever knows the reader will henceforth do nothing for the reader. Another century of readers — and the spirit itself will stink...Nietzsche"

Funny how we express our self's, and draw parallels to everything in life, with the things we once read in a book. Or at least I think its funny, and in some ways I find it extremely bizarre like were not even alive, like were puppets just repeating things over and over, dragging the past our pasts and most of it fabricated by others into the present as if it mattered. That is! And in till! Eventually one day we wake up to find it's all changed, or lost its meaning entirely.

Anyway, OP, here's another poster couple for your thesis: Voltaire and Emilie du Chatelet

galadofwarthethird


But i see you dont like answering questions eh? I dont know man, maybe people just assume to much about people. Whats in a name anyways? Yet when in doubt its always best to ask, and even when you dont get an answer, you get the gist of an answer. Sometimes even by not answering, that is itself in itself an answer.

Interesting declarative statement that.

Putting aside the fact that the sentence starts with the word "but" and the word "I" is not capitalized.

Where did anyone get the idea that I don't like answering questions.
I love answering questions, but in this case, are the right questions being asked?

Shelve that for a second and take a detour with me.


I picked up some strange vibes coming off of the personal questions that
have substituted the discussion in this thread for the past two pages, and
being positive that they were not coming from me I decided to search the
net to see what the world-wide-web-of-lies has to say about "Super Genius."

I find this on page one of the search results.

www.brainaudit.com / what makes a person a super genius




What a crock of self entitled bear droppings.


Lavoisier answered all the questions put to him,
and his so-called questioners executed him anyway.





What makes questions so sacred?
If the asker is doing nothing more than putting
untoward burden on the person being asked.
If the asker is not doing commensurate research
on the same subject, but only turning the point
to make things about the person and not the
subject.


Lavoisier answered all the questions put to him,
and his so-called questioners executed him anyway.



Back to the point of detour.
Are the right questions being asked here.

Not in the least.

In the post media world,
where the favorite technique is to ignore the information
and characterize the person bringing it as credible or not credible,
where the sound bite rules,
and the laws of gamesmanship dictate that it is easier to put someone
on the defensive by asking them personal questions,
I would say that not only are the right questions not being asked,
but the ones that are show signs of being meaningless.

For the past two pages, they have been little more than personal innuendo. Not even on topic at that.

Previously the discussion was stellar. People questioning the two choices for examples of super genius,
positing their own choices. Leaving the debate a comparison and contrast between examples of genius.


But to conclude the last two pages with ...

galadofwarthethird
But i see you dont like answering questions eh?

...is not only disingenuous, it is the shallowest form of character assassination.

I have seen Galadofwarthethird conduct themselves in a manor far better than
this for far too long. I am not disappointed. I am just waiting for the better
qualities to show up.

Mike

ATS thread: When did credible become the ultimate word

August 30th, 2011



Credibility factors.



[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/13619551c120.png[/atsimg]



... anyone else notice the formula for credibility is all about sales, marketing, and perceived trust in a product?







Credible means nothing more than someone else agrees with it.

It does not mean right.
Nor correct.
Not even accurate.

For instance the credit system is credible.
The national debt and deficit spending are credible.

Lady Gaga is a credible artist.

Astyanax
Anyway, OP, here's another poster couple for your thesis: Voltaire and Emilie du Chatelet

Thanks for the link! What a great read.
I particularly like the part where she had
men's clothes made so she could sneak
back in and continue participating in the
intellectual debate.

Works
Besides the multitude of letters, notes and unpublished experiments, Gabrielle Emilie LeTonnelier de Breteuil du Chatelet Lomont / Emilie du Chatelet published the following:


Oedipus Rex - a translation from the Greek into French.

1738 - The Elements of the Philosophy of Newton - 1938 edition. Voltaire is listed as the author of this work but in the Preface he states that they worked together on the volume. This work made Newton understandable for those who did not have a background in higher mathematics.

1740 - Institutions de Physique. An explanation of Leibniz' metaphysics as found in the Mondologie



1759 - a translation from the original Latin into French of Principia by Isaac Newton This translation of the Principia remains the authoritative French translation of Newton's work.