[Recording Start]
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: It’s often said that Einstein wasn’t as proficient in math as many people believe. Would you agree with that?
Rick Rosner: Yes, that’s a fair assessment. Einstein was exceptional at conceptual thinking, but he often relied on his friends who were more knowledgeable about various mathematical systems. He had a sort of informal discussion group where they would spend hours, possibly in a café or similar setting, exchanging ideas. For example, when he was developing his theory of general relativity, he struggled for years until a friend suggested a particular mathematical structure that helped him express his ideas. So, while Einstein was competent in math, others had greater expertise in specific mathematical areas.
Jacobsen: Could you comment on George Gamow’s mathematical abilities, particularly in relation to the Big Bang theory?
Rosner: George Gamow, one of the pivotal figures in developing the Big Bang theory, wasn’t strong in math either. He played a key role in explaining the early universe’s conditions, such as the synthesis of simple elements and the proportions of hydrogen and helium. However, he often needed assistance with the mathematical aspects of his work. He would consult colleagues, frequently in my hometown of Boulder, Colorado, for help with the calculations.
Jacobsen: Let’s talk about amateurism in science. How do you define it?
Rosner: By amateurism, I mean individuals outside the scientific or academic establishment, without formal training or affiliation, contributing to the advancement of science. The challenge for amateurs is the overwhelming odds against them. Statistically, most who attempt to contribute to science fall into the category of enthusiasts or eccentrics, often retired teachers or others looking to disprove established theories like Einstein’s. We’ve discussed John Carlos Baez’s ‘crackpot index,’ a humorous yet insightful tool to gauge the likelihood of being a scientific outsider with unrealistic ambitions. This index assigns points based on certain beliefs or assertions about one’s scientific contributions. A score of 500 points usually indicates a delusional perspective rather than a legitimate scientific insight.
Jacobsen: Is it true that Baez based the crackpot index on actual correspondence he received?
Rosner: Yes, that’s correct. The whole concept of the crackpot index, while amusing, is grounded in real experiences and correspondence that Baez received. It reflects the genuine challenges faced by those outside the scientific community trying to make a meaningful contribution.
[Recording End]
Authors
Rick Rosner
American Television Writer
Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Founder, In-Sight Publishing
In-Sight Publishing
License and Copyright
License
In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at http://www.rickrosner.org.
Copyright
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
Rick Rosner 