If Albert Einstein was cloned today would he have the same level of genius aptitude toward Theoretical Physics?
- June 1, 2010 at 7:01 am#5747
I’m curious if he was cloned today, would this clone (if educated in theoretical physics for many years) have the same genius aptitude as the original Albert?
Chances of it happening? Really high if you consider all the cloning happening around the world in the animal kingdom…
- June 1, 2010 at 7:07 am #409243
If you think genetics is 100% responsible for someone turning out the way they do then yes.
I know of many experiences where cousins, even siblings seem to have the same “stock” turn out very different and have very different levels of accomplishment even though they seemed have had the same genetic make up.
I personally think that his clone could just as easily end up as a musician, assembly line worker, pro baseball player or drug dealer. I think its like the weather and smoke rising from a cigarette in a still room. It starts out orderly, but in a few minutes, you’ll never be able to predict where it will end up.
- June 1, 2010 at 7:38 am #409214
Probably not, he would have been a chump like others. Einstein, by the way, is severely overrated. There are many scientists and experimental observations and theory upon which Einstein based his theories (The Michelson-Morley experiment, Planks black-body radiation, and the Lorentz’ transformations)… It was only a matter of time until someone would have come up with the theory of relativity…
If it wasn’t Einstein, it’d been somebody else.
Edit: Bekki, oh yeah! I forgot! we would still be in the stone age without Einstein; if not him, somebody else would have done it. There are thousands and thousands of people on this planet working on science; just where I work there are literally 50 people who are among the best scientists in the US, you saying that they are not smart enough to figure stuff out? Einstein was the first to figure out, granted, but he is by no means the only human being who could have done it… and don’t get me started with Newton… thinking that only a few people can discover great things is what keeps us behind in science, especially in this country which has gotten quite a bit backwards in this department…
“. GR might not have been discovered until the 50s or 60s ” and 99.99% of the world population dead and alive would have barely noticed!!! by the way, Einstein’s nobel price wasn’t even on GR, was on the photoelectric effect…
“No other physicist except Newton made so many significant contributions in so many different areas” How about James Clerk Maxwell? How about Thompson? How about Sadi Carnot? How about Poisson? How about Gauss? you severely underestimate the work of many other scientists and overestimate the accomplishments of just one!
- June 1, 2010 at 8:36 am #409144
He would have the same aptitude and a lot of the same proclivities. But would he have the same work ethic from upbringing, opportunities, and luck? Who knows? I agree that we’ll probably be learning a lot more on this subject when the inevitable happens and they start cloning people.
Ivan–while special relativity and some of the other early discoveries may have been inevitable, I don’t think that you can say the same of general relativity. It took years of work and learning math that few physicists knew at the time to put together the pieces to build a theory for which there was no experimental demand whatsoever. Nobody was calling out asking for an explanation of why light bent or time slows in a gravitational field or even the problems in mercury’s orbit. GR might not have been discovered until the 50s or 60s when it would have inevitably come out as the classical limit of a quantum field theory of a massless, spin-2 graiton. And it would have taken a while after that for it to be worked out in the clean and intuitive geometric way that Einstein did it.
And even if one concedes that a lot of the work was low-hanging fruit, you have to admit that Einstein picked a lot of it before anyone else did. No other physicist except Newton made so many significant contributions in so many different areas. And now that physicists are so specialized in what they do, it’s pretty safe to say that noone ever will.
Try to read what I actually said w/o exaggerating it. I said that probably everything but GR would have been inevitably discovered. And I’m not discounting the work of lots of other scientists. And yes, back in the day lots of them made wide-ranging contributions. And yes, trying to compare them is a strictly subjective exercies. What he got his nobel prize in is pretty immaterial to what I said. GR was his most difficult piece of work, if not the most significant in the big picture. That nobody would have noticed is really my entire point–it was a theoretical work born of his unique intuition and circumstance (his having learned of differential geometry at just the time he was thinking about gravity) and not an inescapable conclusion based on glaring experimental evidence.
- June 1, 2010 at 9:05 am #409110
He might very well grow and turn out better than the first Albert, since todays scientific advancements are making leaps and bounds almost over night.
I am confident that the US Government has already cloned alot of geniuses, not necessarily Einstein, but Governments have to do a lot of secret experiments to stay ahead of other Governements.
It could very well be the next step in human evolution…having some cloned Einstein neurons injected into our brains….I like it!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.