Discussion:
complete John Nash obit
(too old to reply)
w***@yahoo.com
2015-05-24 14:16:37 UTC
Permalink
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/john-f-nash-jr-dies-nobel-laureate-was-subject-of-a-beautiful-mind/2015/05/24/61463418-0219-11e5-bc72-f3e16bf50bb6_story.html


National
John F. Nash Jr. dies; Nobel laureate was subject of ‘A Beautiful Mind’
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Plus Share via Email More Options

Resize Text Print Article Comments 0

John Nash, in 1994, won the Nobel in economics. (Charles Rex Arbogast/AP)
By Emily Langer May 24 at 9:49 AM Follow @emilylangerWP
John F. Nash Jr., who revolutionized the mathematical field of game theory, was endowed with a mind that was highly original and deeply troubled. But it became known to most people by its Hollywood description. His mind was beautiful.

Dr. Nash, a Nobel Prize-winning mathematician whose descent into and recovery from mental illness inspired the Academy Award-winning film “A Beautiful Mind,” died May 24 in a two-car accident on the New Jersey Turnpike. He was 86. His wife, Alicia, who was 82, also died.

A New Jersey state police spokesman told the Associated Press the couple were in a taxi cab traveling southbound near Monroe. They lived in Princeton, N.J.

In 1994, when Dr. Nash received the Nobel Prize in economics, the award marked not only an intellectual triumph but also a personal one. More than four decades earlier, as a Princeton University graduate student, he had produced a 27-page thesis on game theory — in essence, the applied mathematical study of decision-making in situations of conflict — that would become one of the most celebrated works in the field.

Before the academic world could fully recognize his achievement, Dr. Nash descended into a condition eventually diagnosed as schizophrenia. For the better part of 20 years, his once supremely rational mind was beset by delusions and hallucinations.

By the time Dr. Nash emerged from his disturbed state, his ideas had influenced economics, foreign affairs, politics, biology — virtually every sphere of life fueled by competition. But he been absent from professional life for so long that some scholars assumed he was dead.

“We helped lift him into daylight,” Assar Lindbeck, the former chairman of the committee for the Nobel Prize in economics, told Sylvia Nasar, Dr. Nash’s biographer. “We resurrected him in a way.”

Nasar’s book, titled “A Beautiful Mind,” was published in 1998 and adapted for the screen three years later. The film, although criticized by some viewers for presenting a romanticized version of the mathematician’s life, won four Oscars, including the one for best picture. Portrayed by actor Russell Crowe, Dr. Nash became an international celebrity — perhaps the most famous mathematician in recent memory.


Complexity in competition
Modern game theory was first articulated by mathematician John von Neumann and economist Oskar Morgenstern in the 1944 volume “Theory of Games and Economic Behavior.”

Its objective: to understand and ultimately predict the interactions between rivals in given circumstances. During the Cold War standoff between the United States and the Soviet Union, game theory became increasingly fashionable and immensely useful.

Von Neumann and Morgenstern had assumed the existence of a “zero-sum” game such as checkers, in which one party’s loss was the adversary’s gain. Dr. Nash — who, ironically, was said to have struggled since childhood with social interactions — observed that few human rivalries function in so simple a fashion.

He expanded game theory to include cooperative games (in which binding agreements can be made) and non-cooperative games (in which they cannot), and to allow for the possibility of mutual gain. Such an outcome became known as the Nash equilibrium.

Nash equilibriums, which he described in the hieroglyphics of mathematical symbols, exist everywhere. Two magazines might charge the same price so that each may achieve maximum profit. Two rival nations might agree to arms treaties that limit each of their stockpiles but guarantee both countries a measure of security.

The utility of Dr. Nash’s work had limitations. One is that rivals frequently do not fully know each other’s strategies, as his theories assumed. Another limitation is that in many cases, there is not a single possible outcome for a conflict but rather many potential outcomes. Game theorists John Harsanyi and Reinhard Selten shared with Dr. Nash the 1994 Nobel Prize for contributions in those areas of the field. The prize citation recognized all three men for their “pioneering analysis.”

Dr. Nash was described as having insights before he could hammer out the proofs of their accuracy, the ideas coming to him more like revelations than like scholarly findings. As early as 1958, Fortune magazine had ranked him among the greatest mathematicians of the era.


“Everyone else would climb a peak by looking for a path somewhere on the mountain,” Nasar quoted a former colleague as saying. “Nash would climb another mountain altogether and from a distant peak would shine a searchlight back on the first peak.”

Emperor of Antarctica
His mental illness came on when he was about 30, during what might have been one of the richest periods of his career. Dr. Nash was working at the time at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and was studying quantum theory.

As his condition worsened, Dr. Nash suffered delusions, hallucinations and impressions of being hunted. Men wearing red ties, he came to believe, were part of a “crypto-Communist Party.”

He thought that the New York Times was publishing messages from extraterrestrials and that he could understand them. He gave a student an intergalactic driver’s license, Nasar wrote.

At one point, he declined a prestigious appointment to the University of Chicago because he believed that he was in line to become emperor of Antarctica. At another point, he concluded that he was a “messianic figure of great but secret importance” and searched numerals — once the object of his brilliance — for hidden messages.

“I felt like I might get a divine revelation by seeing a certain number; a great coincidence could be interpreted as a message from heaven,” Dr. Nash said years later in the PBS “American Experience” documentary “A Brilliant Madness.”

He let his hair grow long. He traveled abroad and attempted to give up his U.S. citizenship, and at various times considered himself a Japanese shogun, the Biblical figure Job and a Palestinian refugee, among other identities.

During one of his stays in mental institutions, a former colleague came for a visit.

“How could you, a mathematician devoted to reason and logical proof, . . . how could you believe that extraterrestrials are sending you messages?” he asked, according to Nasar.

“Because,” Dr. Nash responded, “the ideas about supernatural beings came to me the same way that my mathematical ideas did. So I took them seriously.”

‘Big Brains’
John Forbes Nash Jr. was born on June 13, 1928, in Bluefield, W.Va. His father was an electrical engineer and his mother was an English and Latin teacher.

John Jr. was a precocious child and acquired a nickname: “Big Brains.” His family encouraged education, but he recalled in his Nobel biographical sketch the need to “learn from the world’s knowledge rather than from the knowledge of the immediate community.”

In 1945, he enrolled at what is now Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh and completed his undergraduate work after switching from chemical engineering to chemistry and finally to mathematics.

So great was his progress that he received a master’s degree in addition to his bachelor’s degree, both in mathematics, upon his graduation in 1948. He then moved to Princeton University, where, as a second-year student, he wrote the thesis that became the intellectual underpinning of his contributions to game theory.

Dr. Nash was “handsome as a god,” a former classmate told Nasar, but deeply unusual. He rode a bicycle in figure-eights. He joined a group of students that carried on the long tradition at Princeton of playing complex games, and even invented a game of his own.

Dr. Nash received his doctorate in 1950 and worked at the Rand Corp. before joining the faculty of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1951. In that period of his career, he untangled what he described as a “classical unsolved problem” related to differential geometry and to general relativity.

Also in that period, Dr. Nash met Eleanor Stier, a nurse with whom he had a son, John David, in 1953. At MIT, he met Alicia Larde, a physics student from El Salvador, and they married in 1957. Shortly thereafter, Alicia became pregnant with their son, John Charles Martin Nash, and Dr. Nash began to show signs of mental instability.

During his illness, Dr. Nash was divorced from his wife, moved in and out of hospitals and endured dangerous treatments including insulin-coma therapy. Alicia Nash later took him into her home and cared for him even though they were no longer married.

He spent much of his time on the Princeton campus, where some recognized him as the genius that he was. Others knew him as the Ghost of Fine Hall — a reference to the building that houses the mathematics department.

In time, and seemingly against all odds, he appeared to overcome the illness that had afflicted him for so long. He insisted that he “willed” his recovery.

“I decided I was going to think rationally,” Dr. Nash told an interviewer.

Dr. Nash and Alicia were remarried in 2001. “We thought it would be a good idea,” she later said. “After all, we’ve been together most of our lives.”

A complete list of survivors was not immediately available.

Dr. Nash remarked in his biographical sketch that his return to rational scientific thought was “not entirely a matter of joy as if someone returned from physical disability to good physical health.”

“Without his ‘madness,’ ” Dr. Nash wrote, “Zarathustra would necessarily have been only another of the millions or billions of human individuals who have lived and then been forgotten.”

He acknowledged the improbability of a mathematician of his age making discoveries of the kind that usually come to younger thinkers. But he held out hope.

“It is conceivable,” he continued, “that with the gap period of about 25 years of partially deluded thinking providing a sort of vacation my situation may be atypical. Thus I have hopes of being able to achieve something of value through my current studies or with any new ideas that come in the future.”
c***@aol.com
2015-05-24 14:24:04 UTC
Permalink
Complete? Lol. The obit whitewashes his life just like the movie did leaving out his homosexuality, arrests, and anti-Semitic tendencies.
p***@gmail.com
2015-05-24 14:53:38 UTC
Permalink
Complete? Lol. The obit whitewashes his life just like the movie did leaving out his homosexuality,...
Wait.

An obituary that does not identify the deceased's sexual orientation is "whitewashed"?
Michael OConnor
2015-05-24 14:55:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@gmail.com
Complete? Lol. The obit whitewashes his life just like the movie did leaving out his homosexuality,...
Wait.
An obituary that does not identify the deceased's sexual orientation is "whitewashed"?
I've never seen an obituary that pointed out that the deceased was a heterosexual.
Harvey Fenwick Lung
2015-05-24 17:05:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@gmail.com
Complete? Lol. The obit whitewashes his life just like the movie did leaving out his homosexuality,...
Wait.
An obituary that does not identify the deceased's sexual orientation is "whitewashed"?
You're thinking of the wrong guy.
c***@aol.com
2015-05-24 17:32:02 UTC
Permalink
The obit mentions the controversy surrounding the film and then fails to mention what the controversy was.

It was the parts of his life they left out in order to make him an appealing hero.

Can you guys be that dense?
c***@aol.com
2015-05-24 17:32:29 UTC
Permalink
And I'm not thinking of the wrong guy. Look it up, dumbass.
Harvey Fenwick Lung
2015-05-24 23:07:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by c***@aol.com
And I'm not thinking of the wrong guy. Look it up, dumbass.
Heh, wow, you better get that bug removed from your posterior.

Thought you were thinking of Alan Turing, he was a homo.
Don't know about this one though. Wasn't he married?
Kenny McCormack
2015-05-24 23:30:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Harvey Fenwick Lung
Post by c***@aol.com
And I'm not thinking of the wrong guy. Look it up, dumbass.
Heh, wow, you better get that bug removed from your posterior.
Thought you were thinking of Alan Turing, he was a homo.
Don't know about this one though. Wasn't he married?
Found via the Google machine:

* John Nash ducks gay question on 60 Minutes
* BY ADVOCATE.COM EDITORSMARCH 19 2002 1:00 AM ET
*
* John Forbes Nash Jr., the subject of the Oscar-nominated film A
* Beautiful Mind, appeared on 60 Minutes Sunday to rebut claims being made
* about him in the wake of questions regarding the film's accuracy. Nash
* noted that anti-Semitic remarks attributed to him had been made during a
* bout with schizophrenia. "I did have strange ideas during certain
* periods of time," says Nash. "It's really my subconscious talking. It
* was really that. I know that now." On the subject of his same-sex
* experiences, mentioned in the Sylvia Nasar biography on which the film
* was based, Nash would only say, "I've learned that it's better that I
* don't talk about it."

Make of it what you will...
--
Modern Christian: Someone who can take time out
from using Leviticus to defend homophobia and Exodus
to plaster the Ten Commandments on every school and
courthouse to claim that the Old Testament is merely
"ancient laws" that "only applies to Jews".
Sarah Ehrett
2015-05-24 19:56:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@gmail.com
Complete? Lol. The obit whitewashes his life just like the movie did leaving out his homosexuality,...
Wait.
An obituary that does not identify the deceased's sexual orientation is "whitewashed"?
" leaving out his homosexuality, arrests, and anti-Semitic tendencies."

And the one you have a problem with is his homosexuality?

Wow.
p***@gmail.com
2015-05-24 22:56:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sarah Ehrett
Post by p***@gmail.com
Complete? Lol. The obit whitewashes his life just like the movie did leaving out his homosexuality,...
Wait.
An obituary that does not identify the deceased's sexual orientation is "whitewashed"?
" leaving out his homosexuality, arrests, and anti-Semitic tendencies."
And the one you have a problem with is his homosexuality?
Absolutely.

Arrests in one's life may be newsworthy in an obituary.

Anti-Semitic tendencies may be newsworthy in an obituary, especially if they were public.

But sexual orientation has no business being in an obituary [unless it was the individual's public cause or if he was the first openly gay NFL player]
Post by Sarah Ehrett
Wow.
Wow wow.
Sarah Ehrett
2015-05-25 01:08:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Sarah Ehrett
Post by p***@gmail.com
Complete? Lol. The obit whitewashes his life just like the movie did leaving out his homosexuality,...
Wait.
An obituary that does not identify the deceased's sexual orientation is "whitewashed"?
" leaving out his homosexuality, arrests, and anti-Semitic tendencies."
And the one you have a problem with is his homosexuality?
Absolutely.
Why? It was left off the obituary. As was arrests, and anti-Semitic
tendencies.
Post by p***@gmail.com
Arrests in one's life may be newsworthy in an obituary.
Anti-Semitic tendencies may be newsworthy in an obituary, especially if they were public.
That's why I asked why you were concerned only with the homosexuality non
mention.

Cheers.
c***@aol.com
2015-05-25 01:34:15 UTC
Permalink
His sexual orientation wasn't necessarily relevant but in this case it was because of the controversy about the movie. If an obit is going to mention wives and kids then it also should include that he had homosexual liaisons while married that are part of the public record.

What is so hard to understand about that?
p***@gmail.com
2015-05-25 01:53:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sarah Ehrett
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Sarah Ehrett
Post by p***@gmail.com
Complete? Lol. The obit whitewashes his life just like the movie did leaving out his homosexuality,...
Wait.
An obituary that does not identify the deceased's sexual orientation is "whitewashed"?
" leaving out his homosexuality, arrests, and anti-Semitic tendencies."
And the one you have a problem with is his homosexuality?
Absolutely.
Why? It was left off the obituary. As was arrests, and anti-Semitic
tendencies.
Post by p***@gmail.com
Arrests in one's life may be newsworthy in an obituary.
Anti-Semitic tendencies may be newsworthy in an obituary, especially if they were public.
That's why I asked why you were concerned only with the homosexuality non
mention.
If you actually read the words I wrote, it is quite possible you may realize I was not concerned with a non-mention. I was concerned with why another respondent here thought that leaving out mention of sexual orientation in an obituary constituted "whitewash[ing] his life". This presupposes that a] sexual preference should be part of an obituary and b] not mentioning homosexuality constitutes whitewashing. I disagree on both counts and said so.


Do you disagree with my following comment? Say so.
"Sexual orientation has no business being in an obituary [unless it was the individual's public cause or if he was the first openly gay NFL player]"
Sarah Ehrett
2015-05-25 04:05:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sarah Ehrett
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Sarah Ehrett
Post by p***@gmail.com
Complete? Lol. The obit whitewashes his life just like the movie did leaving out his homosexuality,...
Wait.
An obituary that does not identify the deceased's sexual orientation is "whitewashed"?
" leaving out his homosexuality, arrests, and anti-Semitic tendencies."
And the one you have a problem with is his homosexuality?
Absolutely.
Why? It was left off the obituary. As was arrests, and anti-Semitic
tendencies.
Post by p***@gmail.com
Arrests in one's life may be newsworthy in an obituary.
Anti-Semitic tendencies may be newsworthy in an obituary, especially if they were public.
That's why I asked why you were concerned only with the homosexuality non
mention.
If you actually read the words I wrote, it is quite possible you may realize I was not concerned with a non-mention. I was concerned >with why another respondent here thought that leaving out mention of sexual orientation in an obituary constituted "whitewash[ing] >his life".
And if you actually read what I wrote it might have dawned on you that I was
saying include it all. The Washington Post's obituary *was* a whitewash.
This presupposes that a] sexual preference should be part of an obituary and b] not mentioning homosexuality constitutes >whitewashing. I disagree on both counts and said so.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/25/science/john-nash-a-beautiful-mind-subject-and-nobel-winner-dies-at-86.html

"Dr. Nash also had a series of relationships with men, and while at RAND in
the summer of 1954 he was arrested in a men’s bathroom for indecent
exposure..."


Nash was arrested in California in what was essentially a sting operation
involving homosexual activity. Although the charges were dropped, because
of the arrest Nash was stripped of a top-secret clearance and fired from
RAND Corporation.

Recent declassified information contains letters written to the NSA written
by Nash around the same time of his 1954 arrest. In the letters Nash
anticipated and wrote about new devices for both encryption and decryption
of secure communications.

The arrest changed Nash's life and quite possibly the US lost important
contributions he could have made.
Do you disagree with my following comment? Say so.
"Sexual orientation has no business being in an obituary [unless it was the individual's public cause or if he was the first openly gay NFL >player]"
I disagree with you. As does The New York Times.
c***@aol.com
2015-05-25 04:27:56 UTC
Permalink
Because peter... You're too dense to realize that no one was talking about his sexual preference, per se, but how his behavior affected his life. Duh.
l***@yahoo.com
2015-05-24 19:52:06 UTC
Permalink
It was the first thing I saw when I went to Google News today. Very sad.

I saw the movie when it came out (I have a non-blood-relative in the cast) and
a couple of years later, I tried to point out to a loved one (a mental patient)
that even the brilliant Nash couldn't always tell what was real and what wasn't, so maybe she should consider that things might be the same for her.

Naturally, it didn't work. You can't argue with someone who's delusional -
especially if you don't have the training for it.


Lenona.
Terry del Fuego
2015-05-25 13:42:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@yahoo.com
You can't argue with someone who's delusional
Coincidentally, that's the motto of this newsgroup.

--
Every single Prohibitionist is a willing servant of tyranny and hate,
having but one sole purpose - to make the rest of us suffer their putrid
legacy of incalculable waste and destruction. --"Malcolm"
Louis Epstein
2015-05-26 05:57:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by w***@yahoo.com
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/john-f-nash-jr-dies-nobel-laureate-was-subject-of-a-beautiful-mind/2015/05/24/61463418-0219-11e5-bc72-f3e16bf50bb6_story.html
John Forbes Nash Jr. was born on June 13, 1928, in Bluefield, W.Va. His
father was an electrical engineer and his mother was an English and
Latin teacher.
Also in that period, Dr. Nash met Eleanor Stier, a nurse with whom he
had a son, John David, in 1953. At MIT, he met Alicia Larde, a physics
student from El Salvador, and they married in 1957. Shortly thereafter,
Alicia became pregnant with their son, John Charles Martin Nash, and Dr.
Nash began to show signs of mental instability.
John and his sons John and John,not the least confusing of families.
Post by w***@yahoo.com
A complete list of survivors was not immediately available.
Are sons John and John both alive?

At the time of the film,my mother remarked that my parents
had known the Nashes socially in the late 1950s,though
John was distant,wandering off to corners at parties...we
knew better (and I remember) another Princeton (at times)
professor who was married to a close relative of Alicia.
(also named John and with a son named John,incidentally).

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

Loading...