Talk:Philip Emeagwali

• Archive 1:

Credibility

wait, so is he credible or not? I think I linked an article by him that purports the word "chemistry" is derived from the word "kemet" describing ancient black egypt. Blackpower 18:06, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Just about everything that has been said in the press about Emeagwali has contained gross misrepresentations greatly exaggerating his contributions to the discipline of computer science. The only conclusion I can draw is that Emeagwali has deliberately tried to perpetuate those misrepresentations. So, in general, I would regard any theory he has on *any* topic with a great deal of skepticism. Also, Emeagwali's academic qualifications are in engineering-related fields. As a historian and a linguist, he is strictly an amateur.

I would try to find out whether the claim is Emeagwali's own theory, and is not been adopted by anyone else, or whether he is writing about an idea that has been discussed by other people. One single person writing about a theory (even if they were an academic in the field) does not make it notable. --Robert Merkel 01:57, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Donita Brown is NOT Emeagwali's wife as stated by you. Emeagwali's wife is Dr. Dale Emeagwali. She is a very accomplished scientist in her own right.[1] And as another poster i.e. Jim Apple said, you have not shown any proof that high node count supercomputers were already in use before Emeagwali used them. Emeagwali does not say that he invented supercomputing but he does say that he did RE-INVENT the way supercomputers were designed and programmed.[2]. Richard

Refuting Richard's comment: there is evidence that Donita Browm is also Dr. Dale Emeagwali. See articles at [3] and [4]. Tom

Where is the evidence showing that Donita Brown is Emeagwalis wife? All you have done is linked to 2 articles whose authors CLAIM, without any proof, that Donita Brown is Emeagwali's wife.

Furthermore, the other team that won the Gordon Bell prize that year was also using a CM-2 for a different type of oilfield simulation. I think that fairly directly refutes your claim that high node count supercomputers weren't being used before Emeagwali did so. --Robert Merkel 11:13, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I think you are mistaken about the high node computing claim. Emeagwali did not use a PHYSICAl high node computer, but wrote a PROGRAM that created a VIRTUAL high node computer using the CM-2. That is what this is all about.Emeagwali wrote a program that utilized the CM-2's processors as though they were connected as a Hypercube network. We are not talking about a physical invention but a VIRTUAl/THEORETICAL one. Hence, Emeagwali's hypercube network can be implemented in ANY supercomputer and not only the CM-2. Emeagwali's ingenuity is in the Hypercube and Hyperball networks i.e. how to arrange a supercomputers processors for maximum efficiency[5], that he created to solve problems in weather forecasting and Oil simulation.

According to the Wikipedia article, the Connection Machine are physically interconnected as a hypercube, so I don't see how writing a program to use them as one as any work of genius. And Emeagwali specifically claims that before he came along people were unable to use supercomputers efficiently. That is clearly incorrect, as shown by the fact that other people were indepenently using the CM-2 for other purposes. Nor does the Gordon Bell Prize article (the only time Emeagwali's work actually appears in a scientific journal) mention anything about the supposed "Hyperball" network.

In any case, I repeat what I've said many times on this article in response to various objectors: unless you can find some evidence that anybody other than Emeagwali takes Emeagwali's work seriously (and, as a purported computer scientist, such evidence would primarily be his work being cited by other computer scientists in articles or books) the article should be changed to reflect that. Otherwise, the article as it stands is an accurate summary of Emeagwali's scientific standing. --Robert Merkel 00:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I concur. --Coolcaesar 01:34, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't see the need for such vicious attack by 'Richard Merkel' and 'Coolcaeser'. As far as is obvious neither of you has invented, dicovered or even added to anything. Another classic example of jealousy and the deep sated delusion of white supremacy among caucasoids. Find something better to do with your time than trying to bring someone else down especially one who is African. He has won a prize for his hard work but your jealousy at the fact that he is African means you belittle it as much as possible. Stop being sour grapes and get lives (happy ones at that)!

Did I ever say I was Causasoid? Now I'm just laughing and laughing at our anonymous visitor (who is clearly an imbecile, since he or she can't even spell or write a coherent sentence). --Coolcaesar 21:52, 5 April 2006 (UTC)