@UCm6OZvR_QveiGtwos-qpPZg I think you might be mistaken here. Popper was not a logical positivist, in fact from towardsdatascience.com/logical-positivism-and-the-scientific-method-in-genetic-algorithmics-aaf0ed9d6f22 we get: The non-universality of empirical observation was a particularly vexing problem for logical positivism. Given the verificationist foundations of this movement, only empirical observations made at a particular point in time and space were admissible as protocol sentences. Generalization to other points in time and space was not allowed. This made it hard to prove much of value. Proponents of logical positivism tied themselves in knots trying to address this and other critiques. By the mid twentieth century, the logical positivist movement had largely crumbled and the philosophy of science propounded by Karl Popper had gained traction. so K.P. (among others) put the boots to log. pos.
John Campbell - You’ve phrased it differently. The way to phrase that as a scientific guess is “The Earth is Flat because xyz” and then they go test that theory and it gets proven false. We can never prove the earth is round with 100% certainty. It’s just that theory has never been disproved.
Like mister Feynman, just to name one theory: that matter exists outside of our observation. Not one experiment has been able to prove this, so this implies that this theory isn't true.
+Gene Livingston RU-vid is also an example of why rubbish only wins when it has no counterpart... you can look up 'Ancient Aliens' and in the same list get A real astrophysicist telling you WHY there were no ancient aliens... Bullshit has nowhere to hide when authority enters the party. I suppose you could apply that to the internet... Its an iterative process... this is a new advent for humanity... but like the printing press it will utterly destroy nonsense over time.
@@pancakebb6384 Well Feynman was an incredible teacher. It is concise and focuses on getting the listener to 'get the gist' of the topic. So that they actually take away a lesson from the words he said. He makes jokes, and gives examples to keep the attention of the listener. So if you had to choose one explanation of many, this is the best kind.
9 minutes of sheer brilliance. I am a scientist and whenever I feel I need some recharging, I watch Feynman videos, and my inner scientist again lights up. With new energy, with new hope.
The first minute is so blindingly brilliant -- if it disagrees with the experiment it's WRONG! -- followed by all these other flashes of brilliance to illuminate that point ... the man's words are as light from a star.
I hear you brother. I am _not_ a scientist, just a coder ;-) Richard got a smell of THE truth and it galvanised his effort. I love almost everything about him, as you would a close friend. Such a pity he is NOT the watchword on truth now.... Peace brother _/|\_
My uncle, Abe Bader, was Feynman's high school physics teacher. I remember my uncle describing to my father a brilliant student, who could learn more physics in a weekend than he could learn in a summer. I was only a kid when I heard this, so I didn't catch any name. But the idea of someone that brilliant stayed with me, though I didn't know that my uncle meant Feynman until they both had died, decades later.. I became intrigued with Feynman from programs like NOVA
After Feynman died I got hold the book which is called, I think, "Surely you must be Joking Feynman". In it, Feynman describes what I remembered hearing my uncle tell my father.. He said he lent this brilliant student some graduate level physics books to study, as he was obviously way ahead of the class. Feynman tells the story from his point of view in his book. It's interesting that this particular memory of my uncle talking about a brilliant student stayed with me for so many years.
Thanks. There is more to the story--an unfortunate part. I think it proves that truth is stranger than fiction. If you look up Abram Bader on the Internet, you can usually find a story about my uncle and high school age Feynman, in which my uncle is explaining a physics concept to him. But, if you look up Abe Bader's son Seth Bader, you get news stories about a murder trial. It came as a shock to me when, in 2006, I looked up Seth in the course of trying to write a family history, and this trial came up. My cousin Seth is in prison for life! There is a book about the case called Legally Dead. I don't remember the names of the authors. There was also an episode of a series called Deadly Sins, in which my cousin's case was featured. Abe Bader was married to my father's sister, Yvette. The rest of us are very law-abiding. My father was a violinist in the NY Philharmonic from 1946 to 1979.
I am extremely delighted to hear from Feynman's favorite teacher Bader's relative. Feynman has mentioned Bader at many places in his lectures. Your comment here helped me really get a sense of how Feynman would have been when studying. Being a big fan of Feynman for so many years now, these comments thoroughly delighted me. Thanks a lot!
"I read 'em [the letters] to make sure that I haven't already thought of that." In my opinion, that type of attitude is what made him a good scientist.
Not all people are brought up with the same rights. Insular fundamentalist communities must resent this stuff. I think Ramaano’s comment is worth repeating.
Before Sagan, before Tyson, before Brian Greene, or Michio Kaku, there was a great science communicator who was also a great scientist, and his name was Richard Feynman. Not everyone is going to like his streamlined philosophy of science, but this is how it should work, and i think most practicing scientists would agree.
@@missdee4927 So, apparently, did every physics student at Cornell, and the University of Wisconsin, and every college in the US and probably in the world. (His retirement party, as I understand it, was epic and not a dry eye in the building.)
"problem is not what might be wrong but what might be substituted precisely in place of it." these words by feynman during this lecture just took my breath away.what an amazing super talented intellectually genius. hats off!!
This is exactly what the average person should understand, explained exactly in the way the average person could understand. Why it is not subtitled in tens of languages and shared over and over in the Net?
I would love to find people who don't only care about the views but also that it is accessable long-terms which means that they enable viewers to add subtitles. It's the best thing they could do while ordering them so that you don't find these videos one by one in a yt-algorithm-determinded way.
How can ANYONE click the dislike button on this video?! Richard Feynman is one of the most intellectually honest scientists who ever lived, having no agenda except what is true (or what appears true until it is proven false, if ever). It's a shame that this voice was taken from us. Some people should live forever.
I teach research methods in psychology, and this is exactly how the scientific method should be taught. I even use the example of Newton and Einstein to illustrate it (not nearly as well as Feynman does, but I try), and his criticism of many psychology theories are spot on! That doesn't mean psychology is not a science or can't be studied rigorously, just that a lot of it is useless because it doesn't help actually predict anything, especially in the day's of Freud).
And that's exactly why I love Feynman so much. I have 0 knowledge about physics (never had the subject). But his idea of how to conceptualize theories and thoughts is intreguetly linked with philosophy and how he percieves the world. You could watch his lectures and (ofcourse learn about physics) but more importantly, learn to critically think for yourself. A true teacher, not just for the subject but for life itself. What a great man he was.
Some of my greatest scientific pillars came from this man. His Lectures on Physics books were on the reading list at uni. Thanks for all the memories Richard. You are greatly missed.
Hello John, I believe this was either in 1963 or 1964, it was definitely in the early-to-mid sixties :) Sorry I couldn't be more precise! Thank you by the way for all you have done for the British public and the wider world during this pandemic. Really appreciate your expertise and dedication :) saty safe
My inexpert opinion is Feynman looks too young for this to be the 1960s. And the audience looks very 1950s to me. Feynman was born in 1918, so he would have been 30 in 1948, 40 in 1958, or 50 in 1968. I guess decide which of those he looks closer to to you. ;)
Nobody can play Mr.Feynman, for starters, nobody is even close to being worthy of that honor. Hollywood people are just that , Hollywood people, just actor's, playing a part, Mr. Feynman is the real deal.Actors are phony baloney, they have no idea of reality.
The combination lock example he tells at the end is way more significant when you know that at one point when Feynman was doing research for the US government he would continuously guess the combination to other scientists safes. He learned how to essentially guess any safes combination within the timespan of a few minutes just to mess around with his peers
In "The Pleasure of Finding Things Out" there is a wonderful bit of Feynman talking about how the actual safecracking he did was mostly smoke and mirrors: you figured out what two of the three digits of the combination were from looking at the door when it was open, and you wrote that down somewhere. Then you would "get your tools" and retrieve the part you wrote down, try the 100 possible combinations, and then read a magazine for a while because you don't want it to look too easy.
There are two other professors from that generation that I know were like that in style and in knowledge. The first was a professional economist by the name of Milton Friedman. The second was a professor of History and kinesiology at the University of Texas during the 1970s through the 1990s. His name was Dr Terry Todd.
There are plenty of great scientists around today, they just don't get media coverage and generally don't want it. Also, they tend to focus on very specific problems, so while Newton and Euler could discover laws in various fields, today's scientists will focus on specific problems within specific fields, perhaps for their entire life.
@@colonelarmfeldt8572 I didn't mean to imply that there aren't many great scientists anymore. Science seems to be making so many discoveries every week that I can't keep up with them anymore. Feynman had a unique talent in being able to break complex ideas down to make them understandable. Not only was he a brilliant scientist, but he was also a great communicator and educator. I particularly liked his humility and sense of humour. I would like to see more scientists willing to make the effort to promote science and make it understandable to a wider range of people.
Mister F if only they taught more cursive. but RIP, we’re in the days of typing, on a touchscreen no less. Even mechanical keyboards is becoming old, and DEFINITELY not Gen-X. (If there are any Gen-Xs out there that does type with a Cherry MX keyboard, I applaud. Just know that you’re a minority.)
@@projectjt3149 I would not be surprised if handwriting comes back with a vengeance once touchscreen pens become as commonplace as ballpoint pens and work as smoothly and intuitively, with AI-driven handwriting recognition reaching near 100% accuracy. There's something deeply humanistic about writing something out through old-fashion manipulation of pen that typing will not be able to replicate.
I think Feynman was at his best here. As he got older, I don't think he lost a step or got less brilliant, but I think he lost some intensity. I appreciate his take on the scientific method, and the tentativeness with which we should approach discerning between fact and fantasy
@@gerryjtierney Cult? Most scientists agree that viruses exist, that epidemics exists, so what is more likely that all scientist lie about covid, or that it is real?
@@tgstudio85 More important than the question whether anything exists is the insight that (objective) science can never give you an imperative of action, because this is part of the subjective decision on what you are actually wanting to achieve. Nowadays pseudoscience is marked by a constant claim that science proved we should implement these and those measures, which is not only beyond the mandate of science but actually an instrumentalisation of the latter and as such an insult to free mankind.
@@tgstudio85 do you know the majority scientific opinion on covid? But excluding that what scientists have a high enough education in economics to recommend policies to follow that won't cause more harm than good? What about years lost to covid? 600,000 school children suffering from malnutrition and poverty first year due to shutdowns. Is sacrificing our young to spare our old really the way forward? In the west those born into poverty live to their 60s, and economic shutdowns caused a lot of poverty. So why have mass shutdowns which cause poverty when the so few people were at risk? In the UK our average lifespan is 81 years old, yet the average covid death was 84. We also know that large percentages of the human populace, including all ages, had natural immunity and would never get sick. So why do they need a vaccine and a vaccine passport? Why not an immunity passport? Why ignore all the data that natural immunity is better? Why vaccinate the young? Why implement policies that reduce people's natural immunity if herd immunity is the goal? There's a lot of questions a thinking person asks, and a lot of things to consider, and not just scientists to listen to. But most importantly scientists had lots of different opinions backed up with solid peer review research. Ignoring one group and only listening to another is always dangerous. Don't dismiss anything without assessing it's merits
Humble? Feynman? WRONG. The theory that Feynman was a humble man sounds nice, but it didn't agree with experiment, observation, or experience. So it's WRONG. I don't care how beautiful the theory may be, or how smart you are, or what your name is; the theory doesn't agree with experiment, observation, or experience, so it's WRONG, and that's all there is to it.
6:35 "Ow - So you're dealing with phycological matters and things can not be defines so precisely?" "yes" "But then you can not claim to know anything about it" Nailed it : D
As a psychologist who is also a big fan of Feynman, he's not entirely wrong. People are nowhere near as precise as physics. A bit of irony, however, is that both physics and psychology are both ruled by statistics. We can't say exactly what any given person will do, but with enough information we can give a decent prediction within a certain margin of error.
@@joshbutts3143 Once you get to the quantum mechanical realm, it totally is. We have no idea what a single particle is gonna do, we can just do statistics on a large number of them.
@@joshbutts3143 Lol it totally is. For example the fraction of the total proton momentum that a single quark carries is random, based on a distribution function. Feynman's point was about quantitative (which includes statistics) vs qualitative guesses.
If only we had more people like this teaching nowadays we would be in a lot better condition than we are at the present time.I love this man.He's right up there with Albert Einstein.
Gerjaison Exactly, and tn this day and age religions are an to insult our intelligence, I try discussing it with some of my religious friends and as the saying goes, never attempt to teach a pig to sing, it wastes your time and just annoys the pig, I myself miss Mr. Christopher Hitchens deeply.
guess: Feynman's lectures are always enjoyable and clear. experiment: I have watched this video and I found it enjoyable and clear. however, this is not enough to establish our hypothesis as a theory. more experimentation is needed. I shall now watch more of Feynman's lectures and see if it holds true.
Just remember that you can only prove that your guess is wrong. No matter how many brilliant videos you watch, you'll never know if the next one you watch is extremely boring.
A great Professor indeed. Things, points which are very tough to understand turn out to be so clear and easy from Feynman's mouth. A great man, a brillant man for mankind. Thanks a lot for the sharing. That's pretty smart.
What lucky men and women they were to be able to enjoy this man's lecture. I wonder how many were inspired to pursue the sciences as a result of his unique and compelling method of teaching?
A model of flawless clarity from the most original mind of the 20th Century. Feynman’s value came from his utter immunity to bullshit - he took absolutely no one’s word for anything. We sure could use him today.
The 1st thing that catched me is his handwriting over the board... Its awesome, beautiful n done/written spontaneously! I repeatedly watches part everytimes he wrote on the board!
Richard Feynman was a great scientist and pioneer of Quantum Electrodynamics (QED). He was a student of John Wheeler (a great physicist in his own right). Feynman was also on the scientific panel investigating the cause of the Challenger Space Shuttle disaster in 1986. He passed away in 1988. RIP 🙏🙏🙏
Why has the clarifying statement he made at the end of the "If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong" part been edited out? (something I've noticed quite a few other channels seem to have done as well..) In the full version he goes on to clarify that it's wrong once one has gone back and made sure the results are accurate and not the product of human / experimental error etc. somewhere along the way..
+possumverde probably because it's an edited version taken from another video where they had to make it shorter to make it fit removing "redundant" parts...
Inogan Cool, some of the channels I've come across with the edited version are hard core anti-science channels who use it as a bit of quote mining in an attempt to make an argument that theoretical science is unscientific (since a good deal of it...especially physics...is currently beyond our technological ability to test)...a point of view Feynman would strongly have disagreed with and covered later on in this particular lecture series...
It's also that kind of statement that makes psychology look more like quackery or pseudo science than an actual field of research. Either the results of it can be trusted or it's very much a profession of highly educated guessers without any experts.
That's actually a bit of a shame. There are fields where experiments and proofs are harder or impossible, and the fields are aware of that. But they still are essential for our health and survival, so they should not be disregarded as weaker science,
This a very small part of a series of Feynman gave at CORNELL in the 1950’s. You might want to post all of them. He had a very unique presentation that helped scientists and non scientist to understand the basics.
Feynman is awesome. Since this talk though there's been advancements in our understanding and what we know about the quantum realm than was not known back then. Remember, this is a talk on Newtonian physics and what Feynman is saying is "there are limits to what physics can and cannot answer".
@0:40 looks like he makes direct reference to Dirac, who exactly thought what mathematical formulae should represent. In a way experiments should agree with mathematical laws.
If I could teleport back in time at a place of my choosing it would be to when God was creating life so I could take a video and stick it to the 'evolutionists'.
