Too bad he never did a project like Cosmos. His enthusiasm and ability to explain advanced physics in simple terms would have made a great teacher for the masses. At least some one had the brilliant idea of taping these interviews and we can still hear him talk in 2019
Feynman was a terrific improbable combination of a number of traits - openminded inquisitiveness, great personality, great with words, passionate, and other things. The world is filled with people that excel in one or more of those, but to see them all lined up in one person is rare.
“Has it ever struck you that life is all memory, except for the one present moment that goes by you so quick you hardly catch it going?”― Tennessee Williams.
This is awesome! An interview with Feynman during the birth of the Standard Model! I am so glad I go on regular Feynman benders! This was great. I think this is how it should be taught in schools, cloud chambers, math diagrammes, than quarks and the Standard Model. This video should be required viewing by all physics students.
Wow...just wow. Sadly, I just learned about this guy and just from watching a couple videos of him I think he's amazing. His charisma is nearly jaw-dropping!
***** I just enjoyed Feynman's tone and assertiveness. You're right about interviewers trying to sum up complex issues in a nice little package though.
Great video! Thanks for sharing. It's true that the "mundane" ideas in life bring into focus the beautiful interactions occurring, literally, in front of all of us everyday. The next time you look at the moon, see it for the sphere it is.
Thank you, Mr. Feynman. Finally, someone explained to me the basics of those chambers. Until now, I saw these weird pictures with all sorts of weirds squiggles in them, spirals and all, and when I asked, they'd just say, "Oh, this is a muon, this is a clingon, that is a bozon and this is a bizon." And I'd go, "Wait a minute. Before you tell me their names, tell me how they are produced." Now, in less than a minute, Mr. Feynman made it all very clear.
The waves in the lake hitting the "shore"( what's the word) just when he says "waves" was just perfect. To use scientific discoveries to be able to live to experience a moment like that is more valuable a reward than honours, prizes or a membership at the club for people who put things on top of another. Or something.
I really do not know whether I can make a valid argument: One person is happy to accept the observable world as it is seen for the moment. The other delves into details and travels deep, to know how such miniscule details can proceed to build up a world, as the former sees. The common platform is the mind of each dictated by their individual egos. If each questions as to whence the ego arose from, the ego vanishes and a strange void rises. I believe that seeing that is seeing Reality . The seer is the self and is a part of that reality. Phew, I have said what I started to, hope it makes sense to the reader.
"In 1973 Yorkshire public television made a short film of the Nobel laureate while he was there. The resulting film, Take the World From Another Point of View, was broadcast in America as part of the PBS Nova series. The documentary features a fascinating interview, but what sets it apart from other films on Feynman is the inclusion of a lively conversation he had with the eminent British astrophysicist Fred Hoyle."
@jimmyti9cer my bad i misheard him. one question though, how does the piston in the bubble chamber expand the liquid hydrogen literally? since we know that liquids cannot be expanded/compressed? ive learnt about thermodynamics but mostly theoretically. visually im still not too sure.
Three types of quarks? I was under the impression that it was 6: up, down, top, bottom, charm, strange. Am I misunderstanding what he meant by 3 types, or they were discovered after this video was made?
I'm pretty sure they hadn't been discovered yet from how feynman looks i'm guessing this is from about early 70s and it was only at this time that the other three quarks were being theorized with the bottom and charm quarks being discovered shortly after but it took till 1995 to discover the top quark
@Bnjolly I wouldn't be surprised if Feynman's intellectual development, like that of many gifted children, was lopsided: he may have tested at the ceiling of the mathematical portion of the IQ test, while only testing average or slightly above average in the verbal portion. This could very well lead to an overall score in the mid-120s. Such a score, however, hardly tells us what Feynman might have scored on a more accurate test as an adult.
@TheStigma While I believe that IQ is an imperfect method for measuring intelligence, I wouldn't put too much stock in reports of Feynman's "unremarkable" IQ. As I understand it, the score in the 120s was from a test taken when Feynman was a child - a test that had a much lower ceiling (around the 99th percentile) than most official IQ tests, making it's accuracy questionable.
It's a pity he died at the time when supercomputers were starting to be built that can take the simple rules of the game and not only easily beat any human at chess but also reproduce the complexity of earth's climate, the folding of a protien molecule, the mammalian neocortex and the interaction of galaxies. I wonder what he would have done with such a machine?
I just love how Feynman keeps saying stuff like "its not very hard..." when talking about how to interpret the results of a nuclear accelerator's experiments lol. Yea - it kind of IS pretty hard Mr. Feynman - you sexy beast - for the rest of us who are under the 99,99 percentile IQ. Stop making the rest of us look bad damnit!
He had a great sense oh humor. You should read Surely, you're joking Mr Feynman(by hisown words). Also read James Gleick "Genius" about Feynman. No Physicist comes closer to this Curious Character for mastery in many things apart from Physics. Einstein was self-taught in violin. So there were many Physicists with different talents but none like RPF.
@Bnjolly Yea - my research into it wasn't really "in-depth" so to speak either. It was more along the lines of putting "richard feynman iq" into a google search - so yea - take it with a grain of salt indeed. Thanks for the clarification in any case.
@starsolace you should try, 'cause it's a matter of practice really. and without the math there's no truly understanding (or let's say 'appreciation of beauty') (and by the way, i study physics)
Love your energy Richard, now open up your beautiful mind and show some respect for Mother Turtle. The truly wise use parable and allegory. Who better to describe the carrier of the cosmic egg we temporarily call home than by the name of the one who cares for the sea, the great mother turtle. The holy cow of the sea! It is a marvel, containing the entire ocean of the cosmic egg on top of her! Not to mention, there are tunnels under the ocean that no man knows and perhaps there truly are giant beings. Best to establish telepathic connections with the most high and holy beings imaginable!
no shit.. I think its my late great homie who never known me Christopher Hitchens. couldn't swear to it though. pretty sure not Dawkins. Dawkins has that kind of gentle peoples (s) sound, Hitchens sounds like what I can best describe as more regal and less gentle. Dawkins sounds like stewy griffin, Hitchens sounds half way between stewie and Attenborough. I assume that's just what south England, Oxford level educated ppl tend to sound like specifically.. Dawkins and Hitchens that is..
