Your morning dose of Feynman

Discuss

16 Responses to “Your morning dose of Feynman”

  1. Ben Carlsen says:

    Great video.  The job of a scientist is to find out new things and increase our understanding of the universe.  Sometimes that new understanding is different from what we understood before.  I always get confused by people who get mad at scientists for just doing their job.

    • John Stephens says:

      People don’t get mad at scientists for doing science, that’s their job.  People get mad at scientists for doing politics, which is not.

  2. xenphilos says:

    Castling in chess seems like something a guy made up one day and said “Oh, no, I’m pretty sure it’s an official move. Trust me.”

  3. PhosPhorious says:

    Brilliantly clear, as usual.

    I suppose the greatest failure if science education is that this point has to be constantly re-explained.  Creationists are always saying “But look, there’s so much science doesn’t know!” as if that means that we should reject science, when what it means is that we need more science.

  4. Lobster says:

    Guess some people think it’s better to be totally wrong once than a little wrong a thousand times.

  5. Paul Renault says:

    This is from one of his lectures for first-year physics students,  on ‘our understanding of physics up to now’.   The other ‘intro lecture’ is on quantum mechanics.

    They’re worth looking for and loading into your MP3 player.

  6. benher says:

    God does not play dice… he’s into chess apparently! 

    “God of Perfect Analogies”… shit, you weren’t kidding. Brilliant boost for my morning. The world needs you again Feynman! 

  7. EricT says:

    I never knew that The Feynman looked and sounded so much like Danny Aiello!  Does this mean I really died in Vietnam?

  8. jennybean42 says:

    I can’t love Feyman enough.

  9. Jim Richardson says:

    Feynman is (as usual) 100% right. 

    So the next time someone on boing boing babbles about “scientific consensus” link them to this video. 
    Science isn’t about consensus, it’s about questions. 

  10. Brandon Hamilton says:

    I don’t know if I can get on board with the praise for this one.  I have just been reading too much Putnam, Rorty, Khun, etc. lately to cheer for what appears to me to be a more or less naive realist conception of what science is and does.

    • flosofl says:

      I’m fairly sure a Nobel Prize for Physics winner has pretty decent conception of science.

      You need to realize that Feynman didn’t get the appellation of The Great Explainer for collecting bottle caps. He got it because he could not only reduce an idea or concept to its simplest core, he could also explain it in such a way that non-physicists would understand. Videos like this are aimed at a lay audience with *zero* to little exposure to real science.

  11. Alex says:

    What a great man he was =)

Leave a Reply