Feynman just seems like the epitome of a good scientist. He didn't do research because he wanted something. He didn't want to prove anyone wrong or prove himself right. He doesn't seem like he did anything for a selfish reason.
"The prize is the pleasure of finding things out, the kicking of discovery, the observation of other people using it."
Damn right. ESPECIALLY the last one. The greatest pleasure of my research was after I had finished it, and presented it to people who got excited about it, said they wanted to use it.
hahah the group of 'arista' kids, is probably useful for mums, so they can bag about their kids being better, it was probably invented by a woman. a true scientist must worry about how to change the world, not getting high grades and frame and hang his diplomas in the living room walls.
Love his attitude. He lives outside social "classes", clothes that seperate people, borders that seperate countries etc... You have to admire him for simply just wanting to learn and following his interests and seeing people as who they really are. His attitude is as much consciousness raising as his science work.
The biggest key to Feynman's success is his curiosity. If I were as curious about physics as he, I could be the next Feynman. Math however bores me to tears. I wish I was passionate about anything in life, as much as he is about physics.
the thing i like about his reasoning is that he makes a point, takes a digression and then comes back to the point , making it as clear as possible and thus demonstrating his clartiy of thought.
@DeliciousRipon no sir. this man "is" awesome. he deserves to be referred to in the present tense due to the fact that he is still affecting people across the globe with his eloquent words of wisdom
I wish anthropologists would check conclusions enough. A lot of nonsense got into anthropology, and still stays there because they haven't been double-checked.
Anthropology is science sometimes, and could be better if there was less ideology and politics and better verification.
There was a spectacular case when anthropologists figured out the correlation between precipitation rate and soil type on one hand and population density among Aborigines of Australia on the other. The correlation was over 90%.
Of course, things are rarely that clear, but so what?
You havent seen this interview to the end did you???
Check out the last part of this interview and you'll see what i'm talking about!
Antropology is consider a social science and its absurd! Almost everything nowadays is consider science somehow just to make it more precise!
Feynman gives the example of social sciences - wich are NOT sciences - history is not a science, psychology is not a science, economy is not a science, engeneering is not a science.
These fields i quoted just use elements od science to guide their studies!
For example History has a particular field: Archeology which uses a scientific approach in order to process and excavate artifacts - the sistematic excavation! That doent mean Archeology is a science or that history is a science!
Where would we be without engineering? We'd still live in caves, and there wouldn't be much science either.
My original point was that anthropology needs more verification, so that nonsense like happy underage sex in Samoa or happy child molestation in New Guinea (both invented by American anthropologists and sold for the real thing) wouldn't be passed for truth for decades. (Not to speak of Carlos Castaneda.)
Science or not, the scientific approach of not accepting any hypothesis unless and until it's verified is very much applicable in anthropology. And very much needed.
Just because Anthropology isnt a science (and this is applied to the other cases too) doesnt mean it is not accurate!!
They (sociology, psychology, antrophology) have differnt methods of verifying the facts other than the scientific way. If the methodology is objective and extensively described then the results will be objective too!
The problem is when the methodoloy is obscure and imperfect - then the results will be of couse dubious
@Kurtlane So true I have a big problem with plenty of anthropology! But the problem is I think it is much easier to check conclusions in physics then it is in anthropology. I think the timeline as to when intelligent humans who were able to create Society's goes back much further then we believe now. But carbon dating is so limited and also It would only take a few thousand years to erase almost all evidence that anything existed.
I just love this man. I have read most of his popular books that I am aware of, and there is magnificent audio series of a semester of intro Physics lectures he have at cal tech that I listen to religiously. (He uses the same chess analogy in the Cal Tech lectures!)
Feynman was a great human!
You MUST finish uploading this series! (And please PM me with the details of where you got it!) Also PLEASE upload anything else you have about Feynman, OK? Thanks.
turned down a job with PIOS. (pious- they are)
w1n6ed83a5t 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
thanks to God that I have found your video. It's very helpful! look forward to viewing the rest.
kevinperry12344 3 months ago
he looked like forest gump in that older pic w/ the nobel haha!
koldblooded1 9 months ago 3
If I had Feynman as my high school physics teacher I would have stayed away from humanities just like him
lou3blades 9 months ago
Feynman just seems like the epitome of a good scientist. He didn't do research because he wanted something. He didn't want to prove anyone wrong or prove himself right. He doesn't seem like he did anything for a selfish reason.
He just did it because he loved it.
Zeus0Moose 10 months ago 2
"The prize is the pleasure of finding things out, the kicking of discovery, the observation of other people using it."
Damn right. ESPECIALLY the last one. The greatest pleasure of my research was after I had finished it, and presented it to people who got excited about it, said they wanted to use it.
kaimialana 10 months ago
his enthusiasm is infectious! Why did I have to wait to be a grown up to learn about this man and his ilk?
InnerSmile72 1 year ago 2
hahah the group of 'arista' kids, is probably useful for mums, so they can bag about their kids being better, it was probably invented by a woman. a true scientist must worry about how to change the world, not getting high grades and frame and hang his diplomas in the living room walls.
VERGIS92 1 year ago
Everytime I begin to lose the fun in my physics education I watch this video keeps me going for a year again.
heoTheo 1 year ago 8
@heoTheo I know what you mean :-)
mojado1982 7 months ago
he should join tautology club
affablegiraffable 1 year ago
Wow! I love that chess analogy!
SpeakMouthWords 1 year ago 5
I love that he's not full of himself. Some otherwise intelligent, capable people can get so conceited, it does them a disservice.
tjonestoday 1 year ago 8
Love his attitude. He lives outside social "classes", clothes that seperate people, borders that seperate countries etc... You have to admire him for simply just wanting to learn and following his interests and seeing people as who they really are. His attitude is as much consciousness raising as his science work.
silvastomp 1 year ago
love his impish smile...
husumable 1 year ago
The biggest key to Feynman's success is his curiosity. If I were as curious about physics as he, I could be the next Feynman. Math however bores me to tears. I wish I was passionate about anything in life, as much as he is about physics.
Sconz32 1 year ago 2
Lol "What's wrong with chemists!"
soulvibe2007 1 year ago
0:45 0:54 - If i was there i would've told him 'shurely your joking Mr. Feynman, you are important'
BlackBeardDelight187 1 year ago 2
He's so effortlessly intelligent.
Mikerty391 1 year ago 11
Anjun, You learn.. You read, you study, you question...
One of the first pages of the book in which he learned Calculus, a book which I also have, has an amazing quote.
"What one fool can do, so can another"
Feynman believed that, So do I. Nothing different between him and myself, or you. Just dedication.
NickC84 1 year ago 9
@NickC84 I totally agree with you !
Its dedication !
LukeOtterbech 1 year ago
how do i get like him, how do i understand these things as fully as he? i want to comprehend such complex subjects.
anjundoobies89 2 years ago 3
Fascinating to hear him talking about society, to see our species examined in a purely rational light. The view from that perspective is disgusting.
CCPlaetean 2 years ago 3
the thing i like about his reasoning is that he makes a point, takes a digression and then comes back to the point , making it as clear as possible and thus demonstrating his clartiy of thought.
nandeepshah85 2 years ago 2
I DON'T LIKE HONOURS!!!
mahoose6 2 years ago 11
This man was awesome!
DeliciousRipon 2 years ago 42
@DeliciousRipon no sir. this man "is" awesome. he deserves to be referred to in the present tense due to the fact that he is still affecting people across the globe with his eloquent words of wisdom
aeropostalbaby1 11 months ago 4
Physicists check the conclusions enough.
I wish anthropologists would check conclusions enough. A lot of nonsense got into anthropology, and still stays there because they haven't been double-checked.
Kurtlane 2 years ago 31
You are forgeting that Physics is a science but Anthropology is NOT!!!!
luarionte 2 years ago
luarionte, that's pretty arrogant of you.
Depends on your definition of science.
Anthropology is science sometimes, and could be better if there was less ideology and politics and better verification.
There was a spectacular case when anthropologists figured out the correlation between precipitation rate and soil type on one hand and population density among Aborigines of Australia on the other. The correlation was over 90%.
Of course, things are rarely that clear, but so what?
Kurtlane 2 years ago
You havent seen this interview to the end did you???
Check out the last part of this interview and you'll see what i'm talking about!
Antropology is consider a social science and its absurd! Almost everything nowadays is consider science somehow just to make it more precise!
Feynman gives the example of social sciences - wich are NOT sciences - history is not a science, psychology is not a science, economy is not a science, engeneering is not a science.
luarionte 2 years ago
These fields i quoted just use elements od science to guide their studies!
For example History has a particular field: Archeology which uses a scientific approach in order to process and excavate artifacts - the sistematic excavation! That doent mean Archeology is a science or that history is a science!
Undestand now???
luarionte 2 years ago
OK, it's not a science. So what?
Where would we be without engineering? We'd still live in caves, and there wouldn't be much science either.
My original point was that anthropology needs more verification, so that nonsense like happy underage sex in Samoa or happy child molestation in New Guinea (both invented by American anthropologists and sold for the real thing) wouldn't be passed for truth for decades. (Not to speak of Carlos Castaneda.)
(cont.)
Kurtlane 2 years ago
Science or not, the scientific approach of not accepting any hypothesis unless and until it's verified is very much applicable in anthropology. And very much needed.
Kurtlane 2 years ago
Yes, ok!
Just because Anthropology isnt a science (and this is applied to the other cases too) doesnt mean it is not accurate!!
They (sociology, psychology, antrophology) have differnt methods of verifying the facts other than the scientific way. If the methodology is objective and extensively described then the results will be objective too!
The problem is when the methodoloy is obscure and imperfect - then the results will be of couse dubious
luarionte 2 years ago
@Kurtlane I wish people would check their conclusions in every aspect of their lives. They'd be a lot better off if they did.
clemonsx90 11 months ago
@Kurtlane Your right, but it's much easier to check equations than social/historical hypotheses.
Gnoo 7 months ago
@Kurtlane So true I have a big problem with plenty of anthropology! But the problem is I think it is much easier to check conclusions in physics then it is in anthropology. I think the timeline as to when intelligent humans who were able to create Society's goes back much further then we believe now. But carbon dating is so limited and also It would only take a few thousand years to erase almost all evidence that anything existed.
JG129 4 months ago
the bit about honors is great
TheEarlOfDublin 2 years ago 7
What i get from Feynman is that were all the same , nobody's better then the next person.
DaveRush2009 2 years ago 2
I have read 2 books about him..He was such an interesting person to listen too. His stories are so funny. Always an adventure.
BigMoons2 2 years ago 4
What an inspiring guy. I wish there had been someone around like this when I was studying physics (I was a very lazy student).
Reorte 2 years ago 5
what a wonderful human.... sitting here with a silly smirk on my lips :P
iPREnZ 2 years ago 6
the chess analogy he uses is great
D119heavy 3 years ago 4
I just love this man. I have read most of his popular books that I am aware of, and there is magnificent audio series of a semester of intro Physics lectures he have at cal tech that I listen to religiously. (He uses the same chess analogy in the Cal Tech lectures!)
Feynman was a great human!
You MUST finish uploading this series! (And please PM me with the details of where you got it!) Also PLEASE upload anything else you have about Feynman, OK? Thanks.
dfarmer1584 4 years ago 3