he is saying you don't know enough about electric and magnetic waves and how they affect electrons to understand how it all works. I understand exactly why he would say he cannot explain this to you because even if you are a bright person it would take you weeks even months of studying the subject to fully understand why.
@kantastisk It's a polar molecule (like a mini v-shaped magnet). In liquid water the molecules are free to move around each other. As ice freezes the molecules build a crystal structure, positive to negative. It leaves tiny little spaces that aren't there in liquid form, and that's why water expands when it freezes.
@kantastisk When water is liquid it forms what are called "hydrogen bonds" between the molecules which hold them closer together. This happens because in the H2O (look up a picture to see the shape) molecule oxygen attracts the shared electrons more strongly than hydrogen does, so the oxygen ends up with a stronger negative charge than the hydrogens. Then the oxygen from one molecule is attracted to the hydrogens on another molecule, and so on, so they are all held closer together.
6:00 onwards this herein lies why he was a great scientist and professor, he was concerned about the students education (whomever they were) and "cheating" them of a better explanation or method, because he was comfortable with the most complex of scientific issues.
I am an engineering student, and he is sooooooo correct in the vid. It is impossible to understand without a big backround...People should get a little curious and try to understand something that takes more than ten seconds to grasp... Rather than singing FUCKIN MAGNETS, HOW DO THEY WORK? Yeah, search that phrase :/
@Ektinstein yes,I obviously realize that and listened to the whole interview. Perhaps you should listen to the the interview again because you must have interpreted it wrong. Feynman's whole demeanor, diction, and tone are all extremely condescending. The guy asked a quesiton, and the platform for feynman's whole answer was only to assert how brilliant he is. Yeah, the guy was a great physicist and great mind, but he was certainly a prick. all of you fanboys cant see past his stature
@kwiss I agree. He diverted from the question. Feynman always believed that if he couldn't explain something properly to his dad (who was not a scientist), then he didn't understand it. One can only conclude that he doesn't really understand how magnetism works. Thing is, few do... especially in 1960s... I wager he was hedging his bets here because the Ising model was still a new thing.
@kwiss Feynman's description of magnetism to a layman is fully up to date. It is exactly the same as something people take for granted (pushing something with your finger) but over a larger distance.
But I don't even why I'm bothering. If you genuinely think this guy is being a prick in taking the time to explain why he didn't want to fob the guy off with a bad analogy, I think you'd find there's no shortage of people who'd disagree and think you are the prick.
Actually NOBODY knows why ice is slippery. It's one of the mysteries of science. The explanation he uses here was, as far as I know, one of many guesses that was laid to rest when tested at some point.
Youtube doesn't let you post links, so remove the stars: htt****p://w*****ww.nytimes.c****om/2006/02/21/science/21ice.htm
Wait wait wait... I never really thought about this before, but based on my limited understanding of atoms, they're not really TOUCHING each other when you put two materials together - there's just a force that's preventing the orbits of their outermost electrons from passing through one another. So that means that when I touch a keyboard, an apple, a woman, I'm not really touching anything... I just feel the changes in that force as particles approach one another. Is that correct?!??!??
@wasteofspace1234 :) exactly. Blew my mind when I first learned about it, too :). If you actually 'touched' them, there would be a chemical reaction between your fingers and the surface. ...and since each electron (your finger's and the surface's) is really popping in and out of existence in a cloud around the nucleus, I don't know if you'd define the clouds overlapping as 'touching.' I'd call it 'touching' when the more 'solid' particles in the nucleis of your finger + surface touch.
"Why" is a different question than "How" – in fact many good Scientist argue the question “Why” is really a “How” question (phrased wrong). Why? (LOL -- sorry, but I had to laugh.) Well, it is because the Scientific Method does NOT take into consideration the question “Why” (as shown in this video, the nearest is “How Come”) For example, the Scientific Method does not answer questions regarding “God” – God issues fall under the question "Why" and should be asked of broader minds…
He explained it by not explaining. Lol what a godly being. But like his father said. He's just a human with all the same problem as everybody else. That's why even this godly being had to die.
@KiNg0fShReD That's too bad. I'd say that this is the opposite of "you're too dumb to understand." It is more like, "I respect your intelligence too much to lie to you."
@KiNg0fShReD I doubt that's what he was doing. He meant to illustrate that the question of "why magnets repel?" is asked simply because it is unfamiliar to us, and that there are, in fact, many examples on the same phenomena on a much smaller scale to which the question is never asked. He also wanted to say that such interactions are considered fundamental, at least with our current understanding of nature, and that asking why makes little sense, although it is a good question.
@tin2019 I understood what he said. I just felt the way Feyman responded to the question was a little harsh, with saying things like "of course you feel it, now what do you want to know?". I think that's why the interviewer defended his question. That is where my original comment came to be. Anyway, it is a great video.
@maxzutter I do know the difference between an argument and a discussion for the sake of understanding, you're trying to avoid the fact that you were wrong about posting that remark in the first place by blabbering on about some distorted perception of reality instead of just facing the facts: he does explain how magnetism works and it has been technically proven. Just do some research and try to get a wider understanding of science in general, since you seem to lack even the basics.
@maxzutter And regarding the word "proof", if I, for example, conduct an experiment which conclusively shows that it's 14 degrees cold outside then i have proven that it's 14 degrees cold. For some reason, that doesn't seem to be enough for you and all I can tell you in that case is that science might not be the right thing for you.
@kzR91 All you can prove is that there is a temperature, and that it is "cold" relative to other temperatures. Whatever you used to measure the temperature is the bias to your proof. Because you believe in it. Whether or not it is "right". The only way to conclude something like the temperature would be for it to display itself accurately, exactly as is. And even then, you would have to believe that it is right.
@maxzutter No, as I just said, the experiment conducted conclusively proves that it's 14 degrees cold outside. That is enough.
So according to you, instruments can't be used in science because they're "bias"?
No, they're made to conduct experiments and have no will of their own, we humans engineer them to our liking. So in short, what you just said makes no sense.
@maxzutter - The apparatus used to measure the temperature is not a magic box that spits out numbers which are accepted as true, though. When the liquid in a thermometer changes temperature, the volume changes. This is an observed fact. By careful noting how the volume changes with respect to what we perceive as temperature (IE average kinetic energy of material's constituent atoms), we can assign numeric values to these changes, and those quantify this change in average kinetic energy...
@maxzutter - (continued) ...unless your issue is with the fallibility of our senses and you're asking whether the thermometer exists at all. Which is much more problematic, but you have to assume something to prove anything; even Euclid, when proving something as simple as "parallel lines never meet", had to make unsupported assumptions before being able to do so. Scientists have been conservative in their assumptions, and it seems that nature has not rejected any of them so far.
@maxzutter In what way is his explanation lacking? I think the problem is that you seem to lack a basic understanding of physics and you just assume that everybody else does too.
@kzR91 If theoretical gravity is "proven", then the current explanation of electromagnetism should include a variable the mass of the object, which it does not, and likely why calculations are off.
this is stupid, the guy just wanted an answer to his question, either you know the answer or you don't. Feynman is basically saying i don't want to get too deep with my answer here therefore i am disqualifying your question and saying thats just how it is. This doesn't answer the question of why magnets repel or attract.
@boogiebuddy01 What Feynman said was that the repulsion of magnets is an amplified version of the repulsion of your hand by a chair (one of many reasons why your hand can't phase through chairs). Then he explained that the answer lends itself to deeper questions like 'Why does a chair repel you hand?' and 'Why does the magnet repel the other magnet more than the chair repels your hand?' which he went on to explain had to do with the composition of iron...
@nanaforiod I'm just being pedantic here, but he said that the repulsion of your hand by a chair was an amplified version of the electrical force, which he was using as an analogy for the magnetic force. The two are related, but in this specific explanation, he's explaining them as two separate phenomena.
magnetic force are patterns who wanna join each other or to to change informations between them to to sthg new, or to change patterns to a new which is more effective
@maxzutter You twat. So WHY even bother watching a video that you obviously have no understanding of? Have you even heard of elcetromagnetism? Ha Ha! Answer that kiddo, and tell me WHY?
@maxzutter I cannot believe you have stated electromagnetism is "unproven". It's clear you have no understanding of physics, so let me explain briefly: The electromagnetic force, along with Gravity and the Strong & Weak Nuclear forces, is one of the 4 forces of nature. If electromagnetism didn't exist YOU wouldn't exist. As I'm sure you are of the belief you are alive, this proves electromagnetism is real, thus proving it is NOT unproven. Go do some research before you reply, please.
@foxinexile Like I would be watching this video if I hadn't known the four forces of nature... There's a difference between something existing, and it being proven, or explained. Just because gravity exists, doesn't mean it's proven. One Theory is as good as the next until it is proven. Dark matter is said to exist just to prove the current theory of gravity, which in reality is likely wrong, and therefore unproven. Learn your definitions before attacking someone on the internet...
@maxzutter I don't understand you. You say gravity exists but ... it isn't proven? How is it not proven? Why do you think you don't float off into space? What keeps your feet on the ground? Gravity! No matter what theories there are/aren't you cannot state that gravity, like electromagnetism, isn't proven. As for dark matter, yes that is a theory at present, but its (likely) existence explains for example how galaxies form as there isn't enough visible matter to "hold" them together.
@foxinexile I think the problem is the variation in our definitions of "proven". You see something that exists as proven, where as I see something that exists but is unexplained as unproven. As for the stability of galaxies, those calculations are based off the theory of universal gravity, which may also be incorrect. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
@maxzutter Sure but I still think to describe gravity, electromagnetism etc as unproven is incorrect. Yes, there are elements of any theory which are unexplained. The graviton, for example, is a theoretical boson but just because its existence hasn't been established doesn't mean the foundations of gravity - general relativity - are unproven or unexplained. And, as I said, yes dark matter is only a theory but it's proven the visible mass of a galaxy isn't enough to hold it together.
@maxzutter Are you kidding me? First of all, if something exists then ofcourse it's "proven"? You exist, therefore the existance of you is proven, what more do you need?
If we go by your definition of proof then all of science breaks down. We wouldn't be able to prove anything because, by your definition, things that exist aren't proven to exist? That makes no sense at all.
@kzR91 I think your right on that, what the other guy said does not make any sense. Although, there are some things that do/may exist that have yet to be proven. I guess that's one reason we need the word faith. Examples would include the hyper string, god, higgs particle, etc. I am not sure if this is what the other guy was trying to say or not.
@kzR91 The explanation he gives is extremely lacking. Not because he chooses not to, but because we only know so much. I can tell you're fine with accepting what we know, as is the average person, but to question the greater percentage, what we don't know, is the only way to fabricate a stable scientific theory. compared to what we don't know, our current theories are held together with rubber-bands and glue. Also, look up the existing and proven definitions of "exist" and "proven"
@ashmerino What is "accepted"? It's not a matter of understanding, it's a matter of believing what you're told. If I were to say that gravity is nothing more than the tendency for neutral matter being attracted to the positive energy at the core of the greater mass, and it were scientifically accepted as the most logical explanation, would you believe it? If you would, it's still not proven, it's just believed. If you wouldn't, then you're the plebian.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Feynman is a TOTAL F-ING moron, it amazes me that people continue to praise this GD moron. He squirms and wiggles like a worm on a hotplate when trying to explain "action at a distance" ie magnetism, the only person who REALLY knew that answer was Tesla, and he didnt explain it very well
FEYNMAN is a total GD moron, hes a pontificator, a conjecture-ruminator, at best he is a linear thinking dipshayt product of colleges, ie educated morons.
In fairness, the guy did ask "how' are they doing it too... I think it was a bit rude and unnecessary by Feynman but the interviewer got a good lesson nonetheless... hahaha
Ice is slippery because that it has no grab or grip apon the slipping object and if you were to assume that it becomes as such and not realize that without any melting; it is then still slippery and when sliping a coposite like ice for instance and the speed and windchill would facror apon this and if film that if would be created on the surfaces ; probably would favtor in the resistance of the anti-slippingwhere turbulance would always be an issue unless frozen iron would maybe keep it as ice
I beleive that gravity; ;oke maybe also magnets; haven't given it thought but let's say that they both seem to have this. I think that they don't wear or consume any values of an object that is affected from them. meaning that objects always have the same resistance when helped by these and they are in essance accumilatable; if the use of this force is releived as bein from the forced apon would be at point be and releiving of the counter tension.
The explaination or simple reason why she sliped or any action where counter forces are in factor by free will and not counter actions of continuous ones as then having a end product that predictability could have been set; (but not likely) ; instead ; you then now have proberbility of average; where in time span of certain activities; would differ in potential of occuring any certain outcome such as her hurting herself. If anything; she was but a number and statistic .
Here we are co=existing to for one a G-force where the accumilated weight likely forces the outwards force apon top to center of this planet and perhaps much like trees; with winter frost comes growth and reform. I think as I write. so please be open minded. The lava within likely travels quicker and constaintly cycles the magnetism as it continuously gets circulating and trafficed through what may be perhaps coil like in functions and which then create north and south poles and gravitystrem
If he's so smart, how come he couldn't figure out what the interviewer was asking? He did know what he was asking, but he chose to be a pedantic dick about it instead. Feynman is a great scientist, but he's not as great of a thinker as people say.
@mikelmoses I doubt you could describe magnets to an interviewer no matter your thinking abilities in given time. He probably can't desribe it so plainly. The best I've gotten is "Electrons spinning" from my physics teacher, and that doesn't make an incling of sense to me. You can't satisfy hunger for the unknown. And also theres a fair chance we don't fully understand magnets to the point we are 100% certain when we desribe the.
@mikelmoses He did answer the question. He said "magnets repel each other" but you can always ask "why" in response to any answer. "Why do magnets repel each other?" -- "Magnets are electrons where spins are aligned to generate a force", "why do electrons have spin?" "electrons have spin due to conservation of angular momentum" "why do electrons have to conserve momentum?" etc etc. The result is either an infinite chain of answers or the questioner will be satisfied with some level of answer.
I know this isn't the entire truth and i am cheating you... But!
Magnetism can be explained in the same way that planets orbit the sun. So imagine that the sun is a heavy atom. And the planets are also atoms (albeit lighter) and thus all planets orbit around the sun.
Our sun (atom) is orbiting the center of our galaxy. So in a sense, our galaxy is the magnet. (which is composed of many atoms or suns)
When the magnet passes another magnet they attract through gravity... Simple as that!?!
@RealCadde To understand a magnet it thus helps to understand gravity and what is causing it. Which i can't honestly tell you i do. But i can imagine it and the way i imagine it working is that there is a force that we cannot see, we cannot feel it without using another magnet.
Just like pressurized air being blown out of a container, we can feel it touching our skin but we cannot see it. We know air exists because we can feel the forces of air.
@RealCadde So what is the force of magnetism that we cannot see or feel with our naked eyes or skin? It helps to know what dark matter and dark energy is. Which nobody understands AFAIK... But it is there because we see the effects of it the same way we see the effects of gravity. So, magnetism works in the same way as water droplets. Magnets are attracted to eachother while the force we cannot see (dark matter/dark energy) wants to move out of the way. Look at a lava lamp and you will see it.
@RealCadde Simply put then, magnets are like balls in a round bowl. The air in the bowl is the dark matter, the dark matter wants to be spherical without much obstruction. The same way the colored (dense) droplets in a lava lamp moves through the less dense water. So the magnets are not pulled together, they are pushed together. When magnets repel on the other hand the energy flow restricts the movement of the dark matter and concentrates it. Thus forcing the magnets apart...
@RealCadde So if you take said round bowl with air and steel balls and force air inbetween the balls they separate. The magnetic field is acting on the invisible dark matter in a way that makes it force the magnets apart. We cannot see, touch or hear dark matter but it is still there and is acting on other matter and light. It passes through us when not charged but once energized it acts on us. If our flesh acted like magnets we would either slam together or be thrown apart and we would feel DM.
my dad is a physicist and when I asked him something about my homework I got an answer like this. and that was when I was an impatient pimply teenager.
I know why they attract and surpress; I have realised just now because of my acheiving cancelling of counterforces where a simular reaction occures with these poles where they in pairs will cancel each other and impair will counter act, and there you are and I do hope you take things I think seriously. Chow.
Is it me or is he just trying to deviate from the first question about magnetic force and start a story whilst trying think up and reasonable answer to the first question.
How to get rid of the units, don't forget to use your units, if there's no units, damn sauce.
ftlqed 10 hours ago
43 juggalos have seen this so far
sqmuth 15 hours ago
Daah Mr. Feynman, tell me about the rabbits!
edbapemo 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
he is saying you don't know enough about electric and magnetic waves and how they affect electrons to understand how it all works. I understand exactly why he would say he cannot explain this to you because even if you are a bright person it would take you weeks even months of studying the subject to fully understand why.
m4rk0256 1 day ago
Comment removed
m4rk0256 1 day ago
MAGNETS? how do they work!!??
Carlsaganguy 2 days ago
gah, now I need to know why water expands when it freezes
kantastisk 3 days ago
@kantastisk of course it expands becuse the average distance between the water-molecules is larger in ice than in fluid water! Why? Because...
episcophagus 2 days ago
@kantastisk It's a polar molecule (like a mini v-shaped magnet). In liquid water the molecules are free to move around each other. As ice freezes the molecules build a crystal structure, positive to negative. It leaves tiny little spaces that aren't there in liquid form, and that's why water expands when it freezes.
jimhemstreet 1 day ago
@kantastisk When water is liquid it forms what are called "hydrogen bonds" between the molecules which hold them closer together. This happens because in the H2O (look up a picture to see the shape) molecule oxygen attracts the shared electrons more strongly than hydrogen does, so the oxygen ends up with a stronger negative charge than the hydrogens. Then the oxygen from one molecule is attracted to the hydrogens on another molecule, and so on, so they are all held closer together.
Squirlol 20 hours ago
Fuckin' magnets, how do they work?
1brothad 3 days ago 2
6:00 onwards this herein lies why he was a great scientist and professor, he was concerned about the students education (whomever they were) and "cheating" them of a better explanation or method, because he was comfortable with the most complex of scientific issues.
skydome29 4 days ago
Or in other words, it would be like trying to explain something to the Amish by using a car analogy.
gotanmp3 5 days ago
I am an engineering student, and he is sooooooo correct in the vid. It is impossible to understand without a big backround...People should get a little curious and try to understand something that takes more than ten seconds to grasp... Rather than singing FUCKIN MAGNETS, HOW DO THEY WORK? Yeah, search that phrase :/
mcmanhandles 1 week ago
amazing for so many reasons
bdsnellable 1 week ago
Feynman was the embodiment of will.
peska2006 1 week ago
I think he didn't know and was just bluffing. He probably looked it up in the encyclopedia afterwards.
tostare 1 week ago
@Ektinstein yes,I obviously realize that and listened to the whole interview. Perhaps you should listen to the the interview again because you must have interpreted it wrong. Feynman's whole demeanor, diction, and tone are all extremely condescending. The guy asked a quesiton, and the platform for feynman's whole answer was only to assert how brilliant he is. Yeah, the guy was a great physicist and great mind, but he was certainly a prick. all of you fanboys cant see past his stature
kwiss 1 week ago
@kwiss I agree. He diverted from the question. Feynman always believed that if he couldn't explain something properly to his dad (who was not a scientist), then he didn't understand it. One can only conclude that he doesn't really understand how magnetism works. Thing is, few do... especially in 1960s... I wager he was hedging his bets here because the Ising model was still a new thing.
rhcquant 1 week ago
@kwiss Feynman's description of magnetism to a layman is fully up to date. It is exactly the same as something people take for granted (pushing something with your finger) but over a larger distance.
But I don't even why I'm bothering. If you genuinely think this guy is being a prick in taking the time to explain why he didn't want to fob the guy off with a bad analogy, I think you'd find there's no shortage of people who'd disagree and think you are the prick.
JeefCakes 4 days ago
That man is one of the most awesome men ever. That is all.
shawnhamman 1 week ago
Great video. One of my favourites
drpiddleton 1 week ago
Fuckin' magnets, how do they work?
lukey405 2 weeks ago
somehow I've not yet come across this video before, shows him in all his colors.
thanks a lot for the uploads!
slaterohm 2 weeks ago
This is SO good!
antizac 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
absolutely unbelievable that this seems to come to him as an improvisation. great art is what it is.
kantastisk 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
kantastisk 2 weeks ago
What a strange man.
MissInformati0n 2 weeks ago
@MissInformati0n Well he was a genius
MightyDrunken 2 weeks ago
Actually NOBODY knows why ice is slippery. It's one of the mysteries of science. The explanation he uses here was, as far as I know, one of many guesses that was laid to rest when tested at some point.
Youtube doesn't let you post links, so remove the stars: htt****p://w*****ww.nytimes.c****om/2006/02/21/science/21ice.htm
UltraMegaSuperPhil 2 weeks ago
I want this video on my A1680 phone.
galenblake821 2 weeks ago
Wow! I just felt love for the explanation of a question
moonrockguy 3 weeks ago
Brilliant!
Dagvadorjify 3 weeks ago
Wait wait wait... I never really thought about this before, but based on my limited understanding of atoms, they're not really TOUCHING each other when you put two materials together - there's just a force that's preventing the orbits of their outermost electrons from passing through one another. So that means that when I touch a keyboard, an apple, a woman, I'm not really touching anything... I just feel the changes in that force as particles approach one another. Is that correct?!??!??
wasteofspace1234 3 weeks ago 4
@wasteofspace1234 :) exactly. Blew my mind when I first learned about it, too :). If you actually 'touched' them, there would be a chemical reaction between your fingers and the surface. ...and since each electron (your finger's and the surface's) is really popping in and out of existence in a cloud around the nucleus, I don't know if you'd define the clouds overlapping as 'touching.' I'd call it 'touching' when the more 'solid' particles in the nucleis of your finger + surface touch.
sweatpants1212 3 weeks ago
@wasteofspace1234 But that would cause a nuclear explosion :(
sweatpants1212 3 weeks ago
@wasteofspace1234 yes you are correct.
sinn212 3 weeks ago
Skip to 6:44 for the answer
lol jk watch the whole thing. RIP Feynman
theycallmenavid 3 weeks ago 2
FUCKIN MAGNETS, HOW DO THEY WORK
analihilator 3 weeks ago 3
"Why" is a different question than "How" – in fact many good Scientist argue the question “Why” is really a “How” question (phrased wrong). Why? (LOL -- sorry, but I had to laugh.) Well, it is because the Scientific Method does NOT take into consideration the question “Why” (as shown in this video, the nearest is “How Come”) For example, the Scientific Method does not answer questions regarding “God” – God issues fall under the question "Why" and should be asked of broader minds…
ExBoydWho 3 weeks ago
It's, like, exactly this way.
fiedel 3 weeks ago
He explained it by not explaining. Lol what a godly being. But like his father said. He's just a human with all the same problem as everybody else. That's why even this godly being had to die.
shitsons 3 weeks ago
Hmm, pretty darn good, except for the fact that he got the ice-meting-due-to-pressure explanation wrong.
pewfly 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
devjones100 3 weeks ago
I feel like Feynman just went on a seven minute "You're too dumb to understand why" rant
KiNg0fShReD 3 weeks ago
@KiNg0fShReD That's too bad. I'd say that this is the opposite of "you're too dumb to understand." It is more like, "I respect your intelligence too much to lie to you."
yesteray 3 weeks ago 7
@yesteray A very optimistic point of view. I like it!
KiNg0fShReD 2 weeks ago
@KiNg0fShReD I doubt that's what he was doing. He meant to illustrate that the question of "why magnets repel?" is asked simply because it is unfamiliar to us, and that there are, in fact, many examples on the same phenomena on a much smaller scale to which the question is never asked. He also wanted to say that such interactions are considered fundamental, at least with our current understanding of nature, and that asking why makes little sense, although it is a good question.
tin2019 3 weeks ago
@tin2019 I understood what he said. I just felt the way Feyman responded to the question was a little harsh, with saying things like "of course you feel it, now what do you want to know?". I think that's why the interviewer defended his question. That is where my original comment came to be. Anyway, it is a great video.
KiNg0fShReD 2 weeks ago
I transcribed this. Here you go:
lesswrong . com/r/discussion/lw/99c/transcript_richard_feynman_on_why_questions/
KurosenvsGrither 3 weeks ago 19
So... magic?
Frusciantefan77 3 weeks ago
Feynman pissed me off here,, just get to the point
noklarok 3 weeks ago
at the end he said he couldn't really give an answer. Why then, eight minutes later,do I suddenly have a much deeper understanding magnets?!
busplunger 4 weeks ago 2
Why didn't he answer the question?
SmallGodFly 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@maxzutter I do know the difference between an argument and a discussion for the sake of understanding, you're trying to avoid the fact that you were wrong about posting that remark in the first place by blabbering on about some distorted perception of reality instead of just facing the facts: he does explain how magnetism works and it has been technically proven. Just do some research and try to get a wider understanding of science in general, since you seem to lack even the basics.
kzR91 1 month ago
Comment removed
kzR91 1 month ago
Comment removed
kzR91 1 month ago
@maxzutter And regarding the word "proof", if I, for example, conduct an experiment which conclusively shows that it's 14 degrees cold outside then i have proven that it's 14 degrees cold. For some reason, that doesn't seem to be enough for you and all I can tell you in that case is that science might not be the right thing for you.
kzR91 1 month ago
Comment removed
isakoqv 1 month ago
@kzR91 All you can prove is that there is a temperature, and that it is "cold" relative to other temperatures. Whatever you used to measure the temperature is the bias to your proof. Because you believe in it. Whether or not it is "right". The only way to conclude something like the temperature would be for it to display itself accurately, exactly as is. And even then, you would have to believe that it is right.
maxzutter 1 month ago
Comment removed
kzR91 1 month ago
Comment removed
kzR91 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@maxzutter No, as I just said, the experiment conducted conclusively proves that it's 14 degrees cold outside. That is enough.
So according to you, instruments can't be used in science because they're "bias"?
No, they're made to conduct experiments and have no will of their own, we humans engineer them to our liking. So in short, what you just said makes no sense.
kzR91 1 month ago
@maxzutter - The apparatus used to measure the temperature is not a magic box that spits out numbers which are accepted as true, though. When the liquid in a thermometer changes temperature, the volume changes. This is an observed fact. By careful noting how the volume changes with respect to what we perceive as temperature (IE average kinetic energy of material's constituent atoms), we can assign numeric values to these changes, and those quantify this change in average kinetic energy...
DarknessHowls 4 weeks ago
@maxzutter - (continued) ...unless your issue is with the fallibility of our senses and you're asking whether the thermometer exists at all. Which is much more problematic, but you have to assume something to prove anything; even Euclid, when proving something as simple as "parallel lines never meet", had to make unsupported assumptions before being able to do so. Scientists have been conservative in their assumptions, and it seems that nature has not rejected any of them so far.
DarknessHowls 4 weeks ago
@DarknessHowls Thanks for that, for some reason my answers to maxzutter were deleted.
kzR91 4 weeks ago
@maxzutter In what way is his explanation lacking? I think the problem is that you seem to lack a basic understanding of physics and you just assume that everybody else does too.
kzR91 1 month ago
@kzR91 If theoretical gravity is "proven", then the current explanation of electromagnetism should include a variable the mass of the object, which it does not, and likely why calculations are off.
maxzutter 1 month ago
Comment removed
kzR91 1 month ago
I think this is the best 240p video that I watched.
Moongazerr 1 month ago 61
That's usually how I explain things: Sorry, you are too stupid to understand it ;)
gogledoessuck 1 month ago
the formulation of the question is more important than the answer
Einstein
medicinaes 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
He has an IQ of 123. Yeah, right.
edwdixon5 1 month ago
@edwdixon5 What do you mean?
nanaforiod 1 month ago
Your video is a favorite on Guinea
galenrivera512 1 month ago
He was like the Yoda of science
INMATE2468 1 month ago
That's a perfectly reasonable question you stupid pompous asshole genius !
edbapemo 1 month ago
I don't know if I'm smarter or dumber after watching this video. Why...?
MrKmose 1 month ago
gg
liefur 1 month ago
pure genius...
nadianorab 1 month ago
Fucking magnets. How do they work?
chenalos 1 month ago
this is stupid, the guy just wanted an answer to his question, either you know the answer or you don't. Feynman is basically saying i don't want to get too deep with my answer here therefore i am disqualifying your question and saying thats just how it is. This doesn't answer the question of why magnets repel or attract.
boogiebuddy01 1 month ago
@boogiebuddy01 Did you watch the video? He did answer the question.
schrodingasdawg 1 month ago 5
@boogiebuddy01 he actually does answer to some degree.
gabeygoat 1 month ago
@boogiebuddy01 retard
haz464 1 month ago
@boogiebuddy01 What Feynman said was that the repulsion of magnets is an amplified version of the repulsion of your hand by a chair (one of many reasons why your hand can't phase through chairs). Then he explained that the answer lends itself to deeper questions like 'Why does a chair repel you hand?' and 'Why does the magnet repel the other magnet more than the chair repels your hand?' which he went on to explain had to do with the composition of iron...
Basically, there is no simple answer.
nanaforiod 1 month ago
@nanaforiod I'm just being pedantic here, but he said that the repulsion of your hand by a chair was an amplified version of the electrical force, which he was using as an analogy for the magnetic force. The two are related, but in this specific explanation, he's explaining them as two separate phenomena.
pyVlad 1 month ago
explaining science like a boss.
bennymclain 1 month ago 2
Feynman is a boss of wisdom.
sk8shred 1 month ago
magnetic force are patterns who wanna join each other or to to change informations between them to to sthg new, or to change patterns to a new which is more effective
IQ20000Berta 1 month ago
40 people find it hard to think...
sinachiniforoosh 1 month ago
"I don't know, so I'm gonna bullshit why I can't explain it, for seven minutes"
maxzutter 1 month ago
@maxzutter You twat. So WHY even bother watching a video that you obviously have no understanding of? Have you even heard of elcetromagnetism? Ha Ha! Answer that kiddo, and tell me WHY?
foxinexile 1 month ago
@foxinexile I have, and as long it remains an unproven theory, there's no point in dancing around the point that it's unproven
maxzutter 1 month ago
@maxzutter I cannot believe you have stated electromagnetism is "unproven". It's clear you have no understanding of physics, so let me explain briefly: The electromagnetic force, along with Gravity and the Strong & Weak Nuclear forces, is one of the 4 forces of nature. If electromagnetism didn't exist YOU wouldn't exist. As I'm sure you are of the belief you are alive, this proves electromagnetism is real, thus proving it is NOT unproven. Go do some research before you reply, please.
foxinexile 1 month ago
@foxinexile Like I would be watching this video if I hadn't known the four forces of nature... There's a difference between something existing, and it being proven, or explained. Just because gravity exists, doesn't mean it's proven. One Theory is as good as the next until it is proven. Dark matter is said to exist just to prove the current theory of gravity, which in reality is likely wrong, and therefore unproven. Learn your definitions before attacking someone on the internet...
maxzutter 1 month ago
@maxzutter I don't understand you. You say gravity exists but ... it isn't proven? How is it not proven? Why do you think you don't float off into space? What keeps your feet on the ground? Gravity! No matter what theories there are/aren't you cannot state that gravity, like electromagnetism, isn't proven. As for dark matter, yes that is a theory at present, but its (likely) existence explains for example how galaxies form as there isn't enough visible matter to "hold" them together.
foxinexile 1 month ago
@foxinexile I think the problem is the variation in our definitions of "proven". You see something that exists as proven, where as I see something that exists but is unexplained as unproven. As for the stability of galaxies, those calculations are based off the theory of universal gravity, which may also be incorrect. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
maxzutter 1 month ago
@maxzutter Sure but I still think to describe gravity, electromagnetism etc as unproven is incorrect. Yes, there are elements of any theory which are unexplained. The graviton, for example, is a theoretical boson but just because its existence hasn't been established doesn't mean the foundations of gravity - general relativity - are unproven or unexplained. And, as I said, yes dark matter is only a theory but it's proven the visible mass of a galaxy isn't enough to hold it together.
foxinexile 1 month ago
@maxzutter Oh, and a merry Christmas by the way. Hope that is something we can both agree on!
foxinexile 1 month ago
@maxzutter Are you kidding me? First of all, if something exists then ofcourse it's "proven"? You exist, therefore the existance of you is proven, what more do you need?
If we go by your definition of proof then all of science breaks down. We wouldn't be able to prove anything because, by your definition, things that exist aren't proven to exist? That makes no sense at all.
kzR91 1 month ago
@kzR91 I think your right on that, what the other guy said does not make any sense. Although, there are some things that do/may exist that have yet to be proven. I guess that's one reason we need the word faith. Examples would include the hyper string, god, higgs particle, etc. I am not sure if this is what the other guy was trying to say or not.
Singetally 1 month ago
@maxzutter He actually does explain how magnets work in this video by the way, try to listen more closely next time.
kzR91 1 month ago
@kzR91 The explanation he gives is extremely lacking. Not because he chooses not to, but because we only know so much. I can tell you're fine with accepting what we know, as is the average person, but to question the greater percentage, what we don't know, is the only way to fabricate a stable scientific theory. compared to what we don't know, our current theories are held together with rubber-bands and glue. Also, look up the existing and proven definitions of "exist" and "proven"
maxzutter 1 month ago
@maxzutter shut up plebian, if you dont undestand physics in a acepted level, you cant undestand ANY explanation of magnetism
ashmerino 1 month ago
@ashmerino What is "accepted"? It's not a matter of understanding, it's a matter of believing what you're told. If I were to say that gravity is nothing more than the tendency for neutral matter being attracted to the positive energy at the core of the greater mass, and it were scientifically accepted as the most logical explanation, would you believe it? If you would, it's still not proven, it's just believed. If you wouldn't, then you're the plebian.
maxzutter 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Feynman is a TOTAL F-ING moron, it amazes me that people continue to praise this GD moron. He squirms and wiggles like a worm on a hotplate when trying to explain "action at a distance" ie magnetism, the only person who REALLY knew that answer was Tesla, and he didnt explain it very well
FEYNMAN is a total GD moron, hes a pontificator, a conjecture-ruminator, at best he is a linear thinking dipshayt product of colleges, ie educated morons.
antiquemodern 1 month ago
@antiquemodern What a delightful little troll you are. Run along now cupcake.
BlankVellum 1 month ago
@antiquemodern Tell your mom to use condoms in future, so people like your wouldn't be born again.
sichilma 1 month ago
@antiquemodern
Tell that to Professor Brian Cox, and Dr. Michio Kaku you UNEDUCATED Internet guru loser. They BOTH respect Richard Feynman A LOT.
SexyJane28 1 month ago
That was the most intelligent insult I have ever heard.
MaxPowerEveryHour 1 month ago 2
In fairness, the guy did ask "how' are they doing it too... I think it was a bit rude and unnecessary by Feynman but the interviewer got a good lesson nonetheless... hahaha
2eelShmeal 1 month ago in playlist RICHARD FEYNMAN Fun To Imagine
he owwwned him
CandyElectraEnjoy 2 months ago in playlist Favorite videos
@CandyElectraEnjoy No, he answered him... that's different.
sinachiniforoosh 1 month ago
Im not overly keen on his chair.
mikespike502005 2 months ago
Ice is slippery because that it has no grab or grip apon the slipping object and if you were to assume that it becomes as such and not realize that without any melting; it is then still slippery and when sliping a coposite like ice for instance and the speed and windchill would facror apon this and if film that if would be created on the surfaces ; probably would favtor in the resistance of the anti-slippingwhere turbulance would always be an issue unless frozen iron would maybe keep it as ice
MichelJCardin 2 months ago
I beleive that gravity; ;oke maybe also magnets; haven't given it thought but let's say that they both seem to have this. I think that they don't wear or consume any values of an object that is affected from them. meaning that objects always have the same resistance when helped by these and they are in essance accumilatable; if the use of this force is releived as bein from the forced apon would be at point be and releiving of the counter tension.
MichelJCardin 2 months ago
If magnets would not exist; we would be asking this same question on static or gravity.
MichelJCardin 2 months ago
But as he said; a constaint why is existing unless such wuestions where one would ask why does why become infinite.LOL
MichelJCardin 2 months ago
The explaination or simple reason why she sliped or any action where counter forces are in factor by free will and not counter actions of continuous ones as then having a end product that predictability could have been set; (but not likely) ; instead ; you then now have proberbility of average; where in time span of certain activities; would differ in potential of occuring any certain outcome such as her hurting herself. If anything; she was but a number and statistic .
MichelJCardin 2 months ago
Here we are co=existing to for one a G-force where the accumilated weight likely forces the outwards force apon top to center of this planet and perhaps much like trees; with winter frost comes growth and reform. I think as I write. so please be open minded. The lava within likely travels quicker and constaintly cycles the magnetism as it continuously gets circulating and trafficed through what may be perhaps coil like in functions and which then create north and south poles and gravitystrem
MichelJCardin 2 months ago
stay tuned for the next installment:
"gravity just is the way it is, so stop asking questions asshole"
TheR88R 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
thanks for taking 7 1/2 minutes out of your day to tell me how stupid i am. dick.
TheR88R 2 months ago
He's lying! - ICP
TheResidentSkeptic 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
fucking magnets. how do they work?
ashmerino 2 months ago
If he's so smart, how come he couldn't figure out what the interviewer was asking? He did know what he was asking, but he chose to be a pedantic dick about it instead. Feynman is a great scientist, but he's not as great of a thinker as people say.
mikelmoses 2 months ago
@mikelmoses I doubt you could describe magnets to an interviewer no matter your thinking abilities in given time. He probably can't desribe it so plainly. The best I've gotten is "Electrons spinning" from my physics teacher, and that doesn't make an incling of sense to me. You can't satisfy hunger for the unknown. And also theres a fair chance we don't fully understand magnets to the point we are 100% certain when we desribe the.
Ricksdetrix 2 months ago
@mikelmoses He did answer the question. He said "magnets repel each other" but you can always ask "why" in response to any answer. "Why do magnets repel each other?" -- "Magnets are electrons where spins are aligned to generate a force", "why do electrons have spin?" "electrons have spin due to conservation of angular momentum" "why do electrons have to conserve momentum?" etc etc. The result is either an infinite chain of answers or the questioner will be satisfied with some level of answer.
cixelsyD1988 2 months ago
fucking magnets. how do they work?
otelio117 2 months ago 12
wow this dude is a mental giant
meweleven 2 months ago
He's smarter than us.
thewildone 2 months ago
fucking Feynman... how does he work?!
jinx2black 2 months ago
@jinx2black
Magnets.
thewildone 2 months ago
Juggalos everywhere just got pwned
CapitanOHYEAH 2 months ago
Then... How?
OursHommePorc 2 months ago
I know this isn't the entire truth and i am cheating you... But!
Magnetism can be explained in the same way that planets orbit the sun. So imagine that the sun is a heavy atom. And the planets are also atoms (albeit lighter) and thus all planets orbit around the sun.
Our sun (atom) is orbiting the center of our galaxy. So in a sense, our galaxy is the magnet. (which is composed of many atoms or suns)
When the magnet passes another magnet they attract through gravity... Simple as that!?!
RealCadde 2 months ago
@RealCadde To understand a magnet it thus helps to understand gravity and what is causing it. Which i can't honestly tell you i do. But i can imagine it and the way i imagine it working is that there is a force that we cannot see, we cannot feel it without using another magnet.
Just like pressurized air being blown out of a container, we can feel it touching our skin but we cannot see it. We know air exists because we can feel the forces of air.
Magnetism is a force that we cannot see or feel.
RealCadde 2 months ago
@RealCadde So what is the force of magnetism that we cannot see or feel with our naked eyes or skin? It helps to know what dark matter and dark energy is. Which nobody understands AFAIK... But it is there because we see the effects of it the same way we see the effects of gravity. So, magnetism works in the same way as water droplets. Magnets are attracted to eachother while the force we cannot see (dark matter/dark energy) wants to move out of the way. Look at a lava lamp and you will see it.
RealCadde 2 months ago
@RealCadde Simply put then, magnets are like balls in a round bowl. The air in the bowl is the dark matter, the dark matter wants to be spherical without much obstruction. The same way the colored (dense) droplets in a lava lamp moves through the less dense water. So the magnets are not pulled together, they are pushed together. When magnets repel on the other hand the energy flow restricts the movement of the dark matter and concentrates it. Thus forcing the magnets apart...
RealCadde 2 months ago
@RealCadde So if you take said round bowl with air and steel balls and force air inbetween the balls they separate. The magnetic field is acting on the invisible dark matter in a way that makes it force the magnets apart. We cannot see, touch or hear dark matter but it is still there and is acting on other matter and light. It passes through us when not charged but once energized it acts on us. If our flesh acted like magnets we would either slam together or be thrown apart and we would feel DM.
RealCadde 2 months ago
@RealCadde That's a lot of typing just for a troll that's not even funny.
lytrigian 2 months ago
my dad is a physicist and when I asked him something about my homework I got an answer like this. and that was when I was an impatient pimply teenager.
smirkatyou 2 months ago
I know why they attract and surpress; I have realised just now because of my acheiving cancelling of counterforces where a simular reaction occures with these poles where they in pairs will cancel each other and impair will counter act, and there you are and I do hope you take things I think seriously. Chow.
MichelJCardin 2 months ago
@MichelJCardin ciao MichelJcardin :)
toonuraccoon 2 months ago
Fuckin magnets. How do they work?
mikeschmidt856 2 months ago
Is it me or is he just trying to deviate from the first question about magnetic force and start a story whilst trying think up and reasonable answer to the first question.
mattsp28 2 months ago
@mattsp28
It's you.
The whole point is the interviewer asked Feynman a question of why magnetism works.
And Feynman answered because of magnetism.
There is no layman's framework that can describe why magnets attract or repel.
He wasn't dodging the question, just explaining how difficult it is to describe why it works the way it does.
whistletom 2 months ago
Lol, at the beginning he's like "smarmy asshole."
gmc5626 2 months ago 8
38 People watched the video upside down and were not sure what 'ek!7' is supposed to mean.
artistoex 2 months ago 2
the dislike bar is the size of insert small object here
Petricigy1 3 months ago
@smuldia What do you mean? Your responses are far too simplistic for intelligent people to understand .
edbapemo 3 months ago
there's a reason why his parents named him "richard"
vomitedshit 3 months ago
Damn juggalos.
matoro1989 3 months ago in playlist The Universe EXPLAINED!
Got that cocksucka! Now put those damn rocks down
w215philly 3 months ago
The Insane Clown Posse should watch this.
DiamShadowWraith 3 months ago 2
@DiamShadowWraith are you a redditor...
dubstepfrog 3 months ago
@dubstepfrog I'm glad someone got it :D
DiamShadowWraith 2 months ago
@DiamShadowWraith HAHA Wow. I am fairly new to reddit, but the signature of a redditor is unmistakable.
dubstepfrog 2 months ago
Feynman was GOD, get over it.
yatter1 3 months ago
@yatter1 haha WAS??
dubstepfrog 3 months ago
@dubstepfrog I stand corrected
yatter1 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Albert Einstein said:
If you can not explain it simply enough, you dont understand it well enough"
It's not hard to tell that Feynman understand the world well enough!
Thumbs up if you agree :-)
Nossucram 3 months ago
Sorry, but he is so irritating to me I can't stop making stupid comments.
edbapemo 3 months ago
Magnets repel because aunt Minnie broke her hip. Makes sense!
edbapemo 3 months ago 2
I cringed a bit at the beginning.
Mandragara 3 months ago 2
That's the longest "fuck you" I've ever seen
that was someone elses comment, it needs to be back up top
Grundalizer 3 months ago
@Grundalizer hahahahah i clicked on that video and was hoping that would be a top comment
jcotter137 3 months ago
@jcotter137 I was pissed not to see it up there
Grundalizer 3 months ago
that's what she said
DontTaseMeBro77 3 months ago
'now when you explain a why, you have to be in some framework where you allow something to be true'
That is so eloquent and to the point, wow. I love it.
Got2flip 3 months ago 21
holly shit my brain is fried with joy
TurkiyeCumhurbaskani 3 months ago
@TurkiyeCumhurbaskani I know exactly how you feel.
yatter1 3 months ago
This is why it can be so tempting to say "Because God wants it so."
SteveBarr42 3 months ago
Such a pimp! xD
Greendragon420able 3 months ago
you D**K!!!
pandafatxXx 3 months ago
What do mean by the meaning of mean? Do you mean meaning or meaning of mean?
edbapemo 3 months ago