This is a collections of thoughts mentioned in the above titled interview of Dr. Richard Feynman.
Can being a scientist deprive one of the ability of appreciating the beauty of nature as seen through an artist's eye? I think that the view of a scientist has for sure some overlaps with the views of an artist; and to add more there are additional dimensions that a science-bent person can use to enjoy the natural beauty from a different perspective/level.
Everything that Feynman was read to as a child was essentially translated into corresponding vivid imagery by his father. The example he gives, is of a T-Rex's dimensions compared to the size of their window. Feynman learned to do this visualization in his mind of whatever he read subsequently.
There is a difference between knowing the name of a concept and having an understanding of that concept. During his graduate school days, Feynman was interested in taking time off for doing his PhD research as though his work would protect civilizations. Something very similar thought every PhD student has while thinking of doing his PhD research.
Feynman won the Nobel prize in quantum electro-dynamics. He attributes the origin of his interest in the topic to rotational motion, electron rotation, to a particular day in his university cafeteria when he observed a student throw a circular wobble in air. Feynman was amused by the rate at which the blue dot at the center of the wobble was rotating as compared the the wobble itself. His work had all started with mere amusement in a particular observation followed by continued interest in studying similar behaviors in other physical systems.
Feynman seems to have a psychological troubles with getting honors like recognition awards etc. From his childhood his father had passed on a sort of disrespect to honors, hierarchy (like Pope, army ranks, etc.). Feynman also invented an alibi that he is irresponsible about administrative tasks because of his belief that for doing good physics one needs a long uninterrupted interval of time.
The best way to teach Physics is not to be history to be chaotic and to connect multiple thoughts. Feynman admits that he does not know how to make his teaching interesting. Learning depends on the personality of the student attempting to learn. There is no one unique best way of teaching science, in the opinion of Feynman.
An interesting thing Feynman says is that, if one is expecting science to give all the answers, to the wonderful questions about what we are , where we are going, the meaning of love; then its easy to become disillusioned and look for mystical answers. It might be that some questions does not have answers and they are just as they are.
The part/observation that does not conform to an understood phenomenon are considered interesting by researchers. Such observations and thoughts lead to new things and new knowledge.
Feynman's scientific views have undeniable effect on the faith/belief-system he has, this he acknowledges in his interview. One of the fundamental part of Feynsman's soul is to doubt, an interesting revelation and then ask to get clarification. It might be interesting to have doubt, not to know and to live as compared to a way life with belief that something is right and not be sure about its validity. One need not be frightened by not having answers to mysterious universe/things, ignorance is just a part of being human. No one knows all and everything.
Can being a scientist deprive one of the ability of appreciating the beauty of nature as seen through an artist's eye? I think that the view of a scientist has for sure some overlaps with the views of an artist; and to add more there are additional dimensions that a science-bent person can use to enjoy the natural beauty from a different perspective/level.
Everything that Feynman was read to as a child was essentially translated into corresponding vivid imagery by his father. The example he gives, is of a T-Rex's dimensions compared to the size of their window. Feynman learned to do this visualization in his mind of whatever he read subsequently.
There is a difference between knowing the name of a concept and having an understanding of that concept. During his graduate school days, Feynman was interested in taking time off for doing his PhD research as though his work would protect civilizations. Something very similar thought every PhD student has while thinking of doing his PhD research.
Feynman won the Nobel prize in quantum electro-dynamics. He attributes the origin of his interest in the topic to rotational motion, electron rotation, to a particular day in his university cafeteria when he observed a student throw a circular wobble in air. Feynman was amused by the rate at which the blue dot at the center of the wobble was rotating as compared the the wobble itself. His work had all started with mere amusement in a particular observation followed by continued interest in studying similar behaviors in other physical systems.
Feynman seems to have a psychological troubles with getting honors like recognition awards etc. From his childhood his father had passed on a sort of disrespect to honors, hierarchy (like Pope, army ranks, etc.). Feynman also invented an alibi that he is irresponsible about administrative tasks because of his belief that for doing good physics one needs a long uninterrupted interval of time.
The best way to teach Physics is not to be history to be chaotic and to connect multiple thoughts. Feynman admits that he does not know how to make his teaching interesting. Learning depends on the personality of the student attempting to learn. There is no one unique best way of teaching science, in the opinion of Feynman.
An interesting thing Feynman says is that, if one is expecting science to give all the answers, to the wonderful questions about what we are , where we are going, the meaning of love; then its easy to become disillusioned and look for mystical answers. It might be that some questions does not have answers and they are just as they are.
The part/observation that does not conform to an understood phenomenon are considered interesting by researchers. Such observations and thoughts lead to new things and new knowledge.
Feynman's scientific views have undeniable effect on the faith/belief-system he has, this he acknowledges in his interview. One of the fundamental part of Feynsman's soul is to doubt, an interesting revelation and then ask to get clarification. It might be interesting to have doubt, not to know and to live as compared to a way life with belief that something is right and not be sure about its validity. One need not be frightened by not having answers to mysterious universe/things, ignorance is just a part of being human. No one knows all and everything.
No comments:
Post a Comment