"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts".
Obviously science is never "settled". Also, everyone should read his famous "cargo cult science" commencement address to the Caltech graduating class of 1974. Just search for it. It speaks so much to the way that science has been distorted today.
Richard Feynman was not a fraud. He was a physicist and a brilliant man. He led an interesting and somewhat controversial life. He was not perfect, no one is. But with Feynman what you see is what you get. IMHO we need more (many more) like him. BTW what is gravity, exactly??
Sheeptard! Maybe so, But, I studied during Feynman's time and he was a man who always questioned everything. He would argue his side of the proposition, but if you were prepared and refuted his position, he would consider your argument. That, by the way, is science. So, try me, what the hell is gravity, exactly?
My hero?? I was just defending him as a scientist. And a very good one at that. I watched the video. What I saw was a scientist trying to explain to a layman the scientific process. Constantly asking why? How? It's not an easy answer: what is gravity??
Having had the good fortune to meet the bongo player on several occasions, trust me when I say that is a load of crap. You come off like a 6-year-old downs tard critiquing Tesla.
Agreed. He was one of the key members of the Manhattan Project (a young prodigy at the time). He also did some good work with neural networks (Thinking Machines) in the 80's.
He had a good life. He led a life of significance, in multiple fields. I am trying, to a much lesser degree, to do the same.
Morons are gonna moron. It's what they do. People like that are nothing more than dancing clowns... a distraction from the things in life that really matter.
The best possible response is - no response. Any response is simply a waste of time, as you have probably already noticed.
Instead, we need to ignore distractions and use our time to focus on the things (and people) that DO matter, in order that we may continue to learn and improve... as we try our best not to accidentally become one of the dancing clowns ourselves.
Did you read the book?? IMHO it was the story of a brilliant, eccentric man who questioned everything and adhered to the scientific principle. You may not like him, but he led a life of adventure. We should all try to be like that...
Yes, I read it back in the 1980s. It was a gift from the Tau Beta Pi Honor Society for admission in their society. There's little to nothing I remember of it though. I regret to say, I recall it being rather boorish.
Thanks, by the number of down votes I received, I wonder what ever happened to respecting the other person's opinion? It seems I have no right to take a different direction from the herd mentality and take a different path? Wow, get along lil' doggies. There's only one path. Now, take it!
Down votes are overrated. Kind of like a scowl from a passerby. Soon forgotten. The thing I remember most about Feynman was his dislike of authority. During his time trying to figure out how to blow up the world, there was, of course, tight security. All papers etc. had to be locked away in "secure" file cabinets nightly. These were no nonsense safes with S & G combination locks on them. He figured out how to open these safes by trial and error, figuring out their weaknesses. How close you had to be to the real number and it would still open, that kind of thing. It was a real taboo to leave your office with an open safe!!! He would go into the security officers office and open the safe and leave a note in it. Thought it was funny...... They hated him.
The down-votes for my opinion is amazing. It seems I have no right to take a different direction from the herd and take a different path? Wow, get along lil' doggies. There's only one path. Now, take it!
So you're the down-voter. I suppose it is your right to do so, but definitely not for your premise though. I thank you for responding. However, unfortunately your response sits at the very bottom of Graham's Hierarchy of Argument. 'Name calling' is pathetic and goes against the rules. GAW strives for its members to be at the upper level of this hierarchy. I suggest you read and understand them.
You mentioned Feynman was "one of mainstream's darlings". It wouldn't be for the same reason Carl Sagan, Albert Einstein, or even a Amy Schumer or Seth Rogan are promoted? A colleague of mine worked several years with Carl Sagan and said he is a "big fake", an "actor" who stole the headlines of the work others did. He was never even involved in the projects. He too publicly was endeared by mainstream television because of his ((karma))).
We are the news. Not the lying propaganda mainstream. A long time ago, decades ago before 'Q' made publicity, I was discerning "mainstream darlings". Feynman was one of them to which I questioned his promotion and his celebritiness.
Of course Science is never settled. It's a process of investigation using the scientific method.... then you have the 'virus' and Anthony Fauci.
Thanks for posting that. I know one of those 'the science is settled types.' Can't wait to show him this.
My favorite Feynman quote:
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts".
Obviously science is never "settled". Also, everyone should read his famous "cargo cult science" commencement address to the Caltech graduating class of 1974. Just search for it. It speaks so much to the way that science has been distorted today.
LMAO Feynman is a fraud like so many of his generation. There’s a great video where he is asked what gravity is… and he can’t answer the question.
Anyways…
please wake up
Richard Feynman was not a fraud. He was a physicist and a brilliant man. He led an interesting and somewhat controversial life. He was not perfect, no one is. But with Feynman what you see is what you get. IMHO we need more (many more) like him. BTW what is gravity, exactly??
Sheeptard! Maybe so, But, I studied during Feynman's time and he was a man who always questioned everything. He would argue his side of the proposition, but if you were prepared and refuted his position, he would consider your argument. That, by the way, is science. So, try me, what the hell is gravity, exactly?
Here is your hero’s answer:
https://youtu.be/36GT2zI8lVA
Sounds like a fraud to me.
My hero?? I was just defending him as a scientist. And a very good one at that. I watched the video. What I saw was a scientist trying to explain to a layman the scientific process. Constantly asking why? How? It's not an easy answer: what is gravity??
Just state you understanding of "what is gravity" and clear it up.
Sounds like Feynman just schooled the idiot journo-tard who is hiding off camera.
So what time mark on that video did Feynman get asked anything about gravity?
I think the mechanism of gravity is famously difficult to understand by scientists. A fraud would pretend to know exactly what it is.
Having had the good fortune to meet the bongo player on several occasions, trust me when I say that is a load of crap. You come off like a 6-year-old downs tard critiquing Tesla.
Agreed. He was one of the key members of the Manhattan Project (a young prodigy at the time). He also did some good work with neural networks (Thinking Machines) in the 80's.
He had a good life. He led a life of significance, in multiple fields. I am trying, to a much lesser degree, to do the same.
He was likely a legit 180 IQ. Both funny and a little sad to see folks who are still in double digits ridicule him.
Morons are gonna moron. It's what they do. People like that are nothing more than dancing clowns... a distraction from the things in life that really matter.
The best possible response is - no response. Any response is simply a waste of time, as you have probably already noticed.
Instead, we need to ignore distractions and use our time to focus on the things (and people) that DO matter, in order that we may continue to learn and improve... as we try our best not to accidentally become one of the dancing clowns ourselves.
Quite right. "Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynman!" I was never 'big' on Richard Feynman.
Did you read the book?? IMHO it was the story of a brilliant, eccentric man who questioned everything and adhered to the scientific principle. You may not like him, but he led a life of adventure. We should all try to be like that...
Yes, I read it back in the 1980s. It was a gift from the Tau Beta Pi Honor Society for admission in their society. There's little to nothing I remember of it though. I regret to say, I recall it being rather boorish.
Fair enough....
Thanks, by the number of down votes I received, I wonder what ever happened to respecting the other person's opinion? It seems I have no right to take a different direction from the herd mentality and take a different path? Wow, get along lil' doggies. There's only one path. Now, take it!
Down votes are overrated. Kind of like a scowl from a passerby. Soon forgotten. The thing I remember most about Feynman was his dislike of authority. During his time trying to figure out how to blow up the world, there was, of course, tight security. All papers etc. had to be locked away in "secure" file cabinets nightly. These were no nonsense safes with S & G combination locks on them. He figured out how to open these safes by trial and error, figuring out their weaknesses. How close you had to be to the real number and it would still open, that kind of thing. It was a real taboo to leave your office with an open safe!!! He would go into the security officers office and open the safe and leave a note in it. Thought it was funny...... They hated him.
The interview is probably still on YouTube. Literally, you will laugh.
The down-votes for my opinion is amazing. It seems I have no right to take a different direction from the herd and take a different path? Wow, get along lil' doggies. There's only one path. Now, take it!
So you're the down-voter. I suppose it is your right to do so, but definitely not for your premise though. I thank you for responding. However, unfortunately your response sits at the very bottom of Graham's Hierarchy of Argument. 'Name calling' is pathetic and goes against the rules. GAW strives for its members to be at the upper level of this hierarchy. I suggest you read and understand them.
You mentioned Feynman was "one of mainstream's darlings". It wouldn't be for the same reason Carl Sagan, Albert Einstein, or even a Amy Schumer or Seth Rogan are promoted? A colleague of mine worked several years with Carl Sagan and said he is a "big fake", an "actor" who stole the headlines of the work others did. He was never even involved in the projects. He too publicly was endeared by mainstream television because of his ((karma))).
We are the news. Not the lying propaganda mainstream. A long time ago, decades ago before 'Q' made publicity, I was discerning "mainstream darlings". Feynman was one of them to which I questioned his promotion and his celebritiness.
So be it. Henceforth it is important to keep in mind Graham' Hierarchy of Argument for guidance.