The Greatest Showman: Richard Feynman
December 11, 2024 9:09 AM Subscribe
Physicist Angela Collier has a new video the sham legacy of Richard Feynman. After reading every book on Feynman, she covers the cottage industry of Feynman media, the Feynman bros in this cult of personality, how he did not write "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!" or any other book, and how the stories that Feynman tells about himself are almost certainly made up.
Additional links:
Surely You’re a Creep, Mr. Feynman by Leila McNeill [The Baffler]
Who Do You Think You are Kidding, Mr Feynman on Terence Eden’s Blog about a man who paid homage by impersonating Feynman on Twitter.
Link to Feynman’s released FBI file (pg 64) (CW: Spousal abuse)
Also, Feynman believed that there was no evidence that brushing teeth prevented cavities and fellow Nobel Prize winning physicist Murray Gell-Mann confirms that Feynmann didn't brush his teeth or wash his hands after using the bathroom.
Additional links:
Surely You’re a Creep, Mr. Feynman by Leila McNeill [The Baffler]
Who Do You Think You are Kidding, Mr Feynman on Terence Eden’s Blog about a man who paid homage by impersonating Feynman on Twitter.
Link to Feynman’s released FBI file (pg 64) (CW: Spousal abuse)
Also, Feynman believed that there was no evidence that brushing teeth prevented cavities and fellow Nobel Prize winning physicist Murray Gell-Mann confirms that Feynmann didn't brush his teeth or wash his hands after using the bathroom.
Wait til you hear about Shakespeare’s personal hygiene.
posted by Lemkin at 9:17 AM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
posted by Lemkin at 9:17 AM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
The big problem, like Collier says; is the deification of Feynman to make it seem like he was the late 20th century equivalent of people like Archimedes, Newton and Einstein. That is the reason for all this cottage industry of books and articles around him, I feel. James Clerk Maxwell should be on this Mount Rushmore if anyone.
Her polemic on String Theory is worth watching as well.
posted by indianbadger1 at 9:20 AM on December 11, 2024 [11 favorites]
Her polemic on String Theory is worth watching as well.
posted by indianbadger1 at 9:20 AM on December 11, 2024 [11 favorites]
I'm going to have to insist that folks watch the video (it's nearly three hours long but respectful of the viewer's time, there's just a lot to cover; auto-generated transcript). Otherwise, Feynman has such adulated (and unexamined) image that your objection will have already been directly addressed in the video.
I always knew Feynman was an asshole by reputation, but this video does a great job diving into details that have always been in plain sight. (Much like Schrödinger being an out and proud pedophile.) And while Feynman is indeed an accomplished physicist (he's not an academic fraud or an Elon Musk), he was obsessed with his self-image and told tall tales about himself to create the rogue iconoclast genius image he holds today. (See the Murray Gell-Mann interview video.)
Also when he says brushing your teeth is a superstition, he wasn't making some hypothetical point. He was just telling on himself. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the right one.
posted by AlSweigart at 9:22 AM on December 11, 2024 [20 favorites]
I always knew Feynman was an asshole by reputation, but this video does a great job diving into details that have always been in plain sight. (Much like Schrödinger being an out and proud pedophile.) And while Feynman is indeed an accomplished physicist (he's not an academic fraud or an Elon Musk), he was obsessed with his self-image and told tall tales about himself to create the rogue iconoclast genius image he holds today. (See the Murray Gell-Mann interview video.)
Also when he says brushing your teeth is a superstition, he wasn't making some hypothetical point. He was just telling on himself. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the right one.
posted by AlSweigart at 9:22 AM on December 11, 2024 [20 favorites]
She has a brief follow-up reviewing/ranking the books about him - reading EVERY SINGLE BOOK by Richard Feynman
posted by phigmov at 9:23 AM on December 11, 2024 [10 favorites]
posted by phigmov at 9:23 AM on December 11, 2024 [10 favorites]
Isn't the relevant comparison not Maxwell but some other postwar physicist? Who is the better physcisit than Feynman who wasn't a relentless self-promoter?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:26 AM on December 11, 2024
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:26 AM on December 11, 2024
I'm going to have to insist that folks watch the video (it's nearly three hours long but…
I’m just going to put that there and read it again.
posted by Lemkin at 9:33 AM on December 11, 2024 [17 favorites]
I’m just going to put that there and read it again.
posted by Lemkin at 9:33 AM on December 11, 2024 [17 favorites]
Are people really that surprised by the “as told to” nature of Surely You’re Joking? Leighton’s not credited on the outside cover of the version I’ve got but he is on the inside cover and in an introduction and I feel like the anecdotal style of it broadcasts this rather clearly. But as Collier says the fact that these were tales he told to a much younger guy who was sort of in awe of him explains a lot about the content.
posted by atoxyl at 9:34 AM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 9:34 AM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
I don't know that much about Feynman in general, but I remember trying to read "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feyman", after having it recommended to me by a friend who studied physics, but I couldn't get more than a few pages into it, I found it so incredibly obnoxious and self-aggrandizing. So what I'm saying is, I guess, thank you for validating me.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 9:41 AM on December 11, 2024 [11 favorites]
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 9:41 AM on December 11, 2024 [11 favorites]
Isn't the relevant comparison not Maxwell but some other postwar physicist?
She talks about this in context of him showing up third on popular lists of great physicists after Newton and Einstein, when almost any physicist would put Maxwell there. She also compares to some contemporaries and talks about exactly how his work came together with that of others for the shared Nobel prize. She gives credit to his legacy in physics, and even as a man, by the end, though. It’s more about taking him off a pedestal than taking him down entirely despite the hook.
(I don’t feel like I should have to say I watched the video but I did, when she posted it)
posted by atoxyl at 9:45 AM on December 11, 2024 [7 favorites]
She talks about this in context of him showing up third on popular lists of great physicists after Newton and Einstein, when almost any physicist would put Maxwell there. She also compares to some contemporaries and talks about exactly how his work came together with that of others for the shared Nobel prize. She gives credit to his legacy in physics, and even as a man, by the end, though. It’s more about taking him off a pedestal than taking him down entirely despite the hook.
(I don’t feel like I should have to say I watched the video but I did, when she posted it)
posted by atoxyl at 9:45 AM on December 11, 2024 [7 favorites]
Does this mean I need to burn my copy of QED, the only Feynman book I ever read?
posted by grumpybear69 at 9:50 AM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
posted by grumpybear69 at 9:50 AM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
fellow Nobel Prize winning physicist Murray Gell-Mann confirms that Feynmann didn't brush his teeth or wash his hands after using the bathroom
I often don't brush my teeth after using the bathroom, either.
Interesting about the book, I had the same edition she's showing on her video, with a very prominent by-line by Richard P. Feynman, but before I saw the image I was thinking "Of course it wasn't by Feynman" because that was one of my clearest memories of the book, that it was so clearly written by someone else based on anecdotes they'd heard from or about him that I was sure it couldn't have credited him as author.
posted by solotoro at 9:50 AM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
I often don't brush my teeth after using the bathroom, either.
Interesting about the book, I had the same edition she's showing on her video, with a very prominent by-line by Richard P. Feynman, but before I saw the image I was thinking "Of course it wasn't by Feynman" because that was one of my clearest memories of the book, that it was so clearly written by someone else based on anecdotes they'd heard from or about him that I was sure it couldn't have credited him as author.
posted by solotoro at 9:50 AM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
The Feynman anecdotes are something you should read once as amusement, and a second time as a warning.
All those anecdotes amount to Feynman observing people to figure out how to use them. It's one thing when the people he's studying are bureaucrats who already are alienated from by their formal duties. But he keeps at it in other contexts. And when you read them again, you start seeing why he wound up not completely alone but limited to the company of those who could stand him.
Reading an unreliable narrator and discovering his unreliability is something we should all experience once, and Feynman's books are an excellent way to tick that checkbox.
You can also pretty much figure out why Feynman started developing those obnoxious behaviors. The pain of losing his first love (and probably only love, given how he behaved afterwards), and it's worth remembering he stuck with her for better and for worse. The constant pressure to WASPify and shed his working class Jewish background. And then the desire to stay relevant as he aged.
That said, having met Gell-Mann, I'd say Gellman belongs in that 3rd spot. Gell-Mann did physics for the sake of physics. Outside of that context the man had no ego. Incredibly pleasant man to be around.
posted by ocschwar at 9:57 AM on December 11, 2024 [28 favorites]
All those anecdotes amount to Feynman observing people to figure out how to use them. It's one thing when the people he's studying are bureaucrats who already are alienated from by their formal duties. But he keeps at it in other contexts. And when you read them again, you start seeing why he wound up not completely alone but limited to the company of those who could stand him.
Reading an unreliable narrator and discovering his unreliability is something we should all experience once, and Feynman's books are an excellent way to tick that checkbox.
You can also pretty much figure out why Feynman started developing those obnoxious behaviors. The pain of losing his first love (and probably only love, given how he behaved afterwards), and it's worth remembering he stuck with her for better and for worse. The constant pressure to WASPify and shed his working class Jewish background. And then the desire to stay relevant as he aged.
That said, having met Gell-Mann, I'd say Gellman belongs in that 3rd spot. Gell-Mann did physics for the sake of physics. Outside of that context the man had no ego. Incredibly pleasant man to be around.
posted by ocschwar at 9:57 AM on December 11, 2024 [28 favorites]
Wait til you hear about Shakespeare’s personal hygiene.
"This person was born after the germ theory of disease was well understood" seems like a reasonable standard to hold someone's actions accountable to, particularly when that person is a scientist.
posted by mhoye at 10:03 AM on December 11, 2024 [39 favorites]
"This person was born after the germ theory of disease was well understood" seems like a reasonable standard to hold someone's actions accountable to, particularly when that person is a scientist.
posted by mhoye at 10:03 AM on December 11, 2024 [39 favorites]
Was his Nobel Prize based on faulty research? Were his theories about quantum electrodynamics stolen from another scientist who didn't get credit? If not, then framing this as a "sham legacy" feels like a bit of bullshit. If he was a creep and a weirdo, fine, say he was a creep and a weirdo. But if his science is sound and his educational abilities, that inspired generations of kids to become scientists themselves, hold up, then at the very least don't throw around loaded phrases like "sham legacy"
No, I haven't watched the three hour video, but it doesn't sound like his science is under question.
posted by gwint at 10:04 AM on December 11, 2024 [26 favorites]
No, I haven't watched the three hour video, but it doesn't sound like his science is under question.
posted by gwint at 10:04 AM on December 11, 2024 [26 favorites]
Was his Nobel Prize based on faulty research? Were his theories about quantum electrodynamics stolen from another scientist who didn't get credit? If not, then framing this as a "sham legacy" feels like a bit of bullshit.
This is directly addressed in the video.
posted by AlSweigart at 10:06 AM on December 11, 2024 [25 favorites]
This is directly addressed in the video.
posted by AlSweigart at 10:06 AM on December 11, 2024 [25 favorites]
It's definitely normal for celebrity memoirs to be ghostwritten, and even to be unreliable.
It's weird in Feynman's case, though, because those memoirs are a big piece of why he's a celebrity.
Like, I would not lose my respect for Barbra Streisand if I found out her memoirs were ghostwritten (I assume they are) or inaccurate (I assume at least bits of them are). I respect her for being Barbra fucking Streisand, and for being verifiably awesome in a bunch of shows and movies, not for writing a book.
Feynman, though, the only reason most people outside of physics ever knew his name or cared about him was those books. (Like, I gather he was a great physicist, but most people — even most nerds — do not have a personal top ten list of physicists, or even have the sort of knowledge where they could compile such a list.) So knowing they're ghostwritten and inaccurate, yeah, seems like it could make a difference for a lot of people.
posted by Birds, snakes, and aeroplanes at 10:07 AM on December 11, 2024 [11 favorites]
It's weird in Feynman's case, though, because those memoirs are a big piece of why he's a celebrity.
Like, I would not lose my respect for Barbra Streisand if I found out her memoirs were ghostwritten (I assume they are) or inaccurate (I assume at least bits of them are). I respect her for being Barbra fucking Streisand, and for being verifiably awesome in a bunch of shows and movies, not for writing a book.
Feynman, though, the only reason most people outside of physics ever knew his name or cared about him was those books. (Like, I gather he was a great physicist, but most people — even most nerds — do not have a personal top ten list of physicists, or even have the sort of knowledge where they could compile such a list.) So knowing they're ghostwritten and inaccurate, yeah, seems like it could make a difference for a lot of people.
posted by Birds, snakes, and aeroplanes at 10:07 AM on December 11, 2024 [11 favorites]
Around what timestamp?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:08 AM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:08 AM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
I don't wash Richard Feynman's hands after using the restroom either
posted by aubilenon at 10:15 AM on December 11, 2024 [16 favorites]
posted by aubilenon at 10:15 AM on December 11, 2024 [16 favorites]
Around what timestamp?
Ie, around what timestamp does she make clear she's calling his popular reputation a sham while his contributions to physics were good and important and not in question? Literally first noted within the first minute, and the line "Don't get me wrong, Feynman, amazing, Nobel-prize-winning physicist, he contributed a lot" is around 00:01:30. The thesis is clearly stated from get that this is about his popular reputation and the fact that people conflate that with his physics, which are great but which would never have alone gotten him the popular recognition he has.
posted by solotoro at 10:17 AM on December 11, 2024 [12 favorites]
Ie, around what timestamp does she make clear she's calling his popular reputation a sham while his contributions to physics were good and important and not in question? Literally first noted within the first minute, and the line "Don't get me wrong, Feynman, amazing, Nobel-prize-winning physicist, he contributed a lot" is around 00:01:30. The thesis is clearly stated from get that this is about his popular reputation and the fact that people conflate that with his physics, which are great but which would never have alone gotten him the popular recognition he has.
posted by solotoro at 10:17 AM on December 11, 2024 [12 favorites]
Very unfortunate, but much of what she talks about can be applied to "bros" in other STEM areas as well.
posted by milnak at 10:17 AM on December 11, 2024 [4 favorites]
posted by milnak at 10:17 AM on December 11, 2024 [4 favorites]
She did NOT come for "Ghostbusters," which is one of the greatest movies of all time.
posted by Captaintripps at 10:18 AM on December 11, 2024
posted by Captaintripps at 10:18 AM on December 11, 2024
"Don't get me wrong, Feynman, amazing, Nobel-prize-winning physicist, he contributed a lot"
So her title is clickbait, got it.
Glad I've learned about this dead scientists' hygiene tho
posted by gwint at 10:24 AM on December 11, 2024 [7 favorites]
So her title is clickbait, got it.
Glad I've learned about this dead scientists' hygiene tho
posted by gwint at 10:24 AM on December 11, 2024 [7 favorites]
> Around what timestamp?
In the first two sections. Like I said, the predictable objections are all directly addressed in the video so it'd be great to keep the discussion on track if people first watched even the first five minutes.
(Funny enough, this kind of immediate pushback to any criticism of the legend of Feynman is also directly addressed in the video.)
The internet has trained us to work in tweet-sized soundbites. If you are comfortable with your understanding of Feynman and his legacy and don't want that disturbed, give this post a pass. Collier spent a year reading literally every book available on Amazon and digested it into three hours. I can't point anyone to a single sentence from timestamp 01:14:37.48939 to 01:14:46.27449 that will change their mind.
It's a bit more complicated, and Collier does a great job explaining it.
> So her title is clickbait, got it.
(The immediate pushback to any criticism of the legend of Feynman that is also directly addressed in the video is quite funny indeed.)
posted by AlSweigart at 10:29 AM on December 11, 2024 [48 favorites]
In the first two sections. Like I said, the predictable objections are all directly addressed in the video so it'd be great to keep the discussion on track if people first watched even the first five minutes.
(Funny enough, this kind of immediate pushback to any criticism of the legend of Feynman is also directly addressed in the video.)
The internet has trained us to work in tweet-sized soundbites. If you are comfortable with your understanding of Feynman and his legacy and don't want that disturbed, give this post a pass. Collier spent a year reading literally every book available on Amazon and digested it into three hours. I can't point anyone to a single sentence from timestamp 01:14:37.48939 to 01:14:46.27449 that will change their mind.
It's a bit more complicated, and Collier does a great job explaining it.
> So her title is clickbait, got it.
(The immediate pushback to any criticism of the legend of Feynman that is also directly addressed in the video is quite funny indeed.)
posted by AlSweigart at 10:29 AM on December 11, 2024 [48 favorites]
In case you were curious about her t-shirt, it's Tamiko Thiel's CM-1 logo which was worn by Feynman in Apple's 1990 Think Different campaign.
posted by autopilot at 10:34 AM on December 11, 2024 [10 favorites]
posted by autopilot at 10:34 AM on December 11, 2024 [10 favorites]
There's a section on 'feynman in physics' which is, imo, quite respectful of his actual physics contributions, and the good lessons from how he worked that others can learn from.
posted by kaibutsu at 10:35 AM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
posted by kaibutsu at 10:35 AM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
Like I said in my first comment: The "sham legacy" refers to Feynman's image as iconoclast genius, not his academic work. Just watch the video or read the transcript or read the related links in the post if you want more understanding.
(Wow, I'm getting flashbacks to the "So are you saying he's not the CEO of SpaceX and Tesla?! Those are objective facts!!" jabs I get when I criticize Elon Musk online. I'm going to bounce from my own thread.)
posted by AlSweigart at 10:37 AM on December 11, 2024 [30 favorites]
(Wow, I'm getting flashbacks to the "So are you saying he's not the CEO of SpaceX and Tesla?! Those are objective facts!!" jabs I get when I criticize Elon Musk online. I'm going to bounce from my own thread.)
posted by AlSweigart at 10:37 AM on December 11, 2024 [30 favorites]
Feynman, though, the only reason most people outside of physics ever knew his name or cared about him was those books
Have you read those books? They’re not great writing, they’re anecdotes from a character people found entertaining and charismatic (I read two when I was younger and honestly even if you are interested in what they have to offer it’s sharply diminishing returns after the first). And among people who are at least casually interested in physics he’s also known for his talent as an educator, which I think is a reason Collier, as a physics popularizer, has to retain some respect for him.
Anyway the video is mostly about deflating the persona (so yeah the title is a little bait-y). I thought the amount of time given to the fact of the ghostwriting made it out to be more shocking than it is, but as I mentioned earlier Collier does keenly observe that the circumstances of the ghostwriting tell you something about what kind of stories they are. Feynman could be fairly accused of self-promotion in physics, too, but nobody is going to say he wasn’t a major physicist.
posted by atoxyl at 10:39 AM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
Have you read those books? They’re not great writing, they’re anecdotes from a character people found entertaining and charismatic (I read two when I was younger and honestly even if you are interested in what they have to offer it’s sharply diminishing returns after the first). And among people who are at least casually interested in physics he’s also known for his talent as an educator, which I think is a reason Collier, as a physics popularizer, has to retain some respect for him.
Anyway the video is mostly about deflating the persona (so yeah the title is a little bait-y). I thought the amount of time given to the fact of the ghostwriting made it out to be more shocking than it is, but as I mentioned earlier Collier does keenly observe that the circumstances of the ghostwriting tell you something about what kind of stories they are. Feynman could be fairly accused of self-promotion in physics, too, but nobody is going to say he wasn’t a major physicist.
posted by atoxyl at 10:39 AM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
I read the two books of anecdotes as a teenager. Watching PUA and manosphere stuff develop on reddit, I could not help thinking that those books are at least partially responsible.
posted by eruonna at 10:40 AM on December 11, 2024 [18 favorites]
posted by eruonna at 10:40 AM on December 11, 2024 [18 favorites]
It's funny, because in the video she's like "I bet you don't know what Feynman actually did" and I said out loud "Quantum electrodynamics" and then later on she's like "and his big contribution was in the field of quantum electrodynamics, but only physicists know that" and, well, I'm not a physicist, or even a scientist, and that is literally all I knew about Feynman.
And I'm glad, because he otherwise sounds like quite the douche.
posted by grumpybear69 at 10:40 AM on December 11, 2024 [12 favorites]
And I'm glad, because he otherwise sounds like quite the douche.
posted by grumpybear69 at 10:40 AM on December 11, 2024 [12 favorites]
Well, she did make a 3:47:59 hours, minutes and seconds long video explaining how Star Trek Picard ruins Star Trek. In which she wears a green Command Staff uniform -- to which she is a credit --and calls Worf a deadbeat dad there in. With love. One would think she is entitled to her frighteningly well informed opinion on just about anything and anyone.
posted by y2karl at 10:41 AM on December 11, 2024 [19 favorites]
posted by y2karl at 10:41 AM on December 11, 2024 [19 favorites]
My only reaction is: Yeah, this tracks.
He's yet another "beloved" personality whose problematic tendencies were always right there in front of us but because he was perceived to be so open-minded and charismatic we either ignored his obvious faults or just dismissed the way he acted as part of his quirkiness.
She talks about this in context of him showing up third on popular lists of great physicists after Newton and Einstein
Feynman is basically Batman for male physics students. They hear about the mischievous Nobel prize-winning guy who played the bongo drums, went to strip clubs, and who never let his own inhibitions get in the way of his curiosity and they want to emulate him.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 10:41 AM on December 11, 2024 [20 favorites]
He's yet another "beloved" personality whose problematic tendencies were always right there in front of us but because he was perceived to be so open-minded and charismatic we either ignored his obvious faults or just dismissed the way he acted as part of his quirkiness.
She talks about this in context of him showing up third on popular lists of great physicists after Newton and Einstein
Feynman is basically Batman for male physics students. They hear about the mischievous Nobel prize-winning guy who played the bongo drums, went to strip clubs, and who never let his own inhibitions get in the way of his curiosity and they want to emulate him.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 10:41 AM on December 11, 2024 [20 favorites]
JFC people are allowed to have opinions about the disconnect between the video and the clickbaity title. No everyone that disagrees with you is a asshole/techbro/feynman apologist/etc.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:41 AM on December 11, 2024 [16 favorites]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:41 AM on December 11, 2024 [16 favorites]
I had his last phd student as a professor in grad school. He was/is eccentric to say the least as well, but I learned a lot about solid state physics. Really don't have hours to spend debunking things I don't have bunked, though.
posted by nutate at 10:44 AM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
posted by nutate at 10:44 AM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
Not contradicting you AISweigart - just providing a timestamp!
Feynman had a few things going which took him from 'really really good physicist' to 'legendary physicist.' The actual results are the baseline - there are many other nobel laureates whose names most people don't know. The extra fuel in the tank is skill as a science communicator. And that's partly the books, but also the public talks. Like this clip that was massively influential on me as a young art-school-dropout-turned-mathematician. Or this on the brown throated thrush...
posted by kaibutsu at 10:46 AM on December 11, 2024 [11 favorites]
Feynman had a few things going which took him from 'really really good physicist' to 'legendary physicist.' The actual results are the baseline - there are many other nobel laureates whose names most people don't know. The extra fuel in the tank is skill as a science communicator. And that's partly the books, but also the public talks. Like this clip that was massively influential on me as a young art-school-dropout-turned-mathematician. Or this on the brown throated thrush...
posted by kaibutsu at 10:46 AM on December 11, 2024 [11 favorites]
Can I please have a hero that doesn’t go milkshake duck when I am most depressed.
posted by varion at 10:51 AM on December 11, 2024 [22 favorites]
posted by varion at 10:51 AM on December 11, 2024 [22 favorites]
He's yet another "beloved" personality whose problematic tendencies were always right there in front of us but because he was perceived to be so open-minded and charismatic we either ignored his obvious faults or just dismissed the way he acted as part of his quirkiness.
The obnoxious iconoclastic genius is so fucking ubiquitous because we love stories, which means we love drama, which means conflict. So the scientists whose names become prominent in popular culture are those who are portrayed as such, truly or falsely.
Since we're debunking portrayals of scientists, I have to rant a little about Alan Turing. A movie was made portraying him as an obnoxious iconoclastic genius and the real life Turing only matched one of those three words.
We need the likes of Turing and Gell-Mann way more than Feynman, and we HAVE the likes of them more than we have Feynman. But nobody would make a movie about Murray Gell-Mann.
posted by ocschwar at 10:53 AM on December 11, 2024 [12 favorites]
As a (former) physicist, I'm honestly glad to see this kind of "take-down" of Feynman's popularized works. Those books have been a big part of the "culture" of physics for a long time. For example, in 2003 when I started a BS in physics, the department sent every new student a copy of The Pleasure of Finding Things Out as a kind of welcome gift.
But while some of the anecdotes are entertaining, there's a ton of problematic crap in them too. Plenty of misogyny shows up directly in the pages of Surely You're Joking, not to mention a fair amount of disdain for other fields. IMO, Feynman's influence on generations of physicists is a good part of why we all recognize ourselves in xkcd 793.
Yes, Feynman was legitimately excellent at doing physics. But absent his books of anecdotes, he would mostly be known only to physicists as creator of Feynman diagrams and as a part of the development of quantum physics. That's probably exactly the right level of prominence for the man, and it should be enough.
posted by learning from frequent failure at 10:56 AM on December 11, 2024 [33 favorites]
But while some of the anecdotes are entertaining, there's a ton of problematic crap in them too. Plenty of misogyny shows up directly in the pages of Surely You're Joking, not to mention a fair amount of disdain for other fields. IMO, Feynman's influence on generations of physicists is a good part of why we all recognize ourselves in xkcd 793.
Yes, Feynman was legitimately excellent at doing physics. But absent his books of anecdotes, he would mostly be known only to physicists as creator of Feynman diagrams and as a part of the development of quantum physics. That's probably exactly the right level of prominence for the man, and it should be enough.
posted by learning from frequent failure at 10:56 AM on December 11, 2024 [33 favorites]
All I'll say is that Feynman's scientific reputation among actual physicists, and especially theoretical physicists, is extremely strong.
posted by kickingtheground at 10:58 AM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
posted by kickingtheground at 10:58 AM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
she has a video on her 2nd channel that she goes through ALL of the Feynman books and ranks them that's shorter and also worth a watch.
posted by Dr. Twist at 10:59 AM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
posted by Dr. Twist at 10:59 AM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
[…] you start seeing why he wound up not completely alone but limited to the company of those who could stand himIn mathematics we’d say this is trivially true. Is there one among us who is not “limited to the company of those who can stand them?” The only reasonable examples I can think of are rich people that spend enough so those that can’t stand them still work for them.
I looked at the transcript. I will not live long enough to read that. I also like the walls of text boiling down to “watch the three hour video, it’s great and answers all questions, but I don’t have the space to quote it.” This *is* a site where we discuss things in text, after all.
posted by Gilgamesh's Chauffeur at 11:00 AM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
Yes, Feynman was legitimately excellent at doing physics. But absent his books of anecdotes, he would mostly be known only to physicists as creator of Feynman diagrams
Restating my other comment but I think he’d be known to the smaller group of laypersons with an interest in physics, because he was also excellent at teaching physics. But yeah I suspect this
Those books have been a big part of the "culture" of physics for a long time
is a big part of why Collier felt the urge to deflate the legend a bit.
posted by atoxyl at 11:00 AM on December 11, 2024 [12 favorites]
Restating my other comment but I think he’d be known to the smaller group of laypersons with an interest in physics, because he was also excellent at teaching physics. But yeah I suspect this
Those books have been a big part of the "culture" of physics for a long time
is a big part of why Collier felt the urge to deflate the legend a bit.
posted by atoxyl at 11:00 AM on December 11, 2024 [12 favorites]
I couldn't get more than a few pages into it, I found it so incredibly obnoxious and self-aggrandizing. So what I'm saying is, I guess, thank you for validating me.
Yes well, I read all of it . . . and came to the same conclusions. Even trying to keep "It was the style of the times" in my mind, things like him holding office hours in a strip club were so completely and obviously toxic.
posted by yerfatma at 11:01 AM on December 11, 2024 [7 favorites]
Yes well, I read all of it . . . and came to the same conclusions. Even trying to keep "It was the style of the times" in my mind, things like him holding office hours in a strip club were so completely and obviously toxic.
posted by yerfatma at 11:01 AM on December 11, 2024 [7 favorites]
scientific reputation among actual physicists
Angela is an actual physicist whom I love to watch on YouTube (as does my daughter; so does my wife, (former) MeFite tigrrrlily). Such a good communicator on technical subjects. We loved this video of hers as well. Glad to see it highlighted here.
posted by Flight Hardware, do not touch at 11:03 AM on December 11, 2024 [12 favorites]
Angela is an actual physicist whom I love to watch on YouTube (as does my daughter; so does my wife, (former) MeFite tigrrrlily). Such a good communicator on technical subjects. We loved this video of hers as well. Glad to see it highlighted here.
posted by Flight Hardware, do not touch at 11:03 AM on December 11, 2024 [12 favorites]
Several people here seem angry that other people won't provide them with free labor!
posted by oneirodynia at 11:06 AM on December 11, 2024 [10 favorites]
posted by oneirodynia at 11:06 AM on December 11, 2024 [10 favorites]
Those books have been a big part of the "culture" of physics for a long time
is a big part of why Collier felt the urge to deflate the legend a bit.
One of the things that Collier mentions is that as a teen,when you show any aptitude/interest towards physics, well meaning grownups shower you with Feynman books. this was solidly true from my experience as well. For me at least when this happened (late 80s) I mostly looked past the misogyny because it wasn't really on my radar yet. Re-reading them as an adult, HO-LEE-SHIT it's absolutely mindboggling you would give this to a sponge-brained teen.
posted by Dr. Twist at 11:10 AM on December 11, 2024 [26 favorites]
is a big part of why Collier felt the urge to deflate the legend a bit.
One of the things that Collier mentions is that as a teen,when you show any aptitude/interest towards physics, well meaning grownups shower you with Feynman books. this was solidly true from my experience as well. For me at least when this happened (late 80s) I mostly looked past the misogyny because it wasn't really on my radar yet. Re-reading them as an adult, HO-LEE-SHIT it's absolutely mindboggling you would give this to a sponge-brained teen.
posted by Dr. Twist at 11:10 AM on December 11, 2024 [26 favorites]
My dad, who was a scientist but not a physicist, gave me Surely You’re Joking when I was a teenager. This is one of those things where on one hand I feel like it’s 100 percent true that there are parts of that book that are a bad example to young men, but at the same time I don’t feel like I had too much trouble understanding that when I, personally, was a young man (I think my dad did give me some warnings along those lines along with the book).
posted by atoxyl at 11:11 AM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 11:11 AM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
I think the most positive side of his popular work is the way it captures “the joy of finding things out.” The most negative side is the misogyny and a certain amount of STEM-chauvinism.
posted by atoxyl at 11:12 AM on December 11, 2024 [4 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 11:12 AM on December 11, 2024 [4 favorites]
Murray Gell-Mann confirms that Feynmann didn't brush his teeth or wash his hands after using the bathroom
I used to work at the Santa Fe Institute with Murray Gell-Mann. I can confirm that half the men who worked there didn't wash their hands after taking a pee. If I'm guessing I'd say most of the European-born men did, most of the US-born ones didn't. I cannot comment on Gell-Mann's own hand washing habits nor Feynman's.
I can also confirm that Gell-Mann and several other men from the SFI including Seth Lloyd were Jeffrey Epstein buddies. I was going to make a joke here but I can no longer find humor in that corruption.
posted by Nelson at 11:18 AM on December 11, 2024 [26 favorites]
I used to work at the Santa Fe Institute with Murray Gell-Mann. I can confirm that half the men who worked there didn't wash their hands after taking a pee. If I'm guessing I'd say most of the European-born men did, most of the US-born ones didn't. I cannot comment on Gell-Mann's own hand washing habits nor Feynman's.
I can also confirm that Gell-Mann and several other men from the SFI including Seth Lloyd were Jeffrey Epstein buddies. I was going to make a joke here but I can no longer find humor in that corruption.
posted by Nelson at 11:18 AM on December 11, 2024 [26 favorites]
The Feynman anecdotes are something you should read once as amusement, and a second time as a warning.
I don't know if this is a comparison born solely out of accidental timing, but I read "Surely..." maybe a couple of months before going to a talk by Kurt Vonnegut and realizing "ah, this is who Feynman THINKS he is". Or, knowing more about him now decades later, how Feynman wanted to brand himself. But there's none of the warmth there, only light.
posted by Lyn Never at 11:21 AM on December 11, 2024 [7 favorites]
I don't know if this is a comparison born solely out of accidental timing, but I read "Surely..." maybe a couple of months before going to a talk by Kurt Vonnegut and realizing "ah, this is who Feynman THINKS he is". Or, knowing more about him now decades later, how Feynman wanted to brand himself. But there's none of the warmth there, only light.
posted by Lyn Never at 11:21 AM on December 11, 2024 [7 favorites]
My total exposure to Richard Feynman is in The Manhattan Projects comic books, which I always assumed was 100% made up things about scientists you may have heard of. Nothing in The Manhattan Projects was real right?
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 11:27 AM on December 11, 2024 [1 favorite]
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 11:27 AM on December 11, 2024 [1 favorite]
I had a couple friends in my early/mid twenties who had "wanting to write like Bukowski" or "read all of Feynman's books" as a big part of their personality. And I stand by what I said then; there's less obnoxious ways to try and signal you want to be seen as interesting and erudite.
That being said, I will stand by my opinion of 'Telling a Good Anecdote is Actually an Art' and 'Many Science Professors Think They're Good at Anecdotes, but Feynman Was Actually Skilled at Spinning Yarns.' And Feynman's books seemed like an interesting glimpse at American Academia of the 60s and 70s that didn't actually conflict with the stories I've heard from family friends who worked in Biochemistry around that time, but he's easy to flag as a not entirely reliable narrator.
But it's trivially easy to see how either written work could be extremely off putting to a mixed or modern audience.
posted by midmarch snowman at 11:27 AM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
That being said, I will stand by my opinion of 'Telling a Good Anecdote is Actually an Art' and 'Many Science Professors Think They're Good at Anecdotes, but Feynman Was Actually Skilled at Spinning Yarns.' And Feynman's books seemed like an interesting glimpse at American Academia of the 60s and 70s that didn't actually conflict with the stories I've heard from family friends who worked in Biochemistry around that time, but he's easy to flag as a not entirely reliable narrator.
But it's trivially easy to see how either written work could be extremely off putting to a mixed or modern audience.
posted by midmarch snowman at 11:27 AM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
Okay, Richard Feynman is in no small part responsible for my (utterly unrequired) love for physics, so I'm probably inclined to be a little easier on him than most. But it's pretty clear that the "sham legacy" Collier is talking has almost nothing to do with his work as a physicist and almost everything to do with the sort of popular mythos that emerged around Feynman as not like all those other stodgy, dull physicists, as this quirky, leprechaun-esque character who played funny little pranks and spoke truth to power and was unashamedly authentic in all things.
Which, yeah, is a sham. Like Collier says, there's just no way some of these stories Feynman either told about himself or allowed to be told about him are true, certainly not in the way they're presented. They're calculated to present a certain image-- hardly a paragon of authenticity. And the "funny little pranks" that amused me reading about them as a 14 year old now look, with the benefit of adulthood, like petty, cruel bullying. Like, stuff that makes you go "Dude, why in the world would you do/say that? What's wrong with you?" And obviously, physicists aren't all stodgy and boring. Feynman was not the only physicist with a sense of humor, or hobbies, or an interesting personality. That's a sham, too.
The irony here-- and this is what I appreciate most about Collier's video, because she brings this up-- is that alongside these sham parts of his legacy is the legacy of the truly kind, genuinely admirable things Feynman did do outside of his physics. I have a collection of his letters (and side note, I do agree with Collier... there's something weird about being able to buy and read famous people's letters). He writes back to young children who've written him letters, boys and girls, encouraging them to pursue their interest in science. A former student writes to him sharing that he feels he hasn't accomplished enough in life and Feynman tells him that's not true because he has a family that loves him and friends who cherish him and because above all he is a person and he has inherent value irrespective of what he does. He didn't have to do those things. The guy was an internationally celebrated physicist and public figure, I'm sure nobody would have faulted him for not replying to a letter from some kid he'd never met. But he took the time to do it, and to do it authentically and passionately.
That's the part of Feynman as a person, not a physicist, that's worth writing about and admiring. It's telling that so many broscience types (I think the Bukowski comparison above is pretty apt) instead venerate the illusion of Feynman as a puckish figure who doesn't play by the rules, doesn't kowtow to The Man, isn't politically correct (read: sexist), etc.
I think some folks here are responding as though Collier is trying to paint a completely negative picture of Feynman (to offset the completely positive one that often emerges in the popular consciousness). Just tar him completely, his personal behavior, his physics, etc. That's not what she's doing. She's just making it clear that aside from his well-deserved reputation as a world-class physicist, Feynman was a human being. Not a leprechaun, not a magical, quirky character, a human being who could be deeply decent and thoughtful, who could encourage people to love and explore science. Who was also, frankly, kind of an asshole, who could be petty and immature, who could be sexist (and also show that he could change and learn to be better), who for whatever psychological reasons I'm not qualified to speculate on felt the need to generate an industry of stories and legends about himself and present a manufactured image of himself. Both aspects of him are true. The guy was human.
posted by Method Man at 11:41 AM on December 11, 2024 [75 favorites]
Which, yeah, is a sham. Like Collier says, there's just no way some of these stories Feynman either told about himself or allowed to be told about him are true, certainly not in the way they're presented. They're calculated to present a certain image-- hardly a paragon of authenticity. And the "funny little pranks" that amused me reading about them as a 14 year old now look, with the benefit of adulthood, like petty, cruel bullying. Like, stuff that makes you go "Dude, why in the world would you do/say that? What's wrong with you?" And obviously, physicists aren't all stodgy and boring. Feynman was not the only physicist with a sense of humor, or hobbies, or an interesting personality. That's a sham, too.
The irony here-- and this is what I appreciate most about Collier's video, because she brings this up-- is that alongside these sham parts of his legacy is the legacy of the truly kind, genuinely admirable things Feynman did do outside of his physics. I have a collection of his letters (and side note, I do agree with Collier... there's something weird about being able to buy and read famous people's letters). He writes back to young children who've written him letters, boys and girls, encouraging them to pursue their interest in science. A former student writes to him sharing that he feels he hasn't accomplished enough in life and Feynman tells him that's not true because he has a family that loves him and friends who cherish him and because above all he is a person and he has inherent value irrespective of what he does. He didn't have to do those things. The guy was an internationally celebrated physicist and public figure, I'm sure nobody would have faulted him for not replying to a letter from some kid he'd never met. But he took the time to do it, and to do it authentically and passionately.
That's the part of Feynman as a person, not a physicist, that's worth writing about and admiring. It's telling that so many broscience types (I think the Bukowski comparison above is pretty apt) instead venerate the illusion of Feynman as a puckish figure who doesn't play by the rules, doesn't kowtow to The Man, isn't politically correct (read: sexist), etc.
I think some folks here are responding as though Collier is trying to paint a completely negative picture of Feynman (to offset the completely positive one that often emerges in the popular consciousness). Just tar him completely, his personal behavior, his physics, etc. That's not what she's doing. She's just making it clear that aside from his well-deserved reputation as a world-class physicist, Feynman was a human being. Not a leprechaun, not a magical, quirky character, a human being who could be deeply decent and thoughtful, who could encourage people to love and explore science. Who was also, frankly, kind of an asshole, who could be petty and immature, who could be sexist (and also show that he could change and learn to be better), who for whatever psychological reasons I'm not qualified to speculate on felt the need to generate an industry of stories and legends about himself and present a manufactured image of himself. Both aspects of him are true. The guy was human.
posted by Method Man at 11:41 AM on December 11, 2024 [75 favorites]
This feels akin to the discovery that Frank Abagnale (of Catch Me if You Can fame) lied about . . . so much. We mourn a great series of stories, but it's almost always good to consider why we were so attached to them in the first place.
I loved the Feynman books as a kid, but realized that he might be a huge jerk as I started to work in academia. This deep dive sure does confirm a lot.
posted by annaramma at 11:43 AM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
I loved the Feynman books as a kid, but realized that he might be a huge jerk as I started to work in academia. This deep dive sure does confirm a lot.
posted by annaramma at 11:43 AM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
This video is eye-opening. I'm halfway through it.
Feynman often gets a pass for his sexist behavior because he expressed deep love for his first wife. People (including me and an earlier comment in this thread) thought that perhaps he became unable to love deeply after she died, and that's why he often cheated on his wives and used pick-up artist techniques on women.
I just realized that his love story with Arline was also a tale told by him! Arline died, and she can't refute his story. For example, P Diddy beat Kim Porter violently but then rewrote history after she died, whitewashing their relationship into a romantic tale ("God broke the mold when he made Kim" etc).
Feynman's second wife said he flew into a violent rage periodically, threw objects, and physically attacked her. I wonder if Feynman also did that to his first wife Arline, and nobody will ever know because she died?
posted by vienna at 12:01 PM on December 11, 2024 [21 favorites]
Feynman often gets a pass for his sexist behavior because he expressed deep love for his first wife. People (including me and an earlier comment in this thread) thought that perhaps he became unable to love deeply after she died, and that's why he often cheated on his wives and used pick-up artist techniques on women.
I just realized that his love story with Arline was also a tale told by him! Arline died, and she can't refute his story. For example, P Diddy beat Kim Porter violently but then rewrote history after she died, whitewashing their relationship into a romantic tale ("God broke the mold when he made Kim" etc).
Feynman's second wife said he flew into a violent rage periodically, threw objects, and physically attacked her. I wonder if Feynman also did that to his first wife Arline, and nobody will ever know because she died?
posted by vienna at 12:01 PM on December 11, 2024 [21 favorites]
Sorry, I'm not going to waste 3 hours of my time listening to a rant based on a list found in a book by a romance author who just plucked a name out of the air, a name that her romance novel audience might recognize. What if she had chosen Carl Sagan? Would Collier have given us 3 hours on why we care about Carl Sagan's public persona and not his Astrophysics resume?
It's ironic that Collier is giving us click-baitey video titles in order to rant to us about how awful having a media presence and specious public persona can be.
You know who admired Feynman? Leonard Susskind. Susskind father of, according to Collier, the 'Lie' of String Theory. Susskind who is responsible for hours and hours of amazing Physics lectures , not one of which includes him playing a game while ranting.
Fine, Feynman was a creep, and his contributions put him in the mid tier of great and glorious physicists. Next time I write a romance novel I'll put Maxwell in my list, but until then I'll stick to media that actually makes science interesting and fun and isn't just someone's ticket to their own notoriety.
posted by OHenryPacey at 12:20 PM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
It's ironic that Collier is giving us click-baitey video titles in order to rant to us about how awful having a media presence and specious public persona can be.
You know who admired Feynman? Leonard Susskind. Susskind father of, according to Collier, the 'Lie' of String Theory. Susskind who is responsible for hours and hours of amazing Physics lectures , not one of which includes him playing a game while ranting.
Fine, Feynman was a creep, and his contributions put him in the mid tier of great and glorious physicists. Next time I write a romance novel I'll put Maxwell in my list, but until then I'll stick to media that actually makes science interesting and fun and isn't just someone's ticket to their own notoriety.
posted by OHenryPacey at 12:20 PM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
Its not based on a list found in a book, that line is a illustrative motivating example: that when a lay person wants to rattle off a list of famous physicists, Feynman is included.
My guess is she didn't read a romance novel, encounter that line, and then decided to read every book about Feynman. She probably, like many of us, knew that Feynman was an asshole, that he is also very famous, and wanted to discuss why that is so.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 12:29 PM on December 11, 2024 [13 favorites]
My guess is she didn't read a romance novel, encounter that line, and then decided to read every book about Feynman. She probably, like many of us, knew that Feynman was an asshole, that he is also very famous, and wanted to discuss why that is so.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 12:29 PM on December 11, 2024 [13 favorites]
Also, what's your argument? That Susskind liked Feynman and also Susskin made nice lectures so therefore...?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 12:30 PM on December 11, 2024 [14 favorites]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 12:30 PM on December 11, 2024 [14 favorites]
People who refuse to watch the video are criticizing it for the most trivial reasons.
@OHenryPacey: Angela Collier has a PhD in physics, but you refer to her repeatedly as a "romance author". Even if she did write romance books, it's even more impressive that a physics PhD can also be a successful romance author or critic.
Romance novels are often associated with female authors and are stigmatized. Calling a physics PhD a "romance author" comes across as sexist.
I'm not surprised that the 3 links you told us to watch instead are all by men.
posted by vienna at 12:30 PM on December 11, 2024 [60 favorites]
@OHenryPacey: Angela Collier has a PhD in physics, but you refer to her repeatedly as a "romance author". Even if she did write romance books, it's even more impressive that a physics PhD can also be a successful romance author or critic.
Romance novels are often associated with female authors and are stigmatized. Calling a physics PhD a "romance author" comes across as sexist.
I'm not surprised that the 3 links you told us to watch instead are all by men.
posted by vienna at 12:30 PM on December 11, 2024 [60 favorites]
Feynman's second wife said he flew into a violent rage periodically, threw objects, and physically attacked her. I wonder if Feynman also did that to his first wife Arline, and nobody will ever know because she died?
It’s often asserted in his defense online that Mary Bell’s statements about his treatment of her may have been exaggerated (with his understanding) because it was before the era of no-fault divorce and so cruelty by one party had to be asserted. I don’t have the knowledge to judge how plausible that is. It’s likely he wasn’t good to her regardless - certainly not faithful. His relationship with his third wife, Gwyneth, seems to have been better in all respects.
(Incidentally when we’re talking about “of his time” characterizations he was definitely accused of sexism in his own time, though I think he responded relatively graciously?)
posted by atoxyl at 12:31 PM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
It’s often asserted in his defense online that Mary Bell’s statements about his treatment of her may have been exaggerated (with his understanding) because it was before the era of no-fault divorce and so cruelty by one party had to be asserted. I don’t have the knowledge to judge how plausible that is. It’s likely he wasn’t good to her regardless - certainly not faithful. His relationship with his third wife, Gwyneth, seems to have been better in all respects.
(Incidentally when we’re talking about “of his time” characterizations he was definitely accused of sexism in his own time, though I think he responded relatively graciously?)
posted by atoxyl at 12:31 PM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
@OHenryPacey: Angela Collier has a PhD in physics, but you refer to her repeatedly as a "romance author".
OHenryPacey is referring to the romance author that Collier discusses in the video, they're not referring to Collier as a romance author.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 12:36 PM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
OHenryPacey is referring to the romance author that Collier discusses in the video, they're not referring to Collier as a romance author.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 12:36 PM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
don't have hours to spend debunking things I don't have bunked, though.
Likewise. I didn't realize Feynman was so _famous famous_ I thought he was just quirky famous. In his defense, I saw an interview / documentary about him where he goes on about the throat singers of Tannu Tuva. It was a great story, about how he wanted to go see and hear them but couldn't. And not long after I got to hear some Mongolian musicians that passed through NYC and it was pretty cool.
Guy was, on a personal level, a dick? That sucks. The videos of him talking about physics are cool, even I can understand them.
posted by From Bklyn at 12:38 PM on December 11, 2024 [4 favorites]
Likewise. I didn't realize Feynman was so _famous famous_ I thought he was just quirky famous. In his defense, I saw an interview / documentary about him where he goes on about the throat singers of Tannu Tuva. It was a great story, about how he wanted to go see and hear them but couldn't. And not long after I got to hear some Mongolian musicians that passed through NYC and it was pretty cool.
Guy was, on a personal level, a dick? That sucks. The videos of him talking about physics are cool, even I can understand them.
posted by From Bklyn at 12:38 PM on December 11, 2024 [4 favorites]
I'm jumping back in to clarify: I believe OHenryPacey is talking about romance author Ali Hazelwood who wrote "Love, Theoretically" which Angela Collier pointed out references Feynman, not Angela Collier herself.
This reference happens 47 seconds into the video and is never mentioned again.
Thanks for watching, uh, the first minute of the video, but it was just a minor point and not at all the basis of her argument so it's a wild thing to latch onto as a grievance against this video. But this sort of knee jerk, outsized response is common when it comes to people bringing up criticism of Feynman's image and mythos.
posted by AlSweigart at 12:42 PM on December 11, 2024 [28 favorites]
This reference happens 47 seconds into the video and is never mentioned again.
Thanks for watching, uh, the first minute of the video, but it was just a minor point and not at all the basis of her argument so it's a wild thing to latch onto as a grievance against this video. But this sort of knee jerk, outsized response is common when it comes to people bringing up criticism of Feynman's image and mythos.
posted by AlSweigart at 12:42 PM on December 11, 2024 [28 favorites]
Also I’m not sure he and Arline ever cohabitated more than briefly and there were times he was practically forbidden by doctors to touch her because of her presumed fragility so I suspect just for practical reasons that relationship didn’t involve much throwing of furniture.
Likewise. I didn't realize Feynman was so _famous famous_ I thought he was just quirky famous
I feel like this is like, say, Tesla, where when I was a kid these were relatively niche science heroes but the internet turned them into brand names. The length of the list of books reviewed in the other video should make it apparent just how strong a brand Feynman is.
posted by atoxyl at 12:45 PM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
Likewise. I didn't realize Feynman was so _famous famous_ I thought he was just quirky famous
I feel like this is like, say, Tesla, where when I was a kid these were relatively niche science heroes but the internet turned them into brand names. The length of the list of books reviewed in the other video should make it apparent just how strong a brand Feynman is.
posted by atoxyl at 12:45 PM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
On people complaining about people who haven't watched the whole video: granted, but it's three hours long. The post has only been up for four!
posted by JHarris at 12:57 PM on December 11, 2024 [12 favorites]
posted by JHarris at 12:57 PM on December 11, 2024 [12 favorites]
Also, what's your argument?
My argument is that if you're going to go after a famous scientist simply for creating a public persona that overshadows their accomplishments, and take 3 friggin' hours to do it, be careful you're not calling the kettle black. Feynman's fame, ill-deserved or not, has helped to popularize physics, and has likely inspired young people to become physicists. I'm not sure Collier's approach is aimed in quite this way.
I was rightly called out for linking to videos of only males. I had tried to include one of Sabine Hossenfelder but failed.
posted by OHenryPacey at 1:04 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
My argument is that if you're going to go after a famous scientist simply for creating a public persona that overshadows their accomplishments, and take 3 friggin' hours to do it, be careful you're not calling the kettle black. Feynman's fame, ill-deserved or not, has helped to popularize physics, and has likely inspired young people to become physicists. I'm not sure Collier's approach is aimed in quite this way.
I was rightly called out for linking to videos of only males. I had tried to include one of Sabine Hossenfelder but failed.
posted by OHenryPacey at 1:04 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
I pretty much cap my YouTube videos at 15, maybe 20 minutes, and I have to really care about the topic. Reading is just so much faster.
posted by grumpybear69 at 1:06 PM on December 11, 2024 [18 favorites]
posted by grumpybear69 at 1:06 PM on December 11, 2024 [18 favorites]
I was an undergraduate at Caltech from 1986 to 1990 (i.e. shortly after _Surely_ came out). At the time he was giving one lecture each year to the freshman physics class, and ours was either the last or second-to-last before he died. If I remember correctly, the lecture was about "what if the world you lived on was a torus instead of a sphere". It was entertaining and somewhat thought-provoking in a question-your-implicit-assumptions kind of way, but ultimately also a bit fluffy.
Feynman was, of course, a kind of celebrity on campus. It was very common for students to have a copy of the _Feynman_Lectures_; less common (I think) for them to have actually read it. I don't know how many had read _Surely_, but I had. The kind of anecdotes told in the book were the sort of thing that "everyone" knew anyway, in that pre-Internet way in which good yarns could spread and stay alive in small and insular communities.
Fun fact: Caltech did not start admitting women as undergraduates until 1970, and the class of 2028 is the first to reach gender parity. In my own class, there were 7 men for every woman.
From this essay by Danny Hillis:
posted by Slothrup at 1:09 PM on December 11, 2024 [20 favorites]
Feynman was, of course, a kind of celebrity on campus. It was very common for students to have a copy of the _Feynman_Lectures_; less common (I think) for them to have actually read it. I don't know how many had read _Surely_, but I had. The kind of anecdotes told in the book were the sort of thing that "everyone" knew anyway, in that pre-Internet way in which good yarns could spread and stay alive in small and insular communities.
Fun fact: Caltech did not start admitting women as undergraduates until 1970, and the class of 2028 is the first to reach gender parity. In my own class, there were 7 men for every woman.
From this essay by Danny Hillis:
The charming side of Richard helped people forgive him for his uncharming characteristics. For example, in many ways Richard was a sexist. Whenever it came time for his daily bowl of soup he would look around for the nearest "girl" and ask if she would fetch it to him. It did not matter if she was the cook, an engineer, or the president of the company. I once asked a female engineer who had just been a victim of this if it bothered her. "Yes, it really annoys me," she said. "On the other hand, he is the only one who ever explained quantum mechanics to me as if I could understand it."I've watched chunks of Dr. Collier's video (even before this post was made) and thought it was both very well done and more nuanced than the title suggests.
posted by Slothrup at 1:09 PM on December 11, 2024 [20 favorites]
Feynman's fame, ill-deserved or not, has helped to popularize physics, and has likely inspired young people to become physicists. I'm not sure Collier's approach is aimed in quite this way.
A good chunk of the video talks about how his cult of personality inspires young men in physics to be total dicks to young women in physics, said young men eventually realizing that being a snide asshole doesn't translate into physics success, and ragequitting the field.
That legacy isn't wholly positive at getting young people into physics.
posted by BungaDunga at 1:12 PM on December 11, 2024 [39 favorites]
A good chunk of the video talks about how his cult of personality inspires young men in physics to be total dicks to young women in physics, said young men eventually realizing that being a snide asshole doesn't translate into physics success, and ragequitting the field.
That legacy isn't wholly positive at getting young people into physics.
posted by BungaDunga at 1:12 PM on December 11, 2024 [39 favorites]
My argument is that if you're going to go after a famous scientist simply for creating a public persona that overshadows their accomplishments, and take 3 friggin' hours to do it, be careful you're not calling the kettle black
What? I wouldn't have even known about this video if it hadn't been linked to on Metafilter. A three hour video is in no way equivalent to a lifetime of carefully curating one's own public image.
Feynman's fame, ill-deserved or not, has helped to popularize physics, and has likely inspired young people to become physicists.
Why does it matter so much? I enjoyed reading Feynman's biography and for a while in college I thought he was a role model, but like any good scientist when I'm presented with new information I'm going to reevaluate what I think of him.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 1:19 PM on December 11, 2024 [17 favorites]
What? I wouldn't have even known about this video if it hadn't been linked to on Metafilter. A three hour video is in no way equivalent to a lifetime of carefully curating one's own public image.
Feynman's fame, ill-deserved or not, has helped to popularize physics, and has likely inspired young people to become physicists.
Why does it matter so much? I enjoyed reading Feynman's biography and for a while in college I thought he was a role model, but like any good scientist when I'm presented with new information I'm going to reevaluate what I think of him.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 1:19 PM on December 11, 2024 [17 favorites]
My argument is that if you're going to go after a famous scientist simply for creating a public persona
This is bad faith. For one, Feynman has been dead since 1989. I learned that from the video. Two, her criticism isn't that he created a public persona, its that he lied a lot, beat the shit out of women, flirted with his students, created a toxic academic culture, etc. etc. That shit should matter to you.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 1:24 PM on December 11, 2024 [26 favorites]
This is bad faith. For one, Feynman has been dead since 1989. I learned that from the video. Two, her criticism isn't that he created a public persona, its that he lied a lot, beat the shit out of women, flirted with his students, created a toxic academic culture, etc. etc. That shit should matter to you.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 1:24 PM on December 11, 2024 [26 favorites]
My argument is that if you're going to go after a famous scientist simply for creating a public persona that overshadows their accomplishments...
One of the more interesting contributions she's making is that Feynman didn't create his public persona. Other people did. Distorted it, spun it, sold it.
Early in the video she remarks that she's read every book Feynman ever wrote. So have you. Zero. It's all ghostwritten.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 1:26 PM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
One of the more interesting contributions she's making is that Feynman didn't create his public persona. Other people did. Distorted it, spun it, sold it.
Early in the video she remarks that she's read every book Feynman ever wrote. So have you. Zero. It's all ghostwritten.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 1:26 PM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
I think if the significant objection is sexism— sounds like it ought to be—it trivializes it to bring up things like toothbrushing and handwashing and ghostwriting. It’s also a bit much to be a guy who refuses to write a couple of sentences clarifying that the issue is sexism.
posted by knobknosher at 1:32 PM on December 11, 2024
posted by knobknosher at 1:32 PM on December 11, 2024
[imagines having the free time to watch ANY three-hour video]
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 1:34 PM on December 11, 2024 [11 favorites]
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 1:34 PM on December 11, 2024 [11 favorites]
One of the more interesting contributions she's making is that Feynman didn't create his public persona. Other people did. Distorted it, spun it, sold it.
Eh. My understanding was that Feynman was fully involved in the creation of Surely You're Joking, Mr Feynman, What Do You Care What Other People Think?, and his other storytelling works. He verbally told stories to his friend Ralph Leighton, who did the actual writing, but was very much part of the production of the books. This wasn't a case where some third party independently built up the persona.
posted by learning from frequent failure at 1:36 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
Eh. My understanding was that Feynman was fully involved in the creation of Surely You're Joking, Mr Feynman, What Do You Care What Other People Think?, and his other storytelling works. He verbally told stories to his friend Ralph Leighton, who did the actual writing, but was very much part of the production of the books. This wasn't a case where some third party independently built up the persona.
posted by learning from frequent failure at 1:36 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
On people complaining about people who haven't watched the whole video: granted, but it's three hours long.
Yeah, screw that -- the executive summary, if you please. Or the transcript.
posted by Rash at 1:48 PM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
Yeah, screw that -- the executive summary, if you please. Or the transcript.
posted by Rash at 1:48 PM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
The bigger problem with the books is NOT that they're ghostwritten. It's that Feynman distorted the stories. This video describes how other biographers fact-checked Feynman's stories and declined to include them in other books because the stories were so exaggerated. The video also cited several descriptions of how Feynman changed the stories over time, and wrote down versions with different dialogue and endings, as though he were workshopping the stories. But he presented the stories as real life.
The stories were distorted to make sexist behavior seem cool and popular. Feynman called women "whores" and described how he treated them poorly, and he claimed this made him extremely popular with women. I recall reading the book as a pre-teen, and he pretty much said that if you treat women well, you won't get laid. You have to treat them badly and insult them, and then they'll clamor to have sex with you.
This led to many young male readers learning to insult women because they thought it would get them more sex. It led to young female readers wondering if their natural reaction to being insulted was wrong. Sadly, my pre-teen self was in that latter category.
posted by vienna at 2:05 PM on December 11, 2024 [20 favorites]
The stories were distorted to make sexist behavior seem cool and popular. Feynman called women "whores" and described how he treated them poorly, and he claimed this made him extremely popular with women. I recall reading the book as a pre-teen, and he pretty much said that if you treat women well, you won't get laid. You have to treat them badly and insult them, and then they'll clamor to have sex with you.
This led to many young male readers learning to insult women because they thought it would get them more sex. It led to young female readers wondering if their natural reaction to being insulted was wrong. Sadly, my pre-teen self was in that latter category.
posted by vienna at 2:05 PM on December 11, 2024 [20 favorites]
I'm listening to it while at work trying to rewrite procedures, so it can be done. I'm only 2 hours in, but at 1:57:00 she sums it up pretty well.
Points generally are that (a) he didn't write down his own stuff, other people did write down what he said and published it and can't really verify what was in his brain, (b) the tales he tells are so preposterous they can't be real (except for the Challenger story since that can be verified), (c) sexist skeezery is all over the place, (d) dude was a showman, (e) does anyone know anything about him? "The legend of Richard Feynman is based on nothing at all."
posted by jenfullmoon at 2:07 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
Points generally are that (a) he didn't write down his own stuff, other people did write down what he said and published it and can't really verify what was in his brain, (b) the tales he tells are so preposterous they can't be real (except for the Challenger story since that can be verified), (c) sexist skeezery is all over the place, (d) dude was a showman, (e) does anyone know anything about him? "The legend of Richard Feynman is based on nothing at all."
posted by jenfullmoon at 2:07 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
It's ok to close the tab if you can't handle a three-hour video and hitting the button that says "show transcript" is too much. FYI you can feed the video to AI and get a summary.
Personally, I assume that every office, and lab, and every place basically in the 1960s was a musical number from How to Succeed in Business.... The problematic and non-problematic techbros of today spent far more of their youth reading on GameFAQs than reading Feynman.
posted by betweenthebars at 2:08 PM on December 11, 2024 [4 favorites]
Personally, I assume that every office, and lab, and every place basically in the 1960s was a musical number from How to Succeed in Business.... The problematic and non-problematic techbros of today spent far more of their youth reading on GameFAQs than reading Feynman.
posted by betweenthebars at 2:08 PM on December 11, 2024 [4 favorites]
It’s often asserted in his defense online that Mary Bell’s statements about his treatment of her may have been exaggerated (with his understanding) because it was before the era of no-fault divorce and so cruelty by one party had to be asserted.
Yeah it's odd that Collier doesn't address that. I thought she was setting it up by talking about how they didn't have no-fault divorce at that time.
posted by fleacircus at 2:09 PM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
Yeah it's odd that Collier doesn't address that. I thought she was setting it up by talking about how they didn't have no-fault divorce at that time.
posted by fleacircus at 2:09 PM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
Yeah, screw that -- the executive summary, if you please. Or the transcript.
As someone who routinely posts about 100+ hours of podcasts, I assume some people will be interested, even if they never come back to the FPP to say so, so, while I appreciate the disinclination to watch a 3 hour video, you’re being a little harsh. Also, the transcript was linked a few comments in.
I suspect the issue here is that a lot of MeFites know something about Feynman and/or have feelings about him, and so feel no need to interact with the subject of the post rather than its subject.
posted by GenjiandProust at 2:18 PM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
As someone who routinely posts about 100+ hours of podcasts, I assume some people will be interested, even if they never come back to the FPP to say so, so, while I appreciate the disinclination to watch a 3 hour video, you’re being a little harsh. Also, the transcript was linked a few comments in.
I suspect the issue here is that a lot of MeFites know something about Feynman and/or have feelings about him, and so feel no need to interact with the subject of the post rather than its subject.
posted by GenjiandProust at 2:18 PM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
The bigger problem with the books is NOT that they're ghostwritten. It's that Feynman distorted the stories. This video describes how other biographers fact-checked Feynman's stories and declined to include them in other books because the stories were so exaggerated
I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with the genre of “old(er) guy telling tales” but accordingly there’s nothing wrong with pointing out that this is what the popular books represent if some people don’t pick up on that on their own.
posted by atoxyl at 2:24 PM on December 11, 2024 [1 favorite]
I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with the genre of “old(er) guy telling tales” but accordingly there’s nothing wrong with pointing out that this is what the popular books represent if some people don’t pick up on that on their own.
posted by atoxyl at 2:24 PM on December 11, 2024 [1 favorite]
The transcript link is - remarkably - an even worse way to absorb this information than a three hour video.
posted by The River Ivel at 2:37 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
posted by The River Ivel at 2:37 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
Wasn’t earlier editions of “surely your joking” packaged as less an autobiography than a bunch lf stories? I never had any interest in ready the book but I did know that it wasn’t something that he sat down and wrote himself.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 2:44 PM on December 11, 2024
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 2:44 PM on December 11, 2024
I concur that the subtitle link is also hard to follow, unfortunately.
Later: She does cover his more favorable treatment of women (that we know of) and how he was into intellectual matches, and how he was nice to children. Why wasn't he wanting to portray himself as more positively with people in all these stories?
The second divorce comes up at 2:20, choking comes up at 2:27:00.
posted by jenfullmoon at 2:52 PM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
Later: She does cover his more favorable treatment of women (that we know of) and how he was into intellectual matches, and how he was nice to children. Why wasn't he wanting to portray himself as more positively with people in all these stories?
The second divorce comes up at 2:20, choking comes up at 2:27:00.
posted by jenfullmoon at 2:52 PM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
People want their heroes to be perfect. The general public isn't aware how poorly Einstein treated his first wife, Mileva Maric. And certainly, the putative heroes don't want their dirty laundry aired while they're still alive.
Deflating the mythology is good, but the tendency to swing the other way (if not a hero, then villain) is bad, too. Keep the full picture and accept humans are neither devils nor angels.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 3:04 PM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
Deflating the mythology is good, but the tendency to swing the other way (if not a hero, then villain) is bad, too. Keep the full picture and accept humans are neither devils nor angels.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 3:04 PM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
The River Ivel: The transcript link is - remarkably - an even worse way to absorb this information than a three hour video.
You're not wrong. It took me nearly an hour to infer what the transcript was telling me, Dr Collier has very conversational spoken delivery.
It's great for a video, the delivery, I've seen other acollierastro videos and think Dr Collier is great.
It's sad that these books and the mythos they've created give young scientist men another excuse to be dicks.
posted by k3ninho at 3:14 PM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
You're not wrong. It took me nearly an hour to infer what the transcript was telling me, Dr Collier has very conversational spoken delivery.
It's great for a video, the delivery, I've seen other acollierastro videos and think Dr Collier is great.
It's sad that these books and the mythos they've created give young scientist men another excuse to be dicks.
posted by k3ninho at 3:14 PM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
we can keep Dirac, right
posted by hototogisu at 3:24 PM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
posted by hototogisu at 3:24 PM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
research: abolish prestige and see who sticks around (and who turns up).
posted by busted_crayons at 3:29 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
posted by busted_crayons at 3:29 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
Susskind liking Feynman totally tracks. They have similarities.
Ask anyone who’s ever been a young female physicist around him. (Hi.)
posted by nat at 4:15 PM on December 11, 2024 [18 favorites]
Ask anyone who’s ever been a young female physicist around him. (Hi.)
posted by nat at 4:15 PM on December 11, 2024 [18 favorites]
[imagines having the free time to watch ANY three-hour video]
When she's wearing a green Star Trek uniform and nerding out about how Star Trek: Picard ruined Star Trek including a touching anecdote by Janes Doohan about how he prevented a teen Trekkie's suicide, finding three hours free time to watch is not so unimaginable imho.
posted by y2karl at 4:27 PM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
When she's wearing a green Star Trek uniform and nerding out about how Star Trek: Picard ruined Star Trek including a touching anecdote by Janes Doohan about how he prevented a teen Trekkie's suicide, finding three hours free time to watch is not so unimaginable imho.
posted by y2karl at 4:27 PM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
The fpp prompted me to finish the video and oof that was a lot. I hope Surely You're Joking starts to fade into obscurity.
posted by mscibing at 4:30 PM on December 11, 2024 [1 favorite]
posted by mscibing at 4:30 PM on December 11, 2024 [1 favorite]
"People do not tend to make excuses for things that they think are right." - Leila McNeill
posted by 3.2.3 at 4:30 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
posted by 3.2.3 at 4:30 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
@AlSweigart, Collier's absolutely incorrect take on "Ghostbusters" aside, thank you and no thank you for sharing this video. No thank you because it completely derailed my workday, but thank you because in part it made me much more enthusiastic about problems I'm working through at work.
It's weird to say I work in the YouTube field, but I do, and I absolutely love how she just tosses best practices out the door. There are so many critiques I could have as an expert here, but she's gotten a half million people to watch some or all of a video the length of a "Dune" movie.
It's compelling video and as someone who is interested in physics, but never really had much exposure to these stories about Feynman, I felt like it was a great exploration of someone's persona and character. I actually came out of it with appreciation for a flawed person and I really enjoyed the parts toward the end where Collier got into what he may have actually been like as a person. Especially how he was as a father. If someone was writing a book about me, I'd hope the complement to my professional life was a parental one like that.
posted by Captaintripps at 4:34 PM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
It's weird to say I work in the YouTube field, but I do, and I absolutely love how she just tosses best practices out the door. There are so many critiques I could have as an expert here, but she's gotten a half million people to watch some or all of a video the length of a "Dune" movie.
It's compelling video and as someone who is interested in physics, but never really had much exposure to these stories about Feynman, I felt like it was a great exploration of someone's persona and character. I actually came out of it with appreciation for a flawed person and I really enjoyed the parts toward the end where Collier got into what he may have actually been like as a person. Especially how he was as a father. If someone was writing a book about me, I'd hope the complement to my professional life was a parental one like that.
posted by Captaintripps at 4:34 PM on December 11, 2024 [6 favorites]
It's compelling video
I lasted about 45 seconds. And that's with the advance hype.
posted by Lemkin at 5:28 PM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
I lasted about 45 seconds. And that's with the advance hype.
posted by Lemkin at 5:28 PM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
Engaging or not, I don't have time to watch a three-hour video.
*Proceeds to spend three hours on Metafilter*
posted by AlSweigart at 5:40 PM on December 11, 2024 [25 favorites]
*Proceeds to spend three hours on Metafilter*
posted by AlSweigart at 5:40 PM on December 11, 2024 [25 favorites]
For what it's worth, I very rarely watch any videos at all, much less anything longer than five minutes, and I clicked through because I have generally found AlSweigart's contributions to be enjoyable and/or insightful. I ended up watching the whole video (RIP my productivity). For those who are understandably uninterested in spending three hours thinking about Feynman, I will summarize that the video is much less about re-litigating the various "genius vs asshole" takes -- after all, that would hardly be novel and would definitely not be worth the video time -- and much more about understanding how a mythos or brand originates and how it propagates. She starts off with the casual sexism stuff because of course she does; the Feynman Mythos has most directly impacted her life via sexist fanbros, as it has for many of us. She spends a fair chunk of time discussing things we can actually know about Feynman-the-human (based on more trustworthy sources than "his" books), and asks why those aspects, especially the admirable things like his well-attested kindness to children, are not more core to Feynman-the-legend. In making points about considering the source, she mentions the frankly startling fact that Ralph Leighton, lifelong Feynman-the-legend booster and author of "Surely You're Joking," has made statements to the effect that no other physicist has ever been remotely as cool and interesting and genius as Feynman, despite his own father (Robert Leighton) being a highly accomplished Caltech physicist. Near the end of the video, she discusses some high-level takeaways from how Feynman actually did physics, which she rightly notes is rarely discussed.
If I were in the position of teaching a course on the rhetoric of personal branding, I'd be tempted to include some clips from this alongside, say, Exit Through the Gift Shop.
For those reacting negatively to the Ghostbusters reference: how is this not the ideal analogy? It's oft-quoted, foundational to the pop culture for those of us who grew up in the 80's and 90's, sexist and cringey in several parts, otherwise fun to watch, and widely beloved. And no one would seriously put it in a short list of influential Great Films.
posted by #11eaea at 6:35 PM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
If I were in the position of teaching a course on the rhetoric of personal branding, I'd be tempted to include some clips from this alongside, say, Exit Through the Gift Shop.
For those reacting negatively to the Ghostbusters reference: how is this not the ideal analogy? It's oft-quoted, foundational to the pop culture for those of us who grew up in the 80's and 90's, sexist and cringey in several parts, otherwise fun to watch, and widely beloved. And no one would seriously put it in a short list of influential Great Films.
posted by #11eaea at 6:35 PM on December 11, 2024 [9 favorites]
Yeah it's odd that Collier doesn't address that. I thought she was setting it up by talking about how they didn't have no-fault divorce at that time.
She's too young to know about the era when if you wanted to get an amicable divorce you had to flip a coin, and the winner would choose whether to accuse or be accused of domestic violence, and then you both had to practice and keep the story straight in case the judge was really anti-divorce.
posted by ocschwar at 6:36 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
She's too young to know about the era when if you wanted to get an amicable divorce you had to flip a coin, and the winner would choose whether to accuse or be accused of domestic violence, and then you both had to practice and keep the story straight in case the judge was really anti-divorce.
posted by ocschwar at 6:36 PM on December 11, 2024 [5 favorites]
any portmanteau in a storm He didn't invent hairgel, no.
posted by MarchHare at 6:37 PM on December 11, 2024
posted by MarchHare at 6:37 PM on December 11, 2024
I really enjoyed this video for so many reasons - but Dr. Collier's exhaustive hate-read of Richard Feynman is 100% virtuoso.
posted by Word_Salad at 6:47 PM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
posted by Word_Salad at 6:47 PM on December 11, 2024 [2 favorites]
I can also confirm that Gell-Mann and several other men from the SFI including Seth Lloyd were Jeffrey Epstein buddies. I was going to make a joke here but I can no longer find humor in that corruption.
Well, fuck.
posted by ocschwar at 6:56 PM on December 11, 2024 [4 favorites]
Well, fuck.
posted by ocschwar at 6:56 PM on December 11, 2024 [4 favorites]
I first came across Angela Collier from her Pickard show video. I only watched the pilot and hated it. So I was happy to see her tear into it.
Her video on Dark Matter gave me my first real understanding of the topic and it has a followup video that gets into marvelous detail on the problem with "people talking on the internet."
She's extremely detail oriented and follows all the connections to her topic that she finds.
I read one of those Feynman books and the best part was about the Challenger explosion investiagation that he participated in.
posted by john at 6:57 PM on December 11, 2024 [1 favorite]
Her video on Dark Matter gave me my first real understanding of the topic and it has a followup video that gets into marvelous detail on the problem with "people talking on the internet."
She's extremely detail oriented and follows all the connections to her topic that she finds.
I read one of those Feynman books and the best part was about the Challenger explosion investiagation that he participated in.
posted by john at 6:57 PM on December 11, 2024 [1 favorite]
Pretty good so far. But an hour in I am going to jump on the 'haven't heard it...does she say' bandwagon...
She says: In 2010 the public turned on string theory
...but the public turned on everything then. It went hyper aggro dumb at exactly this moment...and I didn't see any control group study about how this was something that has to do with String Theory vs just general anti-establishment BS that has plagued us basically ever since.
[also she admits early on to being ameri-centric, so I'm following that with my critique]
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 7:09 PM on December 11, 2024
She says: In 2010 the public turned on string theory
...but the public turned on everything then. It went hyper aggro dumb at exactly this moment...and I didn't see any control group study about how this was something that has to do with String Theory vs just general anti-establishment BS that has plagued us basically ever since.
[also she admits early on to being ameri-centric, so I'm following that with my critique]
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 7:09 PM on December 11, 2024
I gather the video is mostly a debunking of Feynman's fame and reputation in popular culture. That came quite late in Feynman's career and in his life, when his reputation in physics was secure. His Nobel prize winning work on quantum electrodynamics was done in the 1940s . His work on physics education and popularization peaked in the 1960s.
I recall Feynman's popular fame is mostly due to his role in 1986 on the Rogers commission investigating the space shuttle Challenger explosion. Before that no one outside of physics had heard of him. Coincidentally there were the publications of the books Surely You're Joking... in 1985 and the follow-up What Do You Care ... in 1988, which both came just in time to coincide with his new found fame and boost and burnish his reputation.
His late career popular fame coincided with his fatal cancer. He had surgeries in 1978, 1986, and 1987. He died in 1988.
I wonder if his favorable reputation was influenced by knowledge of his illness and expected impending death. When someone is dying or has recently died, people try to find nice things to say about them. It's not the right time to pile on and point out what a jerk they were.
posted by JonJacky at 7:20 PM on December 11, 2024
I recall Feynman's popular fame is mostly due to his role in 1986 on the Rogers commission investigating the space shuttle Challenger explosion. Before that no one outside of physics had heard of him. Coincidentally there were the publications of the books Surely You're Joking... in 1985 and the follow-up What Do You Care ... in 1988, which both came just in time to coincide with his new found fame and boost and burnish his reputation.
His late career popular fame coincided with his fatal cancer. He had surgeries in 1978, 1986, and 1987. He died in 1988.
I wonder if his favorable reputation was influenced by knowledge of his illness and expected impending death. When someone is dying or has recently died, people try to find nice things to say about them. It's not the right time to pile on and point out what a jerk they were.
posted by JonJacky at 7:20 PM on December 11, 2024
She's too young to know about the era when if you wanted to get an amicable divorce you had to flip a coin, and the winner would choose whether to accuse or be accused of domestic violence
Or maybe the sexist, egotistical guy in the 1950s with a reputation for not getting along with people actually abused his wife? Are we really doing the "maybe she was lying" thing here?
posted by AlSweigart at 8:25 PM on December 11, 2024 [10 favorites]
Or maybe the sexist, egotistical guy in the 1950s with a reputation for not getting along with people actually abused his wife? Are we really doing the "maybe she was lying" thing here?
posted by AlSweigart at 8:25 PM on December 11, 2024 [10 favorites]
I enjoyed this. I like this thing where young women who are scientists are on youtube talking about science.
She was pretty repetitive, and as a writer and speaker and general language dork myself I felt myself wanting to jump in and offer hre words when she was wrestling with expressing a concept and ended up just repeated "cringe" over and over.
I did like the way she identified stories as just being too perfect and self-serving to be true. I have an ear for that, and am very skeptical when someone's supposed true-life anecdote works out just way too perfectly. I think the phenomenon of a young man basically devoting the rest of his life to capitalizing on his friendship with someone famous is interesting. Kind of pathetic, but interesting.
I enjoyed picking up info about various physicists, so I'll probably watch more of her videos. I have a couple of friends who are physicists, and their braininess pleases me, which makes me interested in their field.
One of my friends told me, back when he was in grad school, that a favorite joke around the lab when something wasn't working was, "Why can't we get this? It's not like it's—actually, it is like it's rocket science." I bet brain surgeons make that joke, too.
posted by Well I never at 8:36 PM on December 11, 2024
She was pretty repetitive, and as a writer and speaker and general language dork myself I felt myself wanting to jump in and offer hre words when she was wrestling with expressing a concept and ended up just repeated "cringe" over and over.
I did like the way she identified stories as just being too perfect and self-serving to be true. I have an ear for that, and am very skeptical when someone's supposed true-life anecdote works out just way too perfectly. I think the phenomenon of a young man basically devoting the rest of his life to capitalizing on his friendship with someone famous is interesting. Kind of pathetic, but interesting.
I enjoyed picking up info about various physicists, so I'll probably watch more of her videos. I have a couple of friends who are physicists, and their braininess pleases me, which makes me interested in their field.
One of my friends told me, back when he was in grad school, that a favorite joke around the lab when something wasn't working was, "Why can't we get this? It's not like it's—actually, it is like it's rocket science." I bet brain surgeons make that joke, too.
posted by Well I never at 8:36 PM on December 11, 2024
"A good chunk of the video talks about how his cult of personality inspires young men in physics to be total dicks to young women in physics, said young men eventually realizing that being a snide asshole doesn't translate into physics success, and ragequitting the field."
A major point of the thing that you really only get when you've seen the entire thing, or, I suppose, read the transcript butIwouldn'tknowsinceIneverreadanymorepreferringtoplayendlessgamesofvertexwhilelisteningtootherpeopleread is that the "autobiographies" do Feynman no favors, that he in fact tried to discourage them later in life, having figured out that they were offensive and probably suspecting that people would eventually see that they were mostly bullshit fish stories, and that Feynman was, while definitely an asshole, a much more nuanced and interesting asshole than the caricature that emerges from the books, many of which were completely et up with the dumb, particularly the piles of crappy, slapped-together re-releases that emerged after he died. He appears to have been tirelessly dedicated to physics education and is no doubt spinning in his grave today because his specious autobiography is convincing so many 18-year-old boys that they can become rich and famous physicists by merely hanging out in strip clubs and being shits to 18-year-old girls.
posted by Don Pepino at 8:49 PM on December 11, 2024 [8 favorites]
A major point of the thing that you really only get when you've seen the entire thing, or, I suppose, read the transcript butIwouldn'tknowsinceIneverreadanymorepreferringtoplayendlessgamesofvertexwhilelisteningtootherpeopleread is that the "autobiographies" do Feynman no favors, that he in fact tried to discourage them later in life, having figured out that they were offensive and probably suspecting that people would eventually see that they were mostly bullshit fish stories, and that Feynman was, while definitely an asshole, a much more nuanced and interesting asshole than the caricature that emerges from the books, many of which were completely et up with the dumb, particularly the piles of crappy, slapped-together re-releases that emerged after he died. He appears to have been tirelessly dedicated to physics education and is no doubt spinning in his grave today because his specious autobiography is convincing so many 18-year-old boys that they can become rich and famous physicists by merely hanging out in strip clubs and being shits to 18-year-old girls.
posted by Don Pepino at 8:49 PM on December 11, 2024 [8 favorites]
Collier is great, and I'm sure the video is entertaining, if you like her style, and also fair to Feynman's contributions even if it's also mostly criticizing him. I also wish she did shorter videos.
Feynman the anti-establishment joker appealed to a different kind of person in the 1980s. When MASH had just gone off the air and Reagan Republicans were deifying the Pentagon and corporate managers, someone sticking their finger in the eye of bureaucrats or the military brass seemed refreshing and people focused on that aspect. Now it's easy to see him stylistically as if he were an arrogant techbro and so the assholishness and proto-PUA behavior stands out. (And I guess bad oral hygiene, too? That one's new to me.)
I do remember that even when the anecdote books were popular he brushed off comments about them, calling them "joke books." I also remember some of the lockpicking stories as being very funny, true or not. None of that has much to do with quantum electrodynamics, though.
In terms of public reputation I've long maintained that Einstein is more remembered for that picture where he sticks out his tongue than for explaining Brownian motion, so I'm not surprised Feynman also polls well. (Ahead of Galileo, though? Or does Galileo not count as a physicist?)
posted by mark k at 9:09 PM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
Feynman the anti-establishment joker appealed to a different kind of person in the 1980s. When MASH had just gone off the air and Reagan Republicans were deifying the Pentagon and corporate managers, someone sticking their finger in the eye of bureaucrats or the military brass seemed refreshing and people focused on that aspect. Now it's easy to see him stylistically as if he were an arrogant techbro and so the assholishness and proto-PUA behavior stands out. (And I guess bad oral hygiene, too? That one's new to me.)
I do remember that even when the anecdote books were popular he brushed off comments about them, calling them "joke books." I also remember some of the lockpicking stories as being very funny, true or not. None of that has much to do with quantum electrodynamics, though.
In terms of public reputation I've long maintained that Einstein is more remembered for that picture where he sticks out his tongue than for explaining Brownian motion, so I'm not surprised Feynman also polls well. (Ahead of Galileo, though? Or does Galileo not count as a physicist?)
posted by mark k at 9:09 PM on December 11, 2024 [3 favorites]
I pretty much cap my YouTube videos at 15, maybe 20 minutes, and I have to really care about the topic. Reading is just so much faster.
Same. Most of us have these things called "jobs", have family responsibilities, are trying to care for older family members (and in my case not doing a good job of it), have commutes, errands to run, etc. And believe it or not, many of us have actual hands-on jobs that do not allow us to sit in front of a computer watching YouTube for 3 hours a day. I don't even have time to check my email most mornings, me spending 5 mins writing this comment is already causing me to run late for work. Funny how other people on MeFi seem to assume everyone else works a white-collar desk job with tons of free time, and doesn't recognize that's a massive privilege.
And what's with people doing videos for everything now? At least with text articles I can read them at my own speed and don't have Google shoving ads down my throat every few mins.
posted by photo guy at 9:57 PM on December 11, 2024 [7 favorites]
Same. Most of us have these things called "jobs", have family responsibilities, are trying to care for older family members (and in my case not doing a good job of it), have commutes, errands to run, etc. And believe it or not, many of us have actual hands-on jobs that do not allow us to sit in front of a computer watching YouTube for 3 hours a day. I don't even have time to check my email most mornings, me spending 5 mins writing this comment is already causing me to run late for work. Funny how other people on MeFi seem to assume everyone else works a white-collar desk job with tons of free time, and doesn't recognize that's a massive privilege.
And what's with people doing videos for everything now? At least with text articles I can read them at my own speed and don't have Google shoving ads down my throat every few mins.
posted by photo guy at 9:57 PM on December 11, 2024 [7 favorites]
I have always been baffled that Feynman had an abusive relationship with one wife and, as far as I can tell, nobody else had that issue with him that we know of. First and third wives seemed OK, his daughter seems OK, no exes have popped up to speak up. Since usually abusive dudes have a history of doing that repeatedly, with a lot of people, why was this different?
posted by jenfullmoon at 10:17 PM on December 11, 2024 [1 favorite]
posted by jenfullmoon at 10:17 PM on December 11, 2024 [1 favorite]
I first came across Angela Collier from her Pickard show video."Is there a John Luck Pickard here?"
posted by Strutter Cane - United Planets Stilt Patrol at 11:48 PM on December 11, 2024 [1 favorite]
And what's with people doing videos for everything now? At least with text articles I can read them at my own speed and don't have Google shoving ads down my throat every few mins.
I don’t think there’s any outlet for self-published text articles with the audience of YouTube. To be fair, many text publications will also bombard you with ads, making it difficult to read the article.
posted by smelendez at 12:29 AM on December 12, 2024 [1 favorite]
I don’t think there’s any outlet for self-published text articles with the audience of YouTube. To be fair, many text publications will also bombard you with ads, making it difficult to read the article.
posted by smelendez at 12:29 AM on December 12, 2024 [1 favorite]
The first physics influencer.
posted by fairmettle at 12:34 AM on December 12, 2024
posted by fairmettle at 12:34 AM on December 12, 2024
why comment on a post you're too busy to watch/read
posted by haapsane at 1:06 AM on December 12, 2024 [15 favorites]
posted by haapsane at 1:06 AM on December 12, 2024 [15 favorites]
I have a pretty quiet day today and the ability to watch stuff 'in the background' so I'm going to make this my background watch while I do some grindingly boring reading, but just dropping in pre-watch to say - I tried real hard to be a physicist, but I bounced off it in the second-to-last year of a double major because of a) the calculus was really hard and b) all the guys in a mostly-male class had started their degree with reading Surely... and modeled their behaviour more and more after the Feynmann presented there with each passing year. Physics as a field is not particularly welcoming to women in the first place, but when all the people around you are slowly becoming Feynmann-like in social behaviour (but not in actual physics ability!) because that's their picture of 'what a physicist is like', it's fucking intolerable. I for one am here for puncturing the 'Feynmann was a cool guy' myth.
posted by ngaiotonga at 1:17 AM on December 12, 2024 [17 favorites]
posted by ngaiotonga at 1:17 AM on December 12, 2024 [17 favorites]
why comment on a post you're too busy to watch/read
Because I'm interested in the topic but don't have the incredible privilege of setting aside 3 hours(!) to watch a YouTube video. And quite frankly, Metafilter has a bad habit of shunning normal people with normal demands who are not chronically online. I am lucky to spend 90 mins a day in front of a screen that is not behind a corporate firewall, typing this now over my lunch break.
I started out as a physics major (and am still fascinated by the topic) but bombed out due to sucking at math and not having the grades for grad school. I still like to follow the topic on occasion.
posted by photo guy at 3:25 AM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
Because I'm interested in the topic but don't have the incredible privilege of setting aside 3 hours(!) to watch a YouTube video. And quite frankly, Metafilter has a bad habit of shunning normal people with normal demands who are not chronically online. I am lucky to spend 90 mins a day in front of a screen that is not behind a corporate firewall, typing this now over my lunch break.
I started out as a physics major (and am still fascinated by the topic) but bombed out due to sucking at math and not having the grades for grad school. I still like to follow the topic on occasion.
posted by photo guy at 3:25 AM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
I also wish she did shorter videos.
I could watch three hours of green shirt cosplay Star Trek criticism. That part is so Oh the humanity! endearing for me.
posted by y2karl at 3:30 AM on December 12, 2024
I could watch three hours of green shirt cosplay Star Trek criticism. That part is so Oh the humanity! endearing for me.
posted by y2karl at 3:30 AM on December 12, 2024
I don’t think there’s any outlet for self-published text articles with the audience of YouTube. To be fair, many text publications will also bombard you with ads, making it difficult to read the article.
Sadly I am sure this is true and I hate it so so much. I don't want to WATCH anything, reading is far easier to start and stop repeatedly, can be done at my own pace, feels less obnoxious, doesn't require earbuds so I can more easily multitask, etc. But it's a dying medium.
Also ads on text articles are usually easier to block.
posted by photo guy at 3:31 AM on December 12, 2024 [1 favorite]
Sadly I am sure this is true and I hate it so so much. I don't want to WATCH anything, reading is far easier to start and stop repeatedly, can be done at my own pace, feels less obnoxious, doesn't require earbuds so I can more easily multitask, etc. But it's a dying medium.
Also ads on text articles are usually easier to block.
posted by photo guy at 3:31 AM on December 12, 2024 [1 favorite]
You know there’s like sections of the video to select and you can watch parts here or there. You can even just listen to it. Or even listen to it at 1.5 speed.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 4:20 AM on December 12, 2024 [1 favorite]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 4:20 AM on December 12, 2024 [1 favorite]
MisantropicPainforest, I have the time and energy to watch this and pull timestamps of good bits, so I'm trying to do that to like, contribute or something; I'm currently 1/3 of the way in.
posted by ngaiotonga at 4:22 AM on December 12, 2024 [2 favorites]
posted by ngaiotonga at 4:22 AM on December 12, 2024 [2 favorites]
“ I lasted about 45 seconds.”
Sounds like a personal problem.
posted by Captaintripps at 4:27 AM on December 12, 2024 [5 favorites]
Sounds like a personal problem.
posted by Captaintripps at 4:27 AM on December 12, 2024 [5 favorites]
You know there’s like sections of the video to select and you can watch parts here or there. You can even just listen to it. Or even listen to it at 1.5 speed.But can normal people do those?
posted by haapsane at 4:34 AM on December 12, 2024
(3 hours is a lot, I completely understand most people not watching the whole thing, and under normal circumstances I would not either but I have a weird job and weird brain chemistry, so I was able to do that, and a personal interest in understanding what the fuck the Feynmania in my field is about, so I was willing to do that. Y'all 'hur dur it's only three hours or you can watch on 1.5x speed or read the transcript' need to knock it off; she talks fast, she talks at length, and due to the nature of the video, the transcript is dogshit.)
35 minutes in (we've mainly covered 'Richard Feynmann by his own admission repeatedly was weird and sexist even by the standards of his time and most of the women he was being weird and sexist to were not really in a position to say 'to hell with this guy', with anecdotes from the presenter's own experience with being a woman in a physics field heavily culturally influenced by Feynmann.) I am filled with rage and also the relatability factor is high. To hell with that guy. Highlight: 'Feynmann said the female undergraduate students were receptive to this kind of thing. This face? (archetypal uncomfortable smile of 'please stop') this is not receptive, this is a woman who knows she doesn't have another option'.
44 minutes in we're talking about Murray Gell-Mann as a compare-and-contrast exercise (more important but less famous physicist, extremely similar life circumstances, also an asshole). Really worth coming in at 41:10 and staying until 45:25 for a very funny segue.
Section that starts at 45:10 is about how literally every book purportedly written by Feynmann is in fact ghostwritten by a sycophant; SYJ and the sequel were both taken by Ralph Leighton from a series of interviews with Feynmann. "Some of these are really bad! Some of them are written as if the author has the character of Richard Feynmann in his head and he's like this is how Richard Feynmann talks, exclamation point". Also: "If you're falling behind on your reading goals this year, just say you're gonna read the entire RPF oeuvre, and you're done, you did it!"
55:00 - the Challenger thing gets a mention. I am really mad about the Challenger thing and probably always will be because all the Feynmann fanboys are like 'woo Feynmann solved the mystery' and it was never a mystery! it was known before the fucking thing went up what could happen if they launched in those temperatures! The engineers tried so hard to stop it because of how known it was!
55:40-1:00:14 - oh my godddd the 'pranking people into thinking he spoke their language' thing, I hate this, this section breaks it down so incredibly well.
1:05:55-1:08:55 - the safecracking story. "Opening a safe you're not supposed to have access to is a crime, actually, and the guards at Los Alamos have guns."
Anyway the chapter 55:37-1:23:30 is about 'Perhaps most of these stories are at least exaggerated and more likely actually fake, these books contain a lot of improbably stuff, and don't contain anything that anyone who knew him could disprove'.
Starting a new comment and posting this one 'cause it's getting long.
posted by ngaiotonga at 4:39 AM on December 12, 2024 [20 favorites]
35 minutes in (we've mainly covered 'Richard Feynmann by his own admission repeatedly was weird and sexist even by the standards of his time and most of the women he was being weird and sexist to were not really in a position to say 'to hell with this guy', with anecdotes from the presenter's own experience with being a woman in a physics field heavily culturally influenced by Feynmann.) I am filled with rage and also the relatability factor is high. To hell with that guy. Highlight: 'Feynmann said the female undergraduate students were receptive to this kind of thing. This face? (archetypal uncomfortable smile of 'please stop') this is not receptive, this is a woman who knows she doesn't have another option'.
44 minutes in we're talking about Murray Gell-Mann as a compare-and-contrast exercise (more important but less famous physicist, extremely similar life circumstances, also an asshole). Really worth coming in at 41:10 and staying until 45:25 for a very funny segue.
Section that starts at 45:10 is about how literally every book purportedly written by Feynmann is in fact ghostwritten by a sycophant; SYJ and the sequel were both taken by Ralph Leighton from a series of interviews with Feynmann. "Some of these are really bad! Some of them are written as if the author has the character of Richard Feynmann in his head and he's like this is how Richard Feynmann talks, exclamation point". Also: "If you're falling behind on your reading goals this year, just say you're gonna read the entire RPF oeuvre, and you're done, you did it!"
55:00 - the Challenger thing gets a mention. I am really mad about the Challenger thing and probably always will be because all the Feynmann fanboys are like 'woo Feynmann solved the mystery' and it was never a mystery! it was known before the fucking thing went up what could happen if they launched in those temperatures! The engineers tried so hard to stop it because of how known it was!
55:40-1:00:14 - oh my godddd the 'pranking people into thinking he spoke their language' thing, I hate this, this section breaks it down so incredibly well.
1:05:55-1:08:55 - the safecracking story. "Opening a safe you're not supposed to have access to is a crime, actually, and the guards at Los Alamos have guns."
Anyway the chapter 55:37-1:23:30 is about 'Perhaps most of these stories are at least exaggerated and more likely actually fake, these books contain a lot of improbably stuff, and don't contain anything that anyone who knew him could disprove'.
Starting a new comment and posting this one 'cause it's getting long.
posted by ngaiotonga at 4:39 AM on December 12, 2024 [20 favorites]
If you are straight up "I CANNOT DEAL WITH THREE HOUR VIDEO," (which I get, sometimes I can't either), you can perhaps give this a pass? I note that I listened to it like a podcast rather than sitting there staring at it, which probably helped me. Also, some people have helpfully given primers as to what is going on.
I also agree I probably would have preferred to read an article, but that's not how things went. Also I speed read so I'm biased, but a lot of people can't stand to read, so it probably gets the point across to those people faster in video.
posted by jenfullmoon at 4:48 AM on December 12, 2024 [9 favorites]
I also agree I probably would have preferred to read an article, but that's not how things went. Also I speed read so I'm biased, but a lot of people can't stand to read, so it probably gets the point across to those people faster in video.
posted by jenfullmoon at 4:48 AM on December 12, 2024 [9 favorites]
If you are straight up "I CANNOT DEAL WITH THREE HOUR VIDEO," (which I get, sometimes I can't either)
The thing with knee jerk comments in defense of our heroes is that we want to make them right now, not after listening to three hours (or, as in one case, literally two minutes) of information that addresses our objections.
I can understand people giving this video a pass. I'm less tolerant of, "I don't know what the video says but here is my misinformed opinion on what I think it says."
I also agree I probably would have preferred to read an article
You know, lots of people have said this but only one person has left a comment about the linked Baffler article. For all the "this meeting could have been an email" complaints, no one seems to be reading the email...
I also wish she did shorter videos.
9 minutes after Collier posts a 10 minute video: "She doesn't go into detail enough. Does she even know anything about Feynman? I could have read the Wikipedia article..."
posted by AlSweigart at 5:07 AM on December 12, 2024 [15 favorites]
The thing with knee jerk comments in defense of our heroes is that we want to make them right now, not after listening to three hours (or, as in one case, literally two minutes) of information that addresses our objections.
I can understand people giving this video a pass. I'm less tolerant of, "I don't know what the video says but here is my misinformed opinion on what I think it says."
I also agree I probably would have preferred to read an article
You know, lots of people have said this but only one person has left a comment about the linked Baffler article. For all the "this meeting could have been an email" complaints, no one seems to be reading the email...
I also wish she did shorter videos.
9 minutes after Collier posts a 10 minute video: "She doesn't go into detail enough. Does she even know anything about Feynman? I could have read the Wikipedia article..."
posted by AlSweigart at 5:07 AM on December 12, 2024 [15 favorites]
I suggest people start flagging "video too long" comments
These comments always happen, they contribute nothing, and they always result in a weird derail
Someone made a 3hr video about something, a MeFite decides to share it for discussion, full stop.
posted by ginger.beef at 5:27 AM on December 12, 2024 [23 favorites]
These comments always happen, they contribute nothing, and they always result in a weird derail
Someone made a 3hr video about something, a MeFite decides to share it for discussion, full stop.
posted by ginger.beef at 5:27 AM on December 12, 2024 [23 favorites]
But can normal people do those?
Haapsane what do you mean by that? Legit question because I cannot think of a single reason to make this statement other than a clear attempt to sarcastically mock my comments. Yes, many "normal" people have jobs and commitments and have difficulty finding ways to ingest multiple hours of media. Sorry if you have trouble understanding that.
posted by photo guy at 5:38 AM on December 12, 2024
Haapsane what do you mean by that? Legit question because I cannot think of a single reason to make this statement other than a clear attempt to sarcastically mock my comments. Yes, many "normal" people have jobs and commitments and have difficulty finding ways to ingest multiple hours of media. Sorry if you have trouble understanding that.
posted by photo guy at 5:38 AM on December 12, 2024
Someone made a 3hr video about something, a MeFite decides to share it for discussion, full stop.
If I shared an amazing article that was behind a very expensive paywall, say $300 to view it (and the article could not be archived or copy/pasted for whatever reason) would you feel the same? I would imagine that there would be a lot of other MeFites very annoyed by it. If only like 5 people on the site can read the article, you're not going to have much of a discussion.
A 3 hour video is no different. Time is a finite resource, just like money and 3 hours is a massive investment.
I am not commenting on this derail any more.
posted by photo guy at 5:48 AM on December 12, 2024 [2 favorites]
If I shared an amazing article that was behind a very expensive paywall, say $300 to view it (and the article could not be archived or copy/pasted for whatever reason) would you feel the same? I would imagine that there would be a lot of other MeFites very annoyed by it. If only like 5 people on the site can read the article, you're not going to have much of a discussion.
A 3 hour video is no different. Time is a finite resource, just like money and 3 hours is a massive investment.
I am not commenting on this derail any more.
posted by photo guy at 5:48 AM on December 12, 2024 [2 favorites]
In case someone interpreted my comment about 1.5 speed as snarky, it is not. For me I watch videos (and all zoom calls) with captions, and usually watch videos at 1.5 or 1.75 speed. I didn’t realize that was so outside the norm that suggesting as much sounds sarcastic
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:50 AM on December 12, 2024 [7 favorites]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:50 AM on December 12, 2024 [7 favorites]
There is definitely a lot more in here, and a lot more depth, than in the Baffler article that does not take 3 hours to read (for me. I read fast though). Audio is a terrible way for me to absorb information but I found this worthwhile.
Perhaps someone would like to do a Feynmann Lectures on it and transcribe it into book form and put Collier's name on the cover :)
1:22:00 - "we hand this book to every thirteen-year-old with a passing interest in physics and doom them to the same fate"
Picking back up again at the end of the 'these stories seem fake' chapter.
This chapter is about Ralph Leighton who was a massive Feynmann fanboy and also wrote Surely You're Joking (from tape recordings of conversations he had with Feynmann when he was about 20). 1:27:40 "He... makes YouTube videos... addressed... to Richard Feynmann's spirit?" (example follows. Incredibly cringy.) "Who was Richard Feynmann? Why was he so obsessed with curating an image of being an asshole and a pathetic loser and why would he tell fake stories and why are the fake stories still published?"
Apparently Bob Leighton (father of Ralph) was largely responsible for The Feynmann Lectures being a book instead of being forgotten to the mists of time.
"Nobody can be as good a physicist as Richard Feynmann, they don't make 'em like that anymore. Ralph Leighton, son of Bob Leighton, physicist, said that. Still says it. All the time. It almost feels pointed."
Bob Leighton seems like a nice guy and not a raging asshole. (quote on his working style at 1:34:10) Kind of gets into a 'Bob Leighton is underrated' spiral at about 1:34:10 on the way to explaining what kind of person Ralph Leighton is, safe to skip to 1:38:00.
1:39:00-1:45:08 'Lectures on Computation' has Feynmann saying the gender of a person in an example doesn't matter, so apparently he learned that it was inappropriate to do the kind of stuff he was doing before, so why is Surely You're Joking still published with no front matter on how damaging it is? "I made a video about [modern sexual harassment and assualt in STEM], don't watch it, it's depressing as fuck" (I am going to watch it).
The sequel to Surely You're Joking was produced after Feynmann died! He had no idea what was in it! His name is on the cover! (I'm kind of pissed as well now).
Chapter starting 1:45:08 covers 'hey why are there so many books purportedly by Feynmann or containing things Feynmann said when it's just endless repackaging of the Feynmann Lectures and Surely You're Joking?'
"What if we had famed sex pest Lawrence Krause write another biography of Richard Feynmann, surely we need another one right? I didn't give Lawrence Krause any money for this, I bought it used, but I still feel terrible buying it. But not as bad as I felt reading it. Because he's terrible at writing science."
"What if we had AI scrape the three biographies that exist and then we published like a children's version?" [showing book]
"What if we published a book of quotes but all the quotes came from these books that Richard Feynmann didn't write? Who is this for?"
"What if we took a graduate level course and took notes on the course and then ten years after Feynmann died we took the lecture notes and turned them into a book and said it was by Richard Feynmann?"
"So I didn't buy this one because I already knew it wasn't by Feynmann, but it's like 'here's the Feynmann technique for doing physics' - the Feynmann technique doesn't exist, that's just learning."
1:50:50-1:56:00 - this is about 'the most egregious one' and folks... oh boy it really is.
The chapter starting at 1:56:45 is like - "I started this because I hate Richard Feynmann but it turns out I don't know anything about Richard Feynmann, he never wrote a book, all we have is these fake stories he told about being an asshole."
Last part of the video promises to be 'Richard Feynmann the man' and 'Richard Feynmann the physicist' and I'll give those a new comment.
posted by ngaiotonga at 5:53 AM on December 12, 2024 [13 favorites]
Perhaps someone would like to do a Feynmann Lectures on it and transcribe it into book form and put Collier's name on the cover :)
1:22:00 - "we hand this book to every thirteen-year-old with a passing interest in physics and doom them to the same fate"
Picking back up again at the end of the 'these stories seem fake' chapter.
This chapter is about Ralph Leighton who was a massive Feynmann fanboy and also wrote Surely You're Joking (from tape recordings of conversations he had with Feynmann when he was about 20). 1:27:40 "He... makes YouTube videos... addressed... to Richard Feynmann's spirit?" (example follows. Incredibly cringy.) "Who was Richard Feynmann? Why was he so obsessed with curating an image of being an asshole and a pathetic loser and why would he tell fake stories and why are the fake stories still published?"
Apparently Bob Leighton (father of Ralph) was largely responsible for The Feynmann Lectures being a book instead of being forgotten to the mists of time.
"Nobody can be as good a physicist as Richard Feynmann, they don't make 'em like that anymore. Ralph Leighton, son of Bob Leighton, physicist, said that. Still says it. All the time. It almost feels pointed."
Bob Leighton seems like a nice guy and not a raging asshole. (quote on his working style at 1:34:10) Kind of gets into a 'Bob Leighton is underrated' spiral at about 1:34:10 on the way to explaining what kind of person Ralph Leighton is, safe to skip to 1:38:00.
1:39:00-1:45:08 'Lectures on Computation' has Feynmann saying the gender of a person in an example doesn't matter, so apparently he learned that it was inappropriate to do the kind of stuff he was doing before, so why is Surely You're Joking still published with no front matter on how damaging it is? "I made a video about [modern sexual harassment and assualt in STEM], don't watch it, it's depressing as fuck" (I am going to watch it).
The sequel to Surely You're Joking was produced after Feynmann died! He had no idea what was in it! His name is on the cover! (I'm kind of pissed as well now).
Chapter starting 1:45:08 covers 'hey why are there so many books purportedly by Feynmann or containing things Feynmann said when it's just endless repackaging of the Feynmann Lectures and Surely You're Joking?'
"What if we had famed sex pest Lawrence Krause write another biography of Richard Feynmann, surely we need another one right? I didn't give Lawrence Krause any money for this, I bought it used, but I still feel terrible buying it. But not as bad as I felt reading it. Because he's terrible at writing science."
"What if we had AI scrape the three biographies that exist and then we published like a children's version?" [showing book]
"What if we published a book of quotes but all the quotes came from these books that Richard Feynmann didn't write? Who is this for?"
"What if we took a graduate level course and took notes on the course and then ten years after Feynmann died we took the lecture notes and turned them into a book and said it was by Richard Feynmann?"
"So I didn't buy this one because I already knew it wasn't by Feynmann, but it's like 'here's the Feynmann technique for doing physics' - the Feynmann technique doesn't exist, that's just learning."
1:50:50-1:56:00 - this is about 'the most egregious one' and folks... oh boy it really is.
The chapter starting at 1:56:45 is like - "I started this because I hate Richard Feynmann but it turns out I don't know anything about Richard Feynmann, he never wrote a book, all we have is these fake stories he told about being an asshole."
Last part of the video promises to be 'Richard Feynmann the man' and 'Richard Feynmann the physicist' and I'll give those a new comment.
posted by ngaiotonga at 5:53 AM on December 12, 2024 [13 favorites]
A 3 hour video is no different. Time is a finite resource,
It's not required to watch the video. It's not required to leave a comment about the video. If one doesn't watch the video, it's actually preferable to not leave a comment.
posted by AlSweigart at 5:53 AM on December 12, 2024 [10 favorites]
It's not required to watch the video. It's not required to leave a comment about the video. If one doesn't watch the video, it's actually preferable to not leave a comment.
posted by AlSweigart at 5:53 AM on December 12, 2024 [10 favorites]
I always find it so quaint when someone discovers on their own that Tom Lehrer isn't a Fields Medal-winning mathematician. Such is the shadow of Feynman that some people automatically assume being a fun iconoclast must mean he's a giant in his field when in reality he's just an ordinary guy who didn't finish his PhD, didn't publish much, and explored some creative impulses before quietly settling into his true passion: teaching.
I don't think it's fair to compare Feynman and Lehrer beyond their respective positions as clown princes, but there's a lot less out there about Lehrer in no small part because he's an intensely private individual who grew to dislike the fame he was attracting. Feynman seems to have chosen to go the other direction.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 6:02 AM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
I don't think it's fair to compare Feynman and Lehrer beyond their respective positions as clown princes, but there's a lot less out there about Lehrer in no small part because he's an intensely private individual who grew to dislike the fame he was attracting. Feynman seems to have chosen to go the other direction.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 6:02 AM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
It was strange to me for years that a site which is ostensibly more technology-forward than average and more informed than average so frequently seems to have users who magically become bumbling incompetents incurious about the world. Then I realized comments like "Paywall" (when everyone should know how to make an archive link on their own at this point) are usually just complaints about the way things are and not the subject matter of the posts.
I, too, don't always have three hours to watch a video or a movie or to go through the back catalog of a podcast or read an entire ProPublica investigative report. I'm too busy to let people know I don't have the time for that and just move on with my day instead of polluting the thread with my parochial concerns.
This time I actually did have that time and I'm glad I did, as I mentioned previously. In fact, I actually left the video thinking better of Feynman as a person than I did previously, thanks to getting to Collier's section on what he may have actually been like as a person.
posted by Captaintripps at 6:06 AM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
I, too, don't always have three hours to watch a video or a movie or to go through the back catalog of a podcast or read an entire ProPublica investigative report. I'm too busy to let people know I don't have the time for that and just move on with my day instead of polluting the thread with my parochial concerns.
This time I actually did have that time and I'm glad I did, as I mentioned previously. In fact, I actually left the video thinking better of Feynman as a person than I did previously, thanks to getting to Collier's section on what he may have actually been like as a person.
posted by Captaintripps at 6:06 AM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
Should we not talk about books ever, then? It takes a lot longer than three hours to read most books. It would take "normal people" longer than three hours to read Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynmann. If normal people watched two minutes of this video, that would allow them to not read that book and save, at a minimum, $298, assuming based on the $300 paywall example, that the time of normal people is worth $1/minute.
Furthermore, many normal people commute to a workplace by car, by bicycle, by bus, on foot. A lot of those normal people have phones they can use to listen to internet content. They might while away the commute time with a video or a podcast now and then. It's rather the opposite of abusive of normal people to make a 3-hour video on purpose to provide normal people with interesting content to enliven some dead time if they would like to do that. It's definitely the opposite of abusive of normal people to let them know on a website devoted to sharing links about interesting stuff on the internet that there's some interesting stuff available on the internet.
posted by Don Pepino at 6:08 AM on December 12, 2024 [14 favorites]
Furthermore, many normal people commute to a workplace by car, by bicycle, by bus, on foot. A lot of those normal people have phones they can use to listen to internet content. They might while away the commute time with a video or a podcast now and then. It's rather the opposite of abusive of normal people to make a 3-hour video on purpose to provide normal people with interesting content to enliven some dead time if they would like to do that. It's definitely the opposite of abusive of normal people to let them know on a website devoted to sharing links about interesting stuff on the internet that there's some interesting stuff available on the internet.
posted by Don Pepino at 6:08 AM on December 12, 2024 [14 favorites]
Yes, many "normal" people have jobs and commitments and have difficulty finding ways to ingest multiple hours of media.
If we're going to invoke strawmen, the average weekly NFL game clocks in at just over three hours and is watched on average by about 17.9 million "normal" people.
I do often think it's weird that so many "normal" people have that much time to watch the game every week because I sure don't, but apparently they do.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 6:13 AM on December 12, 2024 [8 favorites]
If we're going to invoke strawmen, the average weekly NFL game clocks in at just over three hours and is watched on average by about 17.9 million "normal" people.
I do often think it's weird that so many "normal" people have that much time to watch the game every week because I sure don't, but apparently they do.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 6:13 AM on December 12, 2024 [8 favorites]
I'm sure there are plenty of people capable of listening to a podcast / video while doing other things that require concentration and deep thought. I am not one of those people - I don't listen to music while I run or walk, barely listen to music while I work, definitely don't do podcasts. And this is because if two things are happening at once, one of those things will suffer. Somehow I can sing and play guitar / piano simultaneously, but that's about it. Call me while I'm driving? I will be a distracted talker, because my focus is on driving. Etc etc etc. So listening to 3 hours of this video without dedicating the majority of my mental energy towards it is a waste of time. And at 1.5x it becomes way more distracting and frankly kind of irritating - not because of the video itself, but because I find 1.5x speech to be grating. I envy people who can multitask like that! You have a superpower.
posted by grumpybear69 at 6:25 AM on December 12, 2024
posted by grumpybear69 at 6:25 AM on December 12, 2024
I find 1.5x speech to be grating.
Oh, God, ditto: can't stand it.
Call me while I'm driving? I will be a distracted talker, because my focus is on driving.
Yep, same, so I listen to the radio or books on tape or something where my zoning in and out won't annoy anyone.
But,
listening to 3 hours of this video without dedicating the majority of my mental energy towards it is a waste of time.
I could no more stand around for three straight hours staring at that thing and not doing anything else than run a marathon. Completely impossible. I can barely stand to watch a fully produced Hollywood movie without subtitles, not because I can't hear the dialogue but because reading + watching + listening = enough involvement from enough different brain areas to allow me to focus.
I think you're the one with the enviable superpower. In conclusion, the human brain is a wonderful land of contrasts or whatever is the thing you say.
Anyway, the summaries ngaiotonga is doing are great if you're interested in the topic but don't have a spare three hours to spend staring at youtube this holiday season.
posted by Don Pepino at 6:50 AM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
Oh, God, ditto: can't stand it.
Call me while I'm driving? I will be a distracted talker, because my focus is on driving.
Yep, same, so I listen to the radio or books on tape or something where my zoning in and out won't annoy anyone.
But,
listening to 3 hours of this video without dedicating the majority of my mental energy towards it is a waste of time.
I could no more stand around for three straight hours staring at that thing and not doing anything else than run a marathon. Completely impossible. I can barely stand to watch a fully produced Hollywood movie without subtitles, not because I can't hear the dialogue but because reading + watching + listening = enough involvement from enough different brain areas to allow me to focus.
I think you're the one with the enviable superpower. In conclusion, the human brain is a wonderful land of contrasts or whatever is the thing you say.
Anyway, the summaries ngaiotonga is doing are great if you're interested in the topic but don't have a spare three hours to spend staring at youtube this holiday season.
posted by Don Pepino at 6:50 AM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
"I don't have twelve hours to talk about all the physics Feynmann did but I don't need to, I already did that on my channel."
Chapter starting 1:59:49 - 'Richard Feynmann the man'.
- "This list is going to be all over the place but it's things I think everyone should know about Feynmann before they start worshipping him"
- has a reputation as a great teacher but people attending his lectures... couldn't ... say what they were about.
-2:04:56 for Challenger - Sally Ride blew the whistle on the o-rings. Heroic. Love her. Kutnya called Feynmann to join the commission and he did the ice-water thing we've all heard about. It's a beautiful piece of theatre but it's not... it's not a 'discovery' that he made like a lot of people paint it.
- roughly 2:10:30 - guy keeps refusing to answer questions to just spout on about whatever he wants to talk about and sound smart. This is not cool or nice and it's annoying. Example of annoying physicist given.
- he was kind to kids and people who wanted to learn (pity about the being a contrarian jerk to adults)
- 2:17:32 for Richard Feynmann's relationship to women. "The misogyny I experienced in grad school is largely due to the misogyny in this book. As we've established, these are fake stories. Let's look at the facts."
Encouraged sister Joan into physics (she became an astronomer). Supported Jenijoy La Belle's EEOC case against CalTech (for underpaying her and denying her tenure). Michelle Feynmann (daughter) was adopted, by all accounts he was a good father. Feynmann said his biggest regret (while dying of cancer) was not being able to see Michelle graduate high school.
So far so good. He did make the sexist jokes that were in the Feynmann Lectures (they're on tape). A lot more reasonable and chill in later life - expressed that a lot of the things said in Surely You're Joking were inappropriate.
Apparently (evidence of letters) treated first wife Arline as an equal (she was). Third(?) wife Gweneth is talked about a lot by his friends - as an equal, interesting, intelligent person. Hardly mentioned at all in the books - Collier's hypothesis is that she asked not to be mentioned in Feynmann's silly fake stories. Second wife is mentioned in Surely You're Joking - as an intelligent individual he missed talking to, contrasted to a silly woman he met in Brazil. This is possibly another fake Ralph Leighton story, but the positioning is interesting.
- 2:25:35 - The reason for the divorce from the second wife (in an age of no-fault divorce, so they could have been amicable and making up another fake story?) was 'husband does calculus all the time and has no hobbies'. So far so good. '...and when interrupted from his calculus, flies into a violent rage, chokes wife, and throws things'. "I kinda thought that this was going to be a redemption story, but it's not. It's just not." PSA: "If a family member or anyone ever chokes you, you need to go, you need to leave, you need to run, it hugely increases the likelihood that they will murder you."
On that note, last chapter! 2:28:38, Richard Feynmann the physicist.
"Creating a legend that ignores all the bad stuff doesn't make sense." Brief argument for separating the physicist from the physics (I'm here for this, honestly, he's dead, he's not benefiting from it at all, good work can be and has been done by bad people)
"Investigate some triangles, legitimately a fun activity", but Feynmann making up his own notation as a kid is not the indication of genius it's sometimes painted as. Kids do that.
Publishing a single-author paper as an undergrad, however, is legitimately impressive, why don't we focus on that.
Thinking about computers from a physics perspective and how data is physically stored is really interesting and "emblematic of what makes a good physicist". (2:22:33 for example of Feynmann talking about computers... and making a misogynistic joke :/)
The 'Feynmann was the only one to think outside the box' argument doesn't hold water - he shared the Nobel Prize with two other people, and Freeman Dyson is the one who came up with the proof that what Feynmann was doing was actually physically valid and had the right process as well as the right answer (which is... important, in physics). "Also, I kind of think Freeman Dyson should have got a Nobel Prize."
2:38:05 "Feynmann was often quoting other people's papers and other people's ideas and not explaining where he got them from" which was apparently a real headache for writing up the Feynmann Lectures.
Feynmann didn't publish a lot of papers and didn't take a lot of grad students - what we'd call prolific. (Briefly addresses the 'people break up their papers to get more publications to advance their career and it's annoying' problem - Feynmann didn't do that, he waited until he was done before publishing, which would definitely not work today.)
"Feynmann as a person kind of sucks, Feymann as a physicist, 10/10, he nailed it, end of video."
(Spoiler: not end of video) You should know that over the credits there is a banner reading "In 1971 I got in a fight with some strangers in a bar. This is the list of people i fought with my hands. I won. I'm really strong. This is a true story."
2:44:38: Chapter titled Richard Feynmann on crackpots. This is an exchange of letters with a Mr Y who wrote in to a TV show Feynmann was the science advisor for. Quite fun. Basically, 'here's a problem, do you understand what this is about'.
Here endeth the video! We're done! I'm gonna get a cup of tea.
posted by ngaiotonga at 7:36 AM on December 12, 2024 [23 favorites]
Chapter starting 1:59:49 - 'Richard Feynmann the man'.
- "This list is going to be all over the place but it's things I think everyone should know about Feynmann before they start worshipping him"
- has a reputation as a great teacher but people attending his lectures... couldn't ... say what they were about.
-2:04:56 for Challenger - Sally Ride blew the whistle on the o-rings. Heroic. Love her. Kutnya called Feynmann to join the commission and he did the ice-water thing we've all heard about. It's a beautiful piece of theatre but it's not... it's not a 'discovery' that he made like a lot of people paint it.
- roughly 2:10:30 - guy keeps refusing to answer questions to just spout on about whatever he wants to talk about and sound smart. This is not cool or nice and it's annoying. Example of annoying physicist given.
- he was kind to kids and people who wanted to learn (pity about the being a contrarian jerk to adults)
- 2:17:32 for Richard Feynmann's relationship to women. "The misogyny I experienced in grad school is largely due to the misogyny in this book. As we've established, these are fake stories. Let's look at the facts."
Encouraged sister Joan into physics (she became an astronomer). Supported Jenijoy La Belle's EEOC case against CalTech (for underpaying her and denying her tenure). Michelle Feynmann (daughter) was adopted, by all accounts he was a good father. Feynmann said his biggest regret (while dying of cancer) was not being able to see Michelle graduate high school.
So far so good. He did make the sexist jokes that were in the Feynmann Lectures (they're on tape). A lot more reasonable and chill in later life - expressed that a lot of the things said in Surely You're Joking were inappropriate.
Apparently (evidence of letters) treated first wife Arline as an equal (she was). Third(?) wife Gweneth is talked about a lot by his friends - as an equal, interesting, intelligent person. Hardly mentioned at all in the books - Collier's hypothesis is that she asked not to be mentioned in Feynmann's silly fake stories. Second wife is mentioned in Surely You're Joking - as an intelligent individual he missed talking to, contrasted to a silly woman he met in Brazil. This is possibly another fake Ralph Leighton story, but the positioning is interesting.
- 2:25:35 - The reason for the divorce from the second wife (in an age of no-fault divorce, so they could have been amicable and making up another fake story?) was 'husband does calculus all the time and has no hobbies'. So far so good. '...and when interrupted from his calculus, flies into a violent rage, chokes wife, and throws things'. "I kinda thought that this was going to be a redemption story, but it's not. It's just not." PSA: "If a family member or anyone ever chokes you, you need to go, you need to leave, you need to run, it hugely increases the likelihood that they will murder you."
On that note, last chapter! 2:28:38, Richard Feynmann the physicist.
"Creating a legend that ignores all the bad stuff doesn't make sense." Brief argument for separating the physicist from the physics (I'm here for this, honestly, he's dead, he's not benefiting from it at all, good work can be and has been done by bad people)
"Investigate some triangles, legitimately a fun activity", but Feynmann making up his own notation as a kid is not the indication of genius it's sometimes painted as. Kids do that.
Publishing a single-author paper as an undergrad, however, is legitimately impressive, why don't we focus on that.
Thinking about computers from a physics perspective and how data is physically stored is really interesting and "emblematic of what makes a good physicist". (2:22:33 for example of Feynmann talking about computers... and making a misogynistic joke :/)
The 'Feynmann was the only one to think outside the box' argument doesn't hold water - he shared the Nobel Prize with two other people, and Freeman Dyson is the one who came up with the proof that what Feynmann was doing was actually physically valid and had the right process as well as the right answer (which is... important, in physics). "Also, I kind of think Freeman Dyson should have got a Nobel Prize."
2:38:05 "Feynmann was often quoting other people's papers and other people's ideas and not explaining where he got them from" which was apparently a real headache for writing up the Feynmann Lectures.
Feynmann didn't publish a lot of papers and didn't take a lot of grad students - what we'd call prolific. (Briefly addresses the 'people break up their papers to get more publications to advance their career and it's annoying' problem - Feynmann didn't do that, he waited until he was done before publishing, which would definitely not work today.)
"Feynmann as a person kind of sucks, Feymann as a physicist, 10/10, he nailed it, end of video."
(Spoiler: not end of video) You should know that over the credits there is a banner reading "In 1971 I got in a fight with some strangers in a bar. This is the list of people i fought with my hands. I won. I'm really strong. This is a true story."
2:44:38: Chapter titled Richard Feynmann on crackpots. This is an exchange of letters with a Mr Y who wrote in to a TV show Feynmann was the science advisor for. Quite fun. Basically, 'here's a problem, do you understand what this is about'.
Here endeth the video! We're done! I'm gonna get a cup of tea.
posted by ngaiotonga at 7:36 AM on December 12, 2024 [23 favorites]
no please, let me get that cup of tea for you ngaiotonga
legend
posted by ginger.beef at 7:38 AM on December 12, 2024 [7 favorites]
legend
posted by ginger.beef at 7:38 AM on December 12, 2024 [7 favorites]
Mod note: No deletion made so far, but let's drop the derail about the video's length. It's OK if you don't want to watch it but let's avoid making the thread about that. Also, as pointed out above, referring to a physicist and PhD as a "romance author" without acknowledging her background feels like something that would never be typed out about a man and comes across as sexist. Please avoid doing this.
posted by loup (staff) at 8:04 AM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
posted by loup (staff) at 8:04 AM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
Also, as pointed out above, referring to a physicist and PhD as a "romance author" without acknowledging her background feels like something that would never be typed out about a man and comes across as sexist. Please avoid doing this.
No one in this thread has done that.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 8:06 AM on December 12, 2024 [7 favorites]
No one in this thread has done that.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 8:06 AM on December 12, 2024 [7 favorites]
After all, what does Jenny Nicholson know about Star Wars anyway?
posted by Flight Hardware, do not touch at 8:36 AM on December 12, 2024
posted by Flight Hardware, do not touch at 8:36 AM on December 12, 2024
gwint, gotta hard disagree with you. The title isn't clickbait. Large swathes of Feynman's legacy aren't actually his science; they're his pop books about himself/science, his public persona (cult of personality), etc. *Those* are the parts that are the sham here.
posted by cnidaria at 8:58 AM on December 12, 2024 [9 favorites]
posted by cnidaria at 8:58 AM on December 12, 2024 [9 favorites]
Also, as pointed out above, referring to a physicist and PhD as a "romance author" without acknowledging her background feels like something that would never be typed out about a man and comes across as sexist. Please avoid doing this.
The actual comment this comes from is weird and uncharitable and misses the point of the thing it’s complaining about but this is straightforwardly a misreading of it.
posted by atoxyl at 9:16 AM on December 12, 2024 [8 favorites]
The actual comment this comes from is weird and uncharitable and misses the point of the thing it’s complaining about but this is straightforwardly a misreading of it.
posted by atoxyl at 9:16 AM on December 12, 2024 [8 favorites]
who derails the derailer
posted by ginger.beef at 9:20 AM on December 12, 2024 [2 favorites]
posted by ginger.beef at 9:20 AM on December 12, 2024 [2 favorites]
(I'm currently watching her video on sexual harassment in physics and my god, my tolerance for old powerful men behaving badly has never, ever been lower.)
posted by ngaiotonga at 9:26 AM on December 12, 2024 [9 favorites]
posted by ngaiotonga at 9:26 AM on December 12, 2024 [9 favorites]
It's not about whether Feynman did great work in physics, or whether he was an exceptional communicator w/r/t the field - he did and he was.
It's not even about whether the stories about him are largely bullshit - they probably are.
It's about the effect that his legacy has had, which has been massive. When you reread the anecdotes and think "oh wow, I really brushed over the misogyny when I was younger," it's of minor importance that Feynman was a misogynist, and of major importance that his legacy has reframed that misogyny from being toxic to being cute, quirky, and - most importantly - aspirational.
Physics departments are awash in toxic culture that is more or less a direct consequence of the lionization of Feynman's mythology. That alone means that that legacy needs to be examined and questioned. Because it's done unaccountable damage already and it's not done yet. That's the point.
posted by Navelgazer at 9:38 AM on December 12, 2024 [24 favorites]
It's not even about whether the stories about him are largely bullshit - they probably are.
It's about the effect that his legacy has had, which has been massive. When you reread the anecdotes and think "oh wow, I really brushed over the misogyny when I was younger," it's of minor importance that Feynman was a misogynist, and of major importance that his legacy has reframed that misogyny from being toxic to being cute, quirky, and - most importantly - aspirational.
Physics departments are awash in toxic culture that is more or less a direct consequence of the lionization of Feynman's mythology. That alone means that that legacy needs to be examined and questioned. Because it's done unaccountable damage already and it's not done yet. That's the point.
posted by Navelgazer at 9:38 AM on December 12, 2024 [24 favorites]
Also, as pointed out above, referring to a physicist and PhD as a "romance author"
This is an understandable mistake to made and I made the same one at first because of the confusing wording in the comment. But it's all irrelevant to the discussion. Let's drop it.
posted by AlSweigart at 10:19 AM on December 12, 2024 [4 favorites]
This is an understandable mistake to made and I made the same one at first because of the confusing wording in the comment. But it's all irrelevant to the discussion. Let's drop it.
posted by AlSweigart at 10:19 AM on December 12, 2024 [4 favorites]
(I'm currently watching her video on sexual harassment in physics and my god, my tolerance for old powerful men behaving badly has never, ever been lower.)
The linked Surely You’re a Creep, Mr. Feynman article has these lines (emphasis mine):
The linked Surely You’re a Creep, Mr. Feynman article has these lines (emphasis mine):
No, the intensity with which Feynman’s fan base seeks his exoneration at the bar of history is about something more commonplace, and ugly: the instinctive behavior of men protecting themselves, each other, and their reputations. The men who replied to my original tweet and tried to argue against mentioning Feynman’s treatment of women were overwhelmingly preoccupied with Feynman’s legacy, which he is no longer around to defend—or more to the point in this context, to control. The men who are so quick to defend his legacy and disregard his misogyny not only see themselves in him as the once nerdy science boy who was able to become a symbol of cool; in all likelihood, they have been complicit, at a minimum, in perpetuating the kinds of conduct that Feynman is guilty of. They know at least in principle that Feynman’s behavior is wrong; after all, people do not tend to make excuses for things that they think are right. [...] When they tell me that Feynman practicing pick-up artist techniques is not that big a deal, they are also reassuring themselves that it’s not that big a deal. If Richard Feynman was a predator, so are they. And if a man as powerful and popular as Feynman can fall, so can they.posted by AlSweigart at 10:25 AM on December 12, 2024 [8 favorites]
Is “threadsitting” still a thing around here?
posted by thedaniel at 11:18 AM on December 12, 2024 [9 favorites]
posted by thedaniel at 11:18 AM on December 12, 2024 [9 favorites]
I have always been baffled that Feynman had an abusive relationship with one wife and, as far as I can tell, nobody else had that issue with him that we know of. First and third wives seemed OK, his daughter seems OK, no exes have popped up to speak up. Since usually abusive dudes have a history of doing that repeatedly, with a lot of people, why was this different?
The divorce was in 1958. No-fault divorce was first legalized in California, in 1969.
So either it was because it was the pre-me-too era, or it was a pretext for a divorce.
posted by ocschwar at 11:22 AM on December 12, 2024 [2 favorites]
Did the pretext really need to be that he flew into a violent rage though? Wasn't it usually possible in divorces for someone to just pretend they had an affair? Feynman certainly didn't have any shame about going to strip clubs and talking about being a pickup artist. I don't think he'd sweat having a marriage end because of infidelity even if it was just a convenient, agreed-upon excuse. Violent rage seems awfully specific.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 11:39 AM on December 12, 2024 [3 favorites]
posted by RonButNotStupid at 11:39 AM on December 12, 2024 [3 favorites]
An alternate theory:
They frequently quarreled and she was frightened by what she decided was "a violent temper".[126] Their politics were different; although he registered and voted as a Republican, she was more conservative, and her opinion on the 1954 Oppenheimer security hearing ("Where there's smoke there's fire") offended him
Remember Klaus Fuchs used Feynmann's car to smuggle information from Los Alamos to the Soviets. The smoke cloud wasn't just hovering over Oppenheimer's head. Him flying into a violent rage about something that could easily have resulted in him facing capital charges makes a lot more sense. And her making it about merely interrupting his calculus or drumming means she can get away from him, and get him away from any more state secrets, without him sharing a defendant's seat with the Rosenbergs.
Still doesn't make him a good guy, but again this would explain why only his second wife spoke of him being violent.
posted by ocschwar at 12:01 PM on December 12, 2024 [2 favorites]
They frequently quarreled and she was frightened by what she decided was "a violent temper".[126] Their politics were different; although he registered and voted as a Republican, she was more conservative, and her opinion on the 1954 Oppenheimer security hearing ("Where there's smoke there's fire") offended him
Remember Klaus Fuchs used Feynmann's car to smuggle information from Los Alamos to the Soviets. The smoke cloud wasn't just hovering over Oppenheimer's head. Him flying into a violent rage about something that could easily have resulted in him facing capital charges makes a lot more sense. And her making it about merely interrupting his calculus or drumming means she can get away from him, and get him away from any more state secrets, without him sharing a defendant's seat with the Rosenbergs.
Still doesn't make him a good guy, but again this would explain why only his second wife spoke of him being violent.
posted by ocschwar at 12:01 PM on December 12, 2024 [2 favorites]
I suppose I could have been a Feynman bro. I was a young white male science nerd in school back in the 80's when I picked up Surely You're Joking and I read it several times. Even now I can remember some of the passages pretty well. There were the bongo drums, and the Carnival in Brazil, and the missing door at the fraternity house, and the safecracking at the Manhattan project, and the pickup routines, and the strip clubs, and and and and.
It was entertaining enough for me and my demographic, I suppose, but it certainly did not give me permission to be a dickhead to girls any more than the Indiana Jones movies gave me permission to rob Indigenous gravesites of cultural treasures. And really, the book did play out like a movie, with the equally preposterous stunts and the cross-referencing of historical events. But it sure as hell wasn't a life map. I don't think I was particularly self-aware and I'm not trying to cast myself as some kind of proto-ally. I'm just saying that there were plenty of crappy role models (James Bond, for example) that us young boys found amusing but also clearly understood that that was Not. At. All. how the real world actually works.
There was one thing in Feynman's book that really did inspire me and that I've carried with me for decades. I'm recalling this from memory: Feynman was in the cafeteria at Cornell, back in the late 40's maybe, and his wife had died recently and he was deeply depressed, and he was just sitting there, idly spinning some plates on the tabletop, and he noticed that the Cornell crest in the center of each plate seemed to be spinning at a different rate than the plate itself which seemed really counterintuitive (even to teenage-boy me) and so Feynman kinda perked up and said, well, this seems weird, and tried to work out some equations and this eventually led him to understand some questions about spin in quantum dynamics.
The details don't matter. What does matter is that I was entranced by how you could just sit there and notice something, and decide to look into it, and study it, and maybe it would lead to a Nobel prize and maybe it would lead nowhere at all but it would still be pretty cool to just understand it. And unlike the rest of the book, this wasn't the Manhattan project and this wasn't quantum electrodynamics and this wasn't anything like that.
Now that, I decided to my teenage self, that was something I could do. I couldn't play drums, and I couldn't open safes, and I didn't want to go to Brazil and I didn't want to play stupid sexist games to get women to sleep with me and I certainly didn't want to build weapons of mass destruction. And I thought I could do physics but I was wrong (as I discovered midway through college) but I did indeed carry with me that you could make some surprising discoveries by just noticing things and thinking about them. And so that's what I did, and I'm now a fairly competent mathematician who does indeed sit down at a table and plays with things and notices things and thinks to himself, "Well, that's kind of strange".
I don't think Feynman gave me inspiration or permission to become that kind of person; I mostly already was that kind of person, and it was just nice to see that I wasn't the only one. And this is a long-winded way of saying that the dickheads who sexually harassed young women in science were going to do that anyways, regardless of whether a pop-culture phenomenon like James Bond (oops, Richard Feynman) reflected that back to them.
Assholes gonna asshole, I suppose.
I don't actually care about Feynman's legacy, but I don't know if he (or better to say, if the legend of him) is really to blame for shithole science departments.
posted by math at 1:06 PM on December 12, 2024 [13 favorites]
It was entertaining enough for me and my demographic, I suppose, but it certainly did not give me permission to be a dickhead to girls any more than the Indiana Jones movies gave me permission to rob Indigenous gravesites of cultural treasures. And really, the book did play out like a movie, with the equally preposterous stunts and the cross-referencing of historical events. But it sure as hell wasn't a life map. I don't think I was particularly self-aware and I'm not trying to cast myself as some kind of proto-ally. I'm just saying that there were plenty of crappy role models (James Bond, for example) that us young boys found amusing but also clearly understood that that was Not. At. All. how the real world actually works.
There was one thing in Feynman's book that really did inspire me and that I've carried with me for decades. I'm recalling this from memory: Feynman was in the cafeteria at Cornell, back in the late 40's maybe, and his wife had died recently and he was deeply depressed, and he was just sitting there, idly spinning some plates on the tabletop, and he noticed that the Cornell crest in the center of each plate seemed to be spinning at a different rate than the plate itself which seemed really counterintuitive (even to teenage-boy me) and so Feynman kinda perked up and said, well, this seems weird, and tried to work out some equations and this eventually led him to understand some questions about spin in quantum dynamics.
The details don't matter. What does matter is that I was entranced by how you could just sit there and notice something, and decide to look into it, and study it, and maybe it would lead to a Nobel prize and maybe it would lead nowhere at all but it would still be pretty cool to just understand it. And unlike the rest of the book, this wasn't the Manhattan project and this wasn't quantum electrodynamics and this wasn't anything like that.
Now that, I decided to my teenage self, that was something I could do. I couldn't play drums, and I couldn't open safes, and I didn't want to go to Brazil and I didn't want to play stupid sexist games to get women to sleep with me and I certainly didn't want to build weapons of mass destruction. And I thought I could do physics but I was wrong (as I discovered midway through college) but I did indeed carry with me that you could make some surprising discoveries by just noticing things and thinking about them. And so that's what I did, and I'm now a fairly competent mathematician who does indeed sit down at a table and plays with things and notices things and thinks to himself, "Well, that's kind of strange".
I don't think Feynman gave me inspiration or permission to become that kind of person; I mostly already was that kind of person, and it was just nice to see that I wasn't the only one. And this is a long-winded way of saying that the dickheads who sexually harassed young women in science were going to do that anyways, regardless of whether a pop-culture phenomenon like James Bond (oops, Richard Feynman) reflected that back to them.
Assholes gonna asshole, I suppose.
I don't actually care about Feynman's legacy, but I don't know if he (or better to say, if the legend of him) is really to blame for shithole science departments.
posted by math at 1:06 PM on December 12, 2024 [13 favorites]
And this is a long-winded way of saying that the dickheads who sexually harassed young women in science were going to do that anyways, regardless of whether a pop-culture phenomenon like James Bond (oops, Richard Feynman) reflected that back to them.
Not so sure about that. I don't think that it's automatically true that people are fundamentally one way or another. Sometimes the culture we are immersed in draws out certain aspects of our character.
I think it's a question of permission structure. This person we admire for his achievements is also a misogynist, so maybe it's not such a big deal to be a misogynist. I know that growing up as a young man I've been in similar environments, where macho cruelty was used as a shibboleth. I've learned to remove myself from those places as I've gotten older.
posted by ishmael at 1:48 PM on December 12, 2024 [11 favorites]
Not so sure about that. I don't think that it's automatically true that people are fundamentally one way or another. Sometimes the culture we are immersed in draws out certain aspects of our character.
I think it's a question of permission structure. This person we admire for his achievements is also a misogynist, so maybe it's not such a big deal to be a misogynist. I know that growing up as a young man I've been in similar environments, where macho cruelty was used as a shibboleth. I've learned to remove myself from those places as I've gotten older.
posted by ishmael at 1:48 PM on December 12, 2024 [11 favorites]
... Sometimes the culture we are immersed in draws out certain aspects of our character.
Fair point, and you could be right, ishmael.
In my mind, I'm chewing over the legacy of a similar eccentric iconoclast but in mathematics: Paul Erdős, previously, previously, and others, the Hungarian mathematician who lived out of two suitcases and would arrive in town unannounced on your doorstep and declare, "My mind is open". A few weeks later he would move on, leaving behind five or six almost-finished collaborative papers and an unholy mess of a house. Seriously, when you read the stories about him you realize that he was in all areas outside of mathematics a complete infant; in one famous anecdote, he couldn't figure out how to open a container of juice so he just stabbed it on the bottom, filled his glass, and then put the still-gushing container back in the fridge. And then would just shrug in annoyance when called on his shit.
But Erdős was indeed kind to children and to young scholars, and he was indeed a supremely talented mathematician, and he did a lot of good. But he also was an insufferable narcissist who passively demanded that others (most notably the mathematical couple Ron Graham and Fan Chung) take care of every. single. aspect. of his life so that he could do nothing but math.
Every mathematician knows of Paul Erdős and most of us are just a few degrees of separation. And yet math departments today don't seem to be filled with helpless manchilds any more than are any other academc departments. So... was Feynman just so very different than Erdős? Is physics so very different than math? Or is the answer, as always, misogyny?
posted by fuzzy.little.sock at 2:25 PM on December 12, 2024 [5 favorites]
Fair point, and you could be right, ishmael.
In my mind, I'm chewing over the legacy of a similar eccentric iconoclast but in mathematics: Paul Erdős, previously, previously, and others, the Hungarian mathematician who lived out of two suitcases and would arrive in town unannounced on your doorstep and declare, "My mind is open". A few weeks later he would move on, leaving behind five or six almost-finished collaborative papers and an unholy mess of a house. Seriously, when you read the stories about him you realize that he was in all areas outside of mathematics a complete infant; in one famous anecdote, he couldn't figure out how to open a container of juice so he just stabbed it on the bottom, filled his glass, and then put the still-gushing container back in the fridge. And then would just shrug in annoyance when called on his shit.
But Erdős was indeed kind to children and to young scholars, and he was indeed a supremely talented mathematician, and he did a lot of good. But he also was an insufferable narcissist who passively demanded that others (most notably the mathematical couple Ron Graham and Fan Chung) take care of every. single. aspect. of his life so that he could do nothing but math.
Every mathematician knows of Paul Erdős and most of us are just a few degrees of separation. And yet math departments today don't seem to be filled with helpless manchilds any more than are any other academc departments. So... was Feynman just so very different than Erdős? Is physics so very different than math? Or is the answer, as always, misogyny?
posted by fuzzy.little.sock at 2:25 PM on December 12, 2024 [5 favorites]
So... was Feynman just so very different than Erdős?
I think Feynman’s sexism is just a more commonplace thing than Erdős’ whole deal? If we’re talking in terms of permission structures, Feynman undoubtedly deserves some blame for the culture in physics because, as the good Dr. Collier says, he’s the guy whose books you get handed when you express an interest in physics, but he was also permitted to act a certain way by the physics culture he lived in, from which today’s physics culture inherits in ways that do not run through a single person.
posted by atoxyl at 2:48 PM on December 12, 2024 [3 favorites]
I think Feynman’s sexism is just a more commonplace thing than Erdős’ whole deal? If we’re talking in terms of permission structures, Feynman undoubtedly deserves some blame for the culture in physics because, as the good Dr. Collier says, he’s the guy whose books you get handed when you express an interest in physics, but he was also permitted to act a certain way by the physics culture he lived in, from which today’s physics culture inherits in ways that do not run through a single person.
posted by atoxyl at 2:48 PM on December 12, 2024 [3 favorites]
Does anyone ever go into math because of Erdos?
The only personality I know of that would draw people to math is Gian Carlo Rota. (Please don't milkshake duck him. Let me have my delusions).
posted by ocschwar at 3:02 PM on December 12, 2024
The only personality I know of that would draw people to math is Gian Carlo Rota. (Please don't milkshake duck him. Let me have my delusions).
posted by ocschwar at 3:02 PM on December 12, 2024
One reason that young men get tempted into doing pick-up artistry / Feynman's methods of mistreating women is because it can increase the odds of insecure women having sex with them. She's likely to regret it afterwards or even during, and she might look down on the guy in the long run. But if all he cares about is getting laid, then this is a damaging but "effective" technique, in the same manner that a guy getting every date super-drunk (and ignoring how his actions encroach on date rape) would be "effective" at getting sex.
For example, pick-up artist manuals describe "last minute resistance" (i.e. the woman clearly saying no and refusing to give consent) and teach techniques for how to power through it by wearing her down until she finally gives in. Some pick-up artists describe 2-3 hours of getting "no" from the woman but using one tactic after another until he finally overcomes her defenses and has sex with her. Instead of seeing that as disrespectfully ignoring consent boundaries, he paints that as a huge success and vindication of him as a stud with another conquest.
Angela Collier's video points out how Feynman frequently frustrated women and made them feel bad, but he ignored their feelings and painted himself as the highly desired hero. One example is when he caused a full glass of water to pour onto his waitress. He did this multiple times, and he gleefully described how it was fun and he's so good with women. She refused to serve him after that, but instead of feeling contrite, he laughed it off and painted himself as the charming rake / studmuffin.
If a young impressionable guy tries out Feynman's techniques / pick-up artist methods, and he follow Feynman's lead in downplaying the woman's negative feelings afterwards (e.g. ignoring if she ends up regretful or angry or crying), he will actually have "success" in terms of more sex. That can lead to him going further down this toxic path. Feynman's stories are dangerous because the method "works" in one narrow dimension if you ignore the ways it damages everyone involved.
Also, it's true that young men see other examples of caddish behavior such as James Bond. But it's like ads. The more times you see an ad, the more likely you are to click on it. If a young man sees James Bond and Richard Feynman and Hugh Hefner and and and, each role model increases the likelihood of him following their lead.
posted by vienna at 3:17 PM on December 12, 2024 [5 favorites]
For example, pick-up artist manuals describe "last minute resistance" (i.e. the woman clearly saying no and refusing to give consent) and teach techniques for how to power through it by wearing her down until she finally gives in. Some pick-up artists describe 2-3 hours of getting "no" from the woman but using one tactic after another until he finally overcomes her defenses and has sex with her. Instead of seeing that as disrespectfully ignoring consent boundaries, he paints that as a huge success and vindication of him as a stud with another conquest.
Angela Collier's video points out how Feynman frequently frustrated women and made them feel bad, but he ignored their feelings and painted himself as the highly desired hero. One example is when he caused a full glass of water to pour onto his waitress. He did this multiple times, and he gleefully described how it was fun and he's so good with women. She refused to serve him after that, but instead of feeling contrite, he laughed it off and painted himself as the charming rake / studmuffin.
If a young impressionable guy tries out Feynman's techniques / pick-up artist methods, and he follow Feynman's lead in downplaying the woman's negative feelings afterwards (e.g. ignoring if she ends up regretful or angry or crying), he will actually have "success" in terms of more sex. That can lead to him going further down this toxic path. Feynman's stories are dangerous because the method "works" in one narrow dimension if you ignore the ways it damages everyone involved.
Also, it's true that young men see other examples of caddish behavior such as James Bond. But it's like ads. The more times you see an ad, the more likely you are to click on it. If a young man sees James Bond and Richard Feynman and Hugh Hefner and and and, each role model increases the likelihood of him following their lead.
posted by vienna at 3:17 PM on December 12, 2024 [5 favorites]
So... was Feynman just so very different than Erdős? Is physics so very different than math? Or is the answer, as always, misogyny?
I think there are a few things making up the difference here (aside from the fact that culture is an organic thing and the influence of two similar-in-some-ways-and-different-in-others iconoclasts is going to be felt differently.)
1. Erdős' quirks aren't aspirational to a teenage boy the same way that the misogyny in the Feynman anecdotes is. They have no problem showing up places unannounced, making messes, and leaving shit for others to clean up. But getting laid, showing up women with how smart you are, and being the hero of the story for it? That's catnip to a (certain type of) teenage boy.
2. Erdős never, to my knowledge, had a Ralph Leighton, someone devoting their whole life to mythologizing him as "the only great mathematician." Instead, he got memed, so that even folks who don't know what fields of math he worked in know what an "Erdős Number" is. But with Feynman, we have multiple generations of kids getting a copy of I Hope They Serve Quantum Electrodynamics in Hell placed in their hands as soon as they show an interest in physics. So Erdős is famous, while Feynman has a cult of personality around him. So it goes.
posted by Navelgazer at 3:43 PM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
I think there are a few things making up the difference here (aside from the fact that culture is an organic thing and the influence of two similar-in-some-ways-and-different-in-others iconoclasts is going to be felt differently.)
1. Erdős' quirks aren't aspirational to a teenage boy the same way that the misogyny in the Feynman anecdotes is. They have no problem showing up places unannounced, making messes, and leaving shit for others to clean up. But getting laid, showing up women with how smart you are, and being the hero of the story for it? That's catnip to a (certain type of) teenage boy.
2. Erdős never, to my knowledge, had a Ralph Leighton, someone devoting their whole life to mythologizing him as "the only great mathematician." Instead, he got memed, so that even folks who don't know what fields of math he worked in know what an "Erdős Number" is. But with Feynman, we have multiple generations of kids getting a copy of I Hope They Serve Quantum Electrodynamics in Hell placed in their hands as soon as they show an interest in physics. So Erdős is famous, while Feynman has a cult of personality around him. So it goes.
posted by Navelgazer at 3:43 PM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
I watched the whole YouTube video, but I only skimmed this thread. I see Angela Collier's point, but I think she overstates her case. Any reasonable adult should be able to admire someone's positive qualities while still recognizing and criticizing their faults.
I first encountered Richard Feynman through an extended interview that I saw on PBS when I was about 10 years old. I believe it was the show "Nova", and I think it was devoid of sexism or misogyny (I re-watched it a few years ago). I love the fact that Feynman was so intellectually curious, and he was also just a "regular guy" in some respects. He was an inspiration to me to enter science (biology, not physics).
I also have a very personal reason why I have admiration for some of Feynman's qualities. The following is a quote from "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman":
posted by akk2014 at 3:48 PM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
I first encountered Richard Feynman through an extended interview that I saw on PBS when I was about 10 years old. I believe it was the show "Nova", and I think it was devoid of sexism or misogyny (I re-watched it a few years ago). I love the fact that Feynman was so intellectually curious, and he was also just a "regular guy" in some respects. He was an inspiration to me to enter science (biology, not physics).
I also have a very personal reason why I have admiration for some of Feynman's qualities. The following is a quote from "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman":
One day, about 3:30 in the afternoon, I was walking along the sidewalk opposite the beach at Copacabana past a bar. I suddenly got this treMENDdous, strong feeling: ‘That’s just what I want; that’ll fit just right. I’d just love to have a drink right now!’I do hope that this Feynman story, at least, is true. The reason that quote is inspirational to me will be left as an exercise for the student.
I started to walk into the bar, and I suddenly thought to myself, ‘Wait a minute! It’s the middle of the afternoon. There’s nobody here. There’s no social reason to drink. Why do you have such a terribly strong feeling that you have to have a drink?’ — and I got scared.
I never drank ever again, since then. I suppose I really wasn’t in any danger, because I found it very easy to stop. But that strong feeling that I didn’t understand frightened me. You see, I get such fun out of thinking that I don’t want to destroy this most pleasant machine that makes life such a big kick….”
posted by akk2014 at 3:48 PM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
I just downloaded the Elevenlabs text-to-speech app and which celebrity voice does it first suggest to me? That's right: Richard Feynman, who it calls "an icon of intellectual curiosity and free-spirited exploration-a symbol of the scientific passion that defined his era... Recreating his voice allows today's audiences not only to learn from his insights but to experience his boundless zest for discovery, playful sense of wonder, and fearless curiosity inviting them to approach learning with the same passion that defined his life."
It also notes that they have permission from his estate.
posted by BungaDunga at 3:50 PM on December 12, 2024 [3 favorites]
It also notes that they have permission from his estate.
posted by BungaDunga at 3:50 PM on December 12, 2024 [3 favorites]
Oh, and it styles him "Richard Feynman ™️, Raw Genius."
posted by BungaDunga at 3:52 PM on December 12, 2024 [2 favorites]
posted by BungaDunga at 3:52 PM on December 12, 2024 [2 favorites]
screw that -- the executive summary, if you please.
What if Harlan Ellison but physics
posted by Jon Mitchell at 10:26 PM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
What if Harlan Ellison but physics
posted by Jon Mitchell at 10:26 PM on December 12, 2024 [6 favorites]
Any reasonable adult should be able to admire someone's positive qualities while still recognizing and criticizing their faults.
She does that. She praises his intellectual work, his documented respect for several women, his kindness and patience with children. She meets my reasonable adult standards, even if she doesn't meet yours.
posted by maudlin at 11:19 PM on December 12, 2024 [12 favorites]
She does that. She praises his intellectual work, his documented respect for several women, his kindness and patience with children. She meets my reasonable adult standards, even if she doesn't meet yours.
posted by maudlin at 11:19 PM on December 12, 2024 [12 favorites]
Okay, I'm institutionalised so I tend to obey instructions
DO
I'm going to have to insist that folks watch the video
DONE
30 years ago, before the Celtic Tiger, before Silicon Dock Dublin, my department scraped the money to create a new chair of Human Genetics. The short list were all invited to give a talk. One of them went on for 100min, incl TMI descriptions of stressing A Lot of mice. I though that was disrespectful of our collective time (50 audience x 50m excess = a person-week of lost productivity). But they got the job, and were later instrumental in securing my future in science, so. If Collier's 450K viewers stuck it or browsed it for an hour . . . on company time, then that's 200 person years of lost productivity. But If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter, applies I guess.
Confessional: like math above, I've read SYJMF several times. I have given copies to younger scientists and also filleted a PDF of the text and sent appropriate bits out to folks. There are lessons in there even if they are fables: don't be (a) Dick; pay attention; do the work; polish your crap-detector; be kind. Collier adds: condemn least publishable units LPUs to the flames of hell even if, as now, no trees were harmed in the process.
On the misogyny and sexism, there was an interesting editorial kerfuff at Scientific American 10 years ago when Ashutosh Jogalekar published a blogpost "Richard Feynman, sexism and changing perceptions of a scientific icon" which was taken down and then re-instated. That-all was also part of my education.
posted by BobTheScientist at 12:42 AM on December 13, 2024 [1 favorite]
DO
I'm going to have to insist that folks watch the video
DONE
30 years ago, before the Celtic Tiger, before Silicon Dock Dublin, my department scraped the money to create a new chair of Human Genetics. The short list were all invited to give a talk. One of them went on for 100min, incl TMI descriptions of stressing A Lot of mice. I though that was disrespectful of our collective time (50 audience x 50m excess = a person-week of lost productivity). But they got the job, and were later instrumental in securing my future in science, so. If Collier's 450K viewers stuck it or browsed it for an hour . . . on company time, then that's 200 person years of lost productivity. But If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter, applies I guess.
Confessional: like math above, I've read SYJMF several times. I have given copies to younger scientists and also filleted a PDF of the text and sent appropriate bits out to folks. There are lessons in there even if they are fables: don't be (a) Dick; pay attention; do the work; polish your crap-detector; be kind. Collier adds: condemn least publishable units LPUs to the flames of hell even if, as now, no trees were harmed in the process.
On the misogyny and sexism, there was an interesting editorial kerfuff at Scientific American 10 years ago when Ashutosh Jogalekar published a blogpost "Richard Feynman, sexism and changing perceptions of a scientific icon" which was taken down and then re-instated. That-all was also part of my education.
posted by BobTheScientist at 12:42 AM on December 13, 2024 [1 favorite]
This could be because I (like Collier) am 'too young' or whatever but I'm a little shocked by the several statements along the lines of 'oh well he probably didn't actually abuse his second wife and she just said that... for the lolz? because it was something to say to get a divorce when any number of other things would have got the same result, including the documented philandering that he definitely did say he did? and he totally went along with being painted as a violent abuser even though it wasn't true'
Since when is this a site where 'people who say their spouse repeatedly flew into a rage, destroyed homewares, and choked them' are brushed off with 'well he probably didn't actually do that and you're making it up'.
What the hell, guys?
posted by ngaiotonga at 12:50 AM on December 13, 2024 [8 favorites]
Since when is this a site where 'people who say their spouse repeatedly flew into a rage, destroyed homewares, and choked them' are brushed off with 'well he probably didn't actually do that and you're making it up'.
What the hell, guys?
posted by ngaiotonga at 12:50 AM on December 13, 2024 [8 favorites]
> She meets my reasonable adult standards
She repeatedly calls Feynman an asshole throughout the video. Toward the end of the video, she does spend some time listing his positive traits, but then she ultimately backtracks significantly by citing an unverified incident reported by his ex-wife's divorce lawyer (an incident that seems at odds with the experiences of other people who knew Feynman, including his other two wives).
As I said before: Collier makes some legitimate points, but she takes things too far.
posted by akk2014 at 5:43 AM on December 13, 2024
She repeatedly calls Feynman an asshole throughout the video. Toward the end of the video, she does spend some time listing his positive traits, but then she ultimately backtracks significantly by citing an unverified incident reported by his ex-wife's divorce lawyer (an incident that seems at odds with the experiences of other people who knew Feynman, including his other two wives).
As I said before: Collier makes some legitimate points, but she takes things too far.
posted by akk2014 at 5:43 AM on December 13, 2024
but then she ultimately backtracks significantly by citing an unverified incident reported by his ex-wife's divorce lawyer (an incident that seems at odds with the experiences of other people who knew Feynman, including his other two wives)
Hey quick question, did Collier say "this incident is definately 100% true I know it for a fact" or not.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:10 AM on December 13, 2024 [5 favorites]
Hey quick question, did Collier say "this incident is definately 100% true I know it for a fact" or not.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:10 AM on December 13, 2024 [5 favorites]
Also "I agree with her general point but not as much as she does" is the least critical statement on can make. Sounds like she did a great job.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:10 AM on December 13, 2024 [5 favorites]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:10 AM on December 13, 2024 [5 favorites]
> did Collier say "this incident is definately 100% true I know it for a fact" or not
She doesn't say it in those words, but she implies that the story is credible enough to change her ultimate view of Feynman's legacy. From the auto-generated transcript: "I know I kind of thought that this was going to be a redemption story but it's not it's just not". This quote appears immediately after she reports the incident, and a bit after she describes the positive traits that might otherwise have indicated a redemptive arc for Feynman's life.
posted by akk2014 at 6:21 AM on December 13, 2024
She doesn't say it in those words, but she implies that the story is credible enough to change her ultimate view of Feynman's legacy. From the auto-generated transcript: "I know I kind of thought that this was going to be a redemption story but it's not it's just not". This quote appears immediately after she reports the incident, and a bit after she describes the positive traits that might otherwise have indicated a redemptive arc for Feynman's life.
posted by akk2014 at 6:21 AM on December 13, 2024
It's OK if Feynman was an inspiration to you. Go out and be an inspiration to others. Take everything good you learned from Feynman and pass it on so someone can be inspired by you.
These discussions always follow a familiar pattern where someone complains that X was an inspiration to them and it would be unfair to cancel X because future generations need X to inspire them. No, they don't.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 8:06 AM on December 13, 2024 [10 favorites]
These discussions always follow a familiar pattern where someone complains that X was an inspiration to them and it would be unfair to cancel X because future generations need X to inspire them. No, they don't.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 8:06 AM on December 13, 2024 [10 favorites]
One reason that young men get tempted into doing pick-up artistry / Feynman's methods of... completely ignoring women's consent is that, afterwards they can see themselves as a "cad", like Hefner or Bond, instead of a rapist.
posted by haapsane at 8:40 AM on December 13, 2024 [3 favorites]
I'm a little shocked by the several statements along the lines of 'oh well he probably didn't actually abuse his second wife and she just said that... for the lolz? because it was something to say to get a divorce when any number of other things would have got the same result
I don’t know whether this is aimed at my original comment referencing this notion with the remove of “often asserted in his defense online” but I brought it up hoping that there would be someone who knows enough about the history of divorce to address whether claims of this sort make any sense (in Feynman’s case or in general).
posted by atoxyl at 9:31 AM on December 13, 2024 [1 favorite]
I don’t know whether this is aimed at my original comment referencing this notion with the remove of “often asserted in his defense online” but I brought it up hoping that there would be someone who knows enough about the history of divorce to address whether claims of this sort make any sense (in Feynman’s case or in general).
posted by atoxyl at 9:31 AM on December 13, 2024 [1 favorite]
When it comes to compartmentalization, I have more practice than most people. If I were going to be brutally honest, I would say that the vast majority of my relatives and colleagues are moral monsters. Let me explain. I'm a long-time vegan for reasons of animal rights. To me, it's abhorrent to be complicit in the torture, execution, and dismemberment of sentient beings. However, I can't realistically go around viewing just about everyone as some kind of Hannibal Lecter figure. So I learned to admire people for their qualities while turning a blind eye to their atrocities. If I can give a pass to my mother, I can certainly do so for Richard Feynman.
posted by akk2014 at 10:05 AM on December 13, 2024 [1 favorite]
posted by akk2014 at 10:05 AM on December 13, 2024 [1 favorite]
I brought it up hoping that there would be someone who knows enough about the history of divorce to address whether claims of this sort make any sense (in Feynman’s case or in general).
I'm not a historian but i've read quite a bit from and about the period, and doesn't. Adultery was the vastly more common thing to fake, if you were going to fake a cause to end your marriage (and as noted, Feynman wouldn't have had to fake it). Not least because a whole lot of judges wouldn't have seen anything wrong with a guy terrorizing his wife, so it was by no means a guarantee that you'd get granted a divorce!
(Plus, if you lived in California in the 1950s and wanted a divorce, it was vastly easier, if you had any money at all, to have one of the parties go stay in Reno (or Las Vegas) for six weeks and then nobody had to accuse anyone of any wrongdoing whatsoever.)
posted by adrienneleigh at 10:46 AM on December 13, 2024 [11 favorites]
I'm not a historian but i've read quite a bit from and about the period, and doesn't. Adultery was the vastly more common thing to fake, if you were going to fake a cause to end your marriage (and as noted, Feynman wouldn't have had to fake it). Not least because a whole lot of judges wouldn't have seen anything wrong with a guy terrorizing his wife, so it was by no means a guarantee that you'd get granted a divorce!
(Plus, if you lived in California in the 1950s and wanted a divorce, it was vastly easier, if you had any money at all, to have one of the parties go stay in Reno (or Las Vegas) for six weeks and then nobody had to accuse anyone of any wrongdoing whatsoever.)
posted by adrienneleigh at 10:46 AM on December 13, 2024 [11 favorites]
Oddly it doesn’t seem like adultery came up, as obvious as it is reading his biography now. It looks like the divorce took two years which seems like evidence against the idea that it was an amicably collusive divorce. Papers at the time appear to have been more interested in the novelty of Bell complaining about Feynman’s drumming and intolerable obsession with calculus than the accusations of violence. (This is, however, a reason I didn’t take the idea of it being a standard pretext in those days as out of the question, since it sure seems like many people didn’t, as you say, take a man terrorizing his wife to be such a massive blemish on his character)
posted by atoxyl at 11:00 AM on December 13, 2024 [2 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 11:00 AM on December 13, 2024 [2 favorites]
Collier makes some legitimate points, but she takes things too far.
Says the person who shortly afterwards called most of their colleagues and relatives (and by extension nearly everyone on this thread) 'moral monsters' and compared them to Hannibal Lecter.
I strongly disagree with the calibration of your moral compass, akk2014.
posted by ngaiotonga at 11:21 AM on December 13, 2024 [4 favorites]
Says the person who shortly afterwards called most of their colleagues and relatives (and by extension nearly everyone on this thread) 'moral monsters' and compared them to Hannibal Lecter.
I strongly disagree with the calibration of your moral compass, akk2014.
posted by ngaiotonga at 11:21 AM on December 13, 2024 [4 favorites]
@ngaiotonga
- has a reputation as a great teacher but people attending his lectures... couldn't ... say what they were about.
Oh interesting. I knew of the lectures as a thing but I'd never actually watched them. One of the things that stood out to me in Collier's video essay was a short clip of Feynman responding to a question about magnets. I found a longer clip of the same interview and Feynman does get around to sort-of answering the question about magnets, and he's not wrong about the difficulties of providing a proper explanation (I don't understand them myself and I've done the relevant coursework in quantum mechanics). But the answer was so off-putting.
Ironically his explanation of ice being slippery, which the interviewer hadn't even asked him about, is a pop-sci explanation that is flatly wrong. And yeah, that happens, but is a bit incongruous with a smartest man in the room image.
posted by mscibing at 11:21 AM on December 13, 2024 [4 favorites]
- has a reputation as a great teacher but people attending his lectures... couldn't ... say what they were about.
Oh interesting. I knew of the lectures as a thing but I'd never actually watched them. One of the things that stood out to me in Collier's video essay was a short clip of Feynman responding to a question about magnets. I found a longer clip of the same interview and Feynman does get around to sort-of answering the question about magnets, and he's not wrong about the difficulties of providing a proper explanation (I don't understand them myself and I've done the relevant coursework in quantum mechanics). But the answer was so off-putting.
Ironically his explanation of ice being slippery, which the interviewer hadn't even asked him about, is a pop-sci explanation that is flatly wrong. And yeah, that happens, but is a bit incongruous with a smartest man in the room image.
posted by mscibing at 11:21 AM on December 13, 2024 [4 favorites]
I tried, I really did, but life's too short. I got to about fifteen minutes. In order: I doubt the average person knows even one of Maxwell's equations or what they do; If anyone advised you to read 'Surely ...' as an introduction to physics, then you were badly advised; bundling up behaviours and labelling the perpetrators as Feynman Bros does not tell us anything about Feynman; I guess the introduction to QED is a bit of 'humint' to sell books, sounds awful.
Thanks, but no thanks.
posted by StephenB at 2:45 PM on December 13, 2024
Thanks, but no thanks.
posted by StephenB at 2:45 PM on December 13, 2024
If anyone advised you to read 'Surely ...' as an introduction to physics, then you were badly advised; bundling up behaviours and labelling the perpetrators as Feynman Bros does not tell us anything about Feynman
One- this weird tradition of handing out that book to interested teens is part of the whole legacy thing, whether it's his fault or not.
Two- that's the most interesting question that the video poses: how much of Feynman's legacy was Feynman the man? How much of it was one dumb book published in his lifetime and one sequel published after he died? Was he actually that sort of asshole, or did he just think it was cool to be seen as one? Was his reputation as a Smart Cad just marketing, his own and Leighton's? What's up with the Feynman Publishing Complex that keeps churning out remixes of Feynman-associated text? How much of this is even real?
posted by BungaDunga at 2:55 PM on December 13, 2024 [8 favorites]
One- this weird tradition of handing out that book to interested teens is part of the whole legacy thing, whether it's his fault or not.
Two- that's the most interesting question that the video poses: how much of Feynman's legacy was Feynman the man? How much of it was one dumb book published in his lifetime and one sequel published after he died? Was he actually that sort of asshole, or did he just think it was cool to be seen as one? Was his reputation as a Smart Cad just marketing, his own and Leighton's? What's up with the Feynman Publishing Complex that keeps churning out remixes of Feynman-associated text? How much of this is even real?
posted by BungaDunga at 2:55 PM on December 13, 2024 [8 favorites]
(and that's why the video is so long- the setup is ugh these Feynman bros and then the reveal is wait, how much of this was legacy comes from Feynman-the-man, anyway, vs the Feynman that Leighton wanted to show?)
posted by BungaDunga at 3:00 PM on December 13, 2024 [7 favorites]
posted by BungaDunga at 3:00 PM on December 13, 2024 [7 favorites]
In order: I doubt the average person knows even one of Maxwell's equations or what they do;
That’s the point. I’d venture most don’t know his name, even though he’s the person Einstein saw the way we see Einstein. But people know Feynman because of his persona.
If anyone advised you to read 'Surely ...' as an introduction to physics, then you were badly advised
Nobody does that. They give it to young people interested in science because it’s a “fun” book from the perspective of a famous scientist. One can offer a qualified defense of the book - if your neighbor were an old guy who verifiably worked on the Manhattan Project and he were telling you these stories, you’d probably wince at some of the stuff about his sexual escapades and take a whole lot with a grain of salt but still find the conversation entertaining, and that’s what the book amounts to - but Collier’s issue with it is ultimately in context of feeling like it sets the wrong tone for people getting into the field and reinforces bad tendencies.
I have some sympathy for people not wanting to watch a three hour video but then why make the effort to comment on stuff and inevitably miss by a mile?
posted by atoxyl at 3:50 PM on December 13, 2024 [8 favorites]
That’s the point. I’d venture most don’t know his name, even though he’s the person Einstein saw the way we see Einstein. But people know Feynman because of his persona.
If anyone advised you to read 'Surely ...' as an introduction to physics, then you were badly advised
Nobody does that. They give it to young people interested in science because it’s a “fun” book from the perspective of a famous scientist. One can offer a qualified defense of the book - if your neighbor were an old guy who verifiably worked on the Manhattan Project and he were telling you these stories, you’d probably wince at some of the stuff about his sexual escapades and take a whole lot with a grain of salt but still find the conversation entertaining, and that’s what the book amounts to - but Collier’s issue with it is ultimately in context of feeling like it sets the wrong tone for people getting into the field and reinforces bad tendencies.
I have some sympathy for people not wanting to watch a three hour video but then why make the effort to comment on stuff and inevitably miss by a mile?
posted by atoxyl at 3:50 PM on December 13, 2024 [8 favorites]
It would appear I was being led up the garden path; ho ho. I was quite prepared to give it three hours and had set it aside, but the first fifteen minutes did not bode well. The end of the Feynman Bro section offered me hope that the heavy lifting was about to start but then it entered the QED section which offered more of the same.
posted by StephenB at 4:13 PM on December 13, 2024
posted by StephenB at 4:13 PM on December 13, 2024
Collier makes some legitimate points, but she takes things too far.
I'm in agreement with Collier enough that I did not bother watching the whole video.
Feynman's image is not a model for a successful physicist. Even in Feynman's heyday, physics was led by collaboration, not by arrogant jerks coming to brilliant realizations and smashing icons. After his day, physics became more and more dependent on larger and larger groups collaborating because of diminishing returns. The labs and instruments got larger and more expensive, the discoveries they made got more dependent on tediously analyzing larger and larger data read outs. If you want to do anything in physics in the Year of Our Lord 2024, you have to be willing to grind through a lot of scutwork and be collegial to team mates who are doing it along side yourself.
So if you're a young man and you go into this because you think you can emulate Feynman, you won't have a good career, you won't have a good social life, and you'll make life unpleasant for your colleagues.
Note that this is completely independent of Feynman's second marriage. Feynman the Model Arrogant Jerk is bad enough.
posted by ocschwar at 5:35 AM on December 14, 2024 [6 favorites]
I'm in agreement with Collier enough that I did not bother watching the whole video.
Feynman's image is not a model for a successful physicist. Even in Feynman's heyday, physics was led by collaboration, not by arrogant jerks coming to brilliant realizations and smashing icons. After his day, physics became more and more dependent on larger and larger groups collaborating because of diminishing returns. The labs and instruments got larger and more expensive, the discoveries they made got more dependent on tediously analyzing larger and larger data read outs. If you want to do anything in physics in the Year of Our Lord 2024, you have to be willing to grind through a lot of scutwork and be collegial to team mates who are doing it along side yourself.
So if you're a young man and you go into this because you think you can emulate Feynman, you won't have a good career, you won't have a good social life, and you'll make life unpleasant for your colleagues.
Note that this is completely independent of Feynman's second marriage. Feynman the Model Arrogant Jerk is bad enough.
posted by ocschwar at 5:35 AM on December 14, 2024 [6 favorites]
Dr Collier is funny, and an enjoyable science communicator, says I.
And I imagine a bunch of this is coming from a personal struggle in her professional field, and is probably well earned. Who else could.make such a work as this?
People also complained that the Origin of Species was too long. But such is the way, when addressing beloved heros and topics.
However,
Can I please have a hero that doesn’t go milkshake duck when I am most depressed.
posted by varion
I will not be watching the video until the day lengths begin growing once again
Also I will be making a pre emptive donation to Black in Marine Science , because that is more my field,
let me know if there s a similar effort for physics, so I can donate to more women being physicists and be less depressed over the stupid holidays
posted by eustatic at 10:27 AM on December 14, 2024 [4 favorites]
And I imagine a bunch of this is coming from a personal struggle in her professional field, and is probably well earned. Who else could.make such a work as this?
People also complained that the Origin of Species was too long. But such is the way, when addressing beloved heros and topics.
However,
Can I please have a hero that doesn’t go milkshake duck when I am most depressed.
posted by varion
I will not be watching the video until the day lengths begin growing once again
Also I will be making a pre emptive donation to Black in Marine Science , because that is more my field,
let me know if there s a similar effort for physics, so I can donate to more women being physicists and be less depressed over the stupid holidays
posted by eustatic at 10:27 AM on December 14, 2024 [4 favorites]
Richard Feynman made another significant appearance on the Blue back in 2009. I just read through the comments, and it's interesting how far the pendulum has swung (obligatory physics reference) in 15 short years.
posted by akk2014 at 7:33 PM on December 14, 2024
posted by akk2014 at 7:33 PM on December 14, 2024
I'm jumping back in to clarify: I believe OHenryPacey is talking about romance author Ali Hazelwood who wrote "Love, Theoretically" which Angela Collier pointed out references Feynman, not Angela Collier herself.
I'm coming in late, but it feels important to point out that Ali Hazelwood, the romance author, also has a PhD, in neuroscience.
posted by BrashTech at 9:53 PM on December 15, 2024 [5 favorites]
I'm coming in late, but it feels important to point out that Ali Hazelwood, the romance author, also has a PhD, in neuroscience.
posted by BrashTech at 9:53 PM on December 15, 2024 [5 favorites]
I read SYJ during grad school, I enjoyed many of the anecdotes and I think the most valuable part of that that I got out of it, I would form as a social intellectual thesis: science and counterculture values/attitudes were complementary, because both were about the truth.
I'm also gay, so the obviously sexist parts didn't resonate nor had the charged reception that I imagine a straight man or straight woman would perceive. Those were the sections in the book that I related less to.
And as a pianist, I read Feynman's complaint about being instructed to "play the bongo drums without any tension", and immediately saw through that his response as also incorrect. So clearly, Feynman is not infallible. But I understand how Feynman might have "physicist's disease" and not conceptualize the teacher's advice in a deeper way. It's a bit like Feynman struggling to answer the magnet question, I thought that both Feynman was being kind of a jerk deflecting the question, and yet I could also attribute that to his genuine failure to explain scientific philosophy as part of a deeper and valid intellectual struggle in general.
The problem with Collier's videos is a structural one, social media is changing into this form and discarding the principle that if you have an argument to make, you better write it clearly and concisely. That's actually one of the ground rules of good-faith discourse. So the complaint that this kind of content is being normalized societally, is a valid one. All these podcasts and videos are part of a new wave of information deluge, it will only get worse.
posted by polymodus at 12:07 AM on December 16, 2024
I'm also gay, so the obviously sexist parts didn't resonate nor had the charged reception that I imagine a straight man or straight woman would perceive. Those were the sections in the book that I related less to.
And as a pianist, I read Feynman's complaint about being instructed to "play the bongo drums without any tension", and immediately saw through that his response as also incorrect. So clearly, Feynman is not infallible. But I understand how Feynman might have "physicist's disease" and not conceptualize the teacher's advice in a deeper way. It's a bit like Feynman struggling to answer the magnet question, I thought that both Feynman was being kind of a jerk deflecting the question, and yet I could also attribute that to his genuine failure to explain scientific philosophy as part of a deeper and valid intellectual struggle in general.
The problem with Collier's videos is a structural one, social media is changing into this form and discarding the principle that if you have an argument to make, you better write it clearly and concisely. That's actually one of the ground rules of good-faith discourse. So the complaint that this kind of content is being normalized societally, is a valid one. All these podcasts and videos are part of a new wave of information deluge, it will only get worse.
posted by polymodus at 12:07 AM on December 16, 2024
social media is changing into this form and discarding the principle that if you have an argument to make, you better write it clearly and concisely
the relative popularity of TikTok and other shortform video formats suggests this is not exactly a universal trend. tiktok is ruthless at enforcing clarity and brevity
posted by BungaDunga at 9:49 AM on December 16, 2024 [1 favorite]
the relative popularity of TikTok and other shortform video formats suggests this is not exactly a universal trend. tiktok is ruthless at enforcing clarity and brevity
posted by BungaDunga at 9:49 AM on December 16, 2024 [1 favorite]
tiktok is ruthless at enforcing clarity and brevity
Often at the expense of a thorough discussion, and often in bad faith.
Longform, considered discussion is actually why I appreciate Metafilter, and why I appreciate Dr. Angela Collier. She actually backs up what she's talking about.
posted by ishmael at 11:29 AM on December 16, 2024 [5 favorites]
Often at the expense of a thorough discussion, and often in bad faith.
Longform, considered discussion is actually why I appreciate Metafilter, and why I appreciate Dr. Angela Collier. She actually backs up what she's talking about.
posted by ishmael at 11:29 AM on December 16, 2024 [5 favorites]
« Older Home Alone for the holidays | please take me home with you and brush my tear... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
You can’t go watching her entire oeuvre.
posted by pdoege at 9:14 AM on December 11, 2024 [15 favorites]