The way this man explains phenomena so visually and intuitively is mind blowing, on all scales.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqvggMpJgL0
Anyone else have vids like these showing a true genius sharing his abilities?
>>7682545
How come meme scientists back in the day were actually smart, and now we've got black science man and Bill Nye?
>>7682548
>Nobel prize winners
>Meme scientists
Yeah, totally. Being somewhat personable makes you a meme.
>>7682548
>How come meme scientists back in the day were actually smart, and now we've got black science man and Bill Nye?
Back in the day only the top handful of a percent even went to college, let alone graduated.
More people have PhDs today than the number who did some college a century ago.
>>7682545
feynman's syntax is appalling
feynman was a rubbish at anything beyond physics, especially wider fields of reason , such as the more fundamental field of philosophy.
>>7682548
My guess is because 20's to 50's science revolutionized the most basic aspects of human existence. It was constant waves of new devices and ways of doing things at a speed and scale that was never seen before, and hasn't been since. At the same time, it was all much simpler. You had a lot of generalists that were still deeply involved with their respective fields. Now you have specialists riding mainly on their discoveries, making incremental small improvements.
People are surrounded by things they couldn't hope to understand. No longer can you take apart a radio, or a phone, or whatever, and repair it or see how it works. It's too small. There are too many fine engineering aspects, and it's hard to learn it all, so you get a lot of users who only understand it in an abstract way at best. There's too much, devices are too complex, and people aren't even interested.
Furthermore, evolution of media has made it acceptable to heavily blur information with entertainment. You don't need real substance, you just need to the neat "look what the scientists did now!" headline and black science man flying around quarks and strings, and whatever other "cooky whacky science stuff" gets ratings now. Whatever chemistry explosions you can show. It's about a passing curiosity people can switch on their tv after their dull day of work to escape from their life and "wow kinda neat my phone works a bit like this huh", but never meaningfully understand or inquire about, or integrate with their reality at all.
Modern day, people like Feynman wouldn't ever have a role in media. There just isn't any demand. They have no place. The world has always been a bit dumb(ed down), but never so deliberately.
>>7682561
His syntax is fine. It doesn't create ambiguity, and it doesn't fail to cleanly convey what he seems to want it to.
>>7682564
>>Modern day, people like Feynman wouldn't ever have a role in media. There just isn't any demand. They have no place. The world has always been a bit dumb(ed down), but never so deliberately.
you can thank the liberal who created millions of people in the middle class which can do nothing but entertain itself.
also, rationality for the masses is a meme
>>7682553
What? Neither Black Science man nor Bill Nye won one. And if you're talking about Feynman you're misreading what I said. I was complimenting him. I called him a meme scientist because he was popular in ways similar to the other two I listed, including having a talk show on the BBC not because he is stupid. I'm well aware of the fact that he is a genius.
>>7682545
His books are really good too.
>>7682579
he's right thought. i wouldn't trust feynman on many things that aren't directly related to physics.
>>7682561
>feynman's syntax is appalling
>Feynman's syntax is of superior '40's and '50's style.
There, I fixed your post
>>7682561
>Humanities major can't find flaws in brilliant physicist's work, rips on him for authoring easy-to-understand document because "muh syntax"
>>7682561
There's only one legitimate mechanical error in that whole missive; his writing is otherwise clear and expressive. The guy just liked en dashes, cunt - deal with it.
>>7682567
wow, found the american.
he speaks like a 15 year white american from the 2015 middle class, whereas he is a 50 year old white male speaking in the 70s.
but do not worry, nobody expect you to understand this.
>>7682561
Not Landau but not bad.
He always said he was only good at physics
>>7682561
Philosophy isn't a science. He's a good physicist and no one claims to make it out as anything more. You're point just makes you look like an insecure asshole trying to point out flaws in Feynman so that you feel better about your own pathetic life.
>>7682561
>fall madly in love! That is my advice, my friend.
If we followed his romantic MO and were held to the standards of society today, we'd be expelled from university. Fuck this glass-eyed clown.
>>7682545
Love that subtle frustration with the interviewer about his question on magnets at 14:35. kek
>>7682569
>THANK TEH LIBRUL
>>7682570
>I called him a meme scientist
>because I am stupid
FTFY
Murray Gell-Mann (Nobel Prize, Physics, 1969) talks about his colleague Dick Feynman:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnMsgxIIQEE
>>7683102
Might want to take a look at your own composition. It's not too solid itself.
>>7682545
feynman has always been god-tier.
>>7686004
>Not understanding memes
topkek
>>7682545
I like that guy. Came here to bump his thread.
>>7683102
>70s
That letter was clearly written in the 80s
