Way of Thinking by Richard Feynman | The Cosmological Reality #richardfeynman #universe #cosmos
Summary
TLDRThe transcript explores the idea that anyone can become a scientist with dedication and study, debunking the myth of innate talent for complex subjects like quantum mechanics. It delves into the personal experience of thinking and problem-solving, highlighting the unique mental imagery individuals use when processing information. The speaker also discusses the challenge of visualizing atomic behavior, suggesting that while mathematical equations can predict outcomes, a clear, intuitive picture of quantum phenomena remains elusive. The conversation contemplates the evolution of understanding and whether future generations might develop new ways to conceptualize the quantum world.
Takeaways
- π The concept that anyone can become a scientist through hard work and study is emphasized, dispelling the myth of innate talent or 'miracle' abilities.
- π§ The speaker describes the complexity of understanding advanced concepts like quantum mechanics and electromagnetic fields, highlighting the need for practice, reading, and learning.
- π€ The personal experience of the speaker working with complex ideas, suggesting that the process is rapid and involves a blend of equations and imagery.
- π₯ The idea that each person's mental imagery and thought processes may be very different, even when discussing the same topic, is introduced.
- π The experiment with counting to understand time sense and the difficulty of multitasking, such as counting and speaking simultaneously, is shared.
- π The realization that different people visualize counting differently, with one person seeing a 'tape with numbers' and another using an internal voice.
- π The discussion of how our brains are designed for ordinary circumstances and may struggle with the extraordinary behavior of quantum particles.
- π The acknowledgment that while we can calculate the behavior of atoms mathematically, we often lack a clear, intuitive picture of their behavior.
- π¬ The speaker's belief that future generations may develop new ways of understanding and visualizing complex scientific concepts more effectively.
- π‘ The possibility that there may not be a 'right picture' for quantum phenomena, suggesting that our understanding may need to be abstract and mathematical rather than visual.
- π« The rejection of the idea that quantum mechanics can be reduced to simple, large-scale behaviors, asserting that nature's imagination surpasses human understanding.
Q & A
What is the main idea presented in the script about becoming a scientist?
-The script suggests that anyone, even an ordinary person, can become a scientist by devoting a significant amount of time to study, work, and thinking, emphasizing that there is no special miracle talent required for understanding complex subjects like quantum mechanics.
How does the speaker describe the process of doing deep, esoteric work in science?
-The speaker describes it as a 'crazy mixture of partial equations' and having a semi-visual understanding of what the equations are conveying, which is difficult to articulate and may vary greatly between individuals.
What does the script imply about the differences in how people think and visualize complex concepts?
-The script implies that there may be significant differences in the mental imagery or semi-imagery that people use when thinking about complex concepts, suggesting that what goes on in one person's head might be very different from another's.
What experiment did the speaker conduct to understand time sense and multitasking?
-The speaker conducted an experiment where they counted to a minute (48 counts) while also trying to do other tasks like counting socks or reading lines of type in a newspaper, to see what affected their time sense and whether they could multitask effectively.
Why was the speaker unable to count socks while counting time internally?
-The speaker was unable to count socks because their 'counting machine' was being used for the internal counting of time. They had to develop a pattern recognition method to count the socks without using the internal counting mechanism.
What did the speaker discover about the differences in mental processes when comparing with John Tukey?
-The speaker discovered that when counting, John Tukey visualized a tape with numbers, which allowed him to speak while counting but not read, whereas the speaker could read but not speak during the counting process, highlighting the different mental processes used by different individuals.
What analogy does the script use to describe the difficulty of visualizing atomic behavior?
-The script uses the analogy of a computer that performs arithmetic to determine the arrival time of a car at different destinations without being able to visualize the car itself, to describe the difficulty of visualizing atomic behavior.
What is the speaker's opinion on the possibility of developing a better understanding of quantum mechanics?
-The speaker believes that through study and practice, people might develop a familiarity with quantum mechanics and atomic properties, potentially leading to new ways of teaching and understanding these complex subjects.
Why does the speaker think that some people have difficulty accepting the reality of quantum mechanics?
-The speaker suggests that the difficulty in accepting quantum mechanics is due to a deep prejudice stemming from familiarity with large-scale behavior, and a desire to find mundane, ordinary explanations for atomic behavior.
What does the script suggest about the limitations of human imagination in understanding nature?
-The script suggests that human imagination may be limited compared to the complexity and diversity of nature, and that we may never fully grasp or visualize the behavior of small-scale particles as easily as we do with larger, more familiar objects.
What is the speaker's view on the future of scientific understanding and education?
-The speaker is hopeful that future generations, through better education and training, may overcome current difficulties in visualizing and understanding complex scientific concepts, such as quantum mechanics.
Outlines
π The Pursuit of Knowledge and the Illusion of Talent
This paragraph emphasizes that there is no inherent 'miracle ability' to understand complex subjects like quantum mechanics or visualize electromagnetic fields. It suggests that anyone can become a scientist through dedication, study, and hard work. The speaker reflects on the nature of deep thought and problem-solving, describing it as a rapid, complex process involving equations and imagery. They also discuss the subjective experience of thinking, suggesting that each person's mental imagery and thought processes are unique, which can lead to communication difficulties even among experts.
π The Individuality of Thought and the Challenge of Understanding the Quantum
The speaker explores the idea that the way people think about and visualize complex concepts can vary greatly, as demonstrated by their experiment with counting and time sense. They discovered that another person, John Tukey, visualized counting differently, using an 'optical system' rather than an auditory one, allowing him to speak while counting. This leads to a broader discussion about the difficulty in understanding quantum mechanics and the behavior of particles at a small scale, which is fundamentally different from large-scale phenomena. The speaker ponders whether it's possible to develop a better understanding and familiarity with these concepts through study and practice.
π The Limitations of Human Imagination in Grasping Quantum Reality
In this paragraph, the speaker contemplates the limitations of human imagination in visualizing quantum phenomena, which behave very differently from anything on a large scale. They discuss the inadequacy of simple models like 'electrons acting like waves or particles' and the challenge of forming a clear, accurate image of atomic behavior. The speaker suggests that while mathematical equations can predict outcomes, they do not provide a visual understanding. They also touch on the idea that future generations might develop new ways of thinking and teaching that could make understanding quantum mechanics less challenging.
Mindmap
Keywords
π‘Ordinary person
π‘Quantum mechanics
π‘Miracle ability
π‘Practice
π‘Electromagnetic fields
π‘Scientist
π‘Partial equations
π‘Imagery
π‘Time sense
π‘Translation scheme
π‘Atomic behavior
π‘Nature's imagination
Highlights
The belief that anyone can understand complex concepts like quantum mechanics through dedication and study, rather than relying on innate talent.
The idea that people's internal imagery and thought processes can greatly differ even when discussing the same topic.
The challenge of describing the experience of working with high-level, abstract concepts due to the rapid and complex nature of thought.
The experiment with counting to measure time sense and the discovery of different cognitive processes when performing simple tasks.
The realization that the brain's ability to handle large-scale familiar tasks does not necessarily translate to understanding small-scale phenomena.
The notion that the brain may struggle to conceptualize quantum phenomena because they behave differently from macroscopic objects.
The comparison of understanding quantum mechanics to a computer performing calculations without visualizing the process.
The use of approximate models to understand certain aspects of atomic behavior, despite their limitations.
The difficulty in visualizing atoms and their behavior accurately, especially when considering phenomena like superfluidity in helium.
The hypothesis that future generations might develop new ways of understanding and visualizing quantum phenomena.
The ongoing debate about whether atomic behavior can be understood through large-scale analogies or if it requires a fundamentally different approach.
The importance of mathematical expressions in understanding and predicting atomic behavior, even in the absence of a clear visual image.
The possibility that the brain's evolution has not equipped us to easily understand quantum phenomena, suggesting a need for new cognitive frameworks.
The exploration of how practice and learning can change our cognitive abilities, as demonstrated by the speaker's ability to count and read simultaneously.
The discussion on the potential limitations of human imagination in understanding the natural world at the quantum level.
The reflection on the diversity of thought processes and the implications for communication and understanding in scientific discussions.
The philosophical musings on the nature of reality and our ability to comprehend it through scientific theories and mathematical models.
The emphasis on the importance of continuous learning and the potential for human understanding to evolve over time.
Transcripts
usb of an ordinary person
by studying hard would get to be able to
imagine these things like i imagine of
course
i was an ordinary person who studied
hard there's no miracle people
it just happens they got interested in
this thing
and they learned all this stuff
they're just people
there's no talent a special
miracle
ability to understand quantum mechanics
or a miracle ability
to imagine electromagnetic fields that
comes
without practice and reading and
learning and study so if you say you
take an ordinary person who's willing to
devote a great deal of time and study
and work and thinking and mathematics
and timeline then he's become a
scientist
[Music]
well when i'm actually doing my own
things and i'm working in the high you
know the deep and esoteric stuff
that i worry about
i don't think i can describe
very well
because what it's like first of all it's
like asking a centipede which light
comes after which it happens quickly and
i'm not exactly sure what flashes and
stuff go in the head but i know it's a
crazy mixture of partial equations
partial solving in the equation then
having some sort of picture of what's
happening that the equation is saying is
happening but they're not that well
separated as the words i'm using
and it's a kind of a nut nutty
thing it's very hard to describe and i
don't know that it does any good to
describe it
and i that is something that struck me
that's
very curious i suspect
that what goes on in every man's head
might be very very different
the actual imagery or semi-imagery which
comes
and then when we're talking to each
other at these high and complicated
levels and we think we're
speaking very well and we're
communicating
but what we're really doing is having
some kind of big translation scheme
going on for translating what this
fellow says into our images
which are very different i found that
out because at the very earl lowest
level
i won't go into the details but i got
interested in
well i was doing some experiments and i
was trying to figure out something about
our time sense
and so what i would do is i would count
trying to count
to a minute
actually say i'd count to 48 it then it
would be one minute so i'd calibrate
myself and i would count a minute and 48
i think i was count seconds but it's
close enough
and then it turns out if you repeat that
you can do very accurately when you get
to 48 or 47 or 49 not far off you're
very close to a minute
and and i would try to find out what
affected that time sense and whether i
could do anything at the same time as i
was counting
and i found that i could
do many things i could uh
there were some things that not for
example i had great difficulty but i was
in the high university i had to get my
laundry ready
and i was putting the socks out and i
had to make a list how many socks and it
was something like six or eight socks
and i couldn't count them because the
counting machine was you being used and
i couldn't count them until i found out
i could put them in a pattern and
recognize the number
and so i learned a way after practicing
by which i could go down on lines of
type and newspapers and see them in
groups three three three one that's a
group of ten three three three one
without saying the numbers just seeing
the groupings and could therefore count
the lines of type i practiced
in the newspaper the same time i was
counting internally the seconds and so i
would come
i could do this fantastic trick of
saying 48 that's a one minute and there
are 67 lines of type you see
it was quite wonderful
and i
discovered
many things i could read
while i was uh no i
excuse me yes
yes i could read perfectly all right
while i was counting
and get an idea of what it was about but
i couldn't speak i couldn't say anything
because of course i was sort of when i
count i sort of spoke to myself inside i
would say one two three sort of in the
head
well i went down to the
breakfast
and there was uh
john tukey was a mathematician down at
princeton at the same time and we had
many discussions and i was telling him
about these experiments and what i could
do and he says that's absurd he says
he says i don't see why you would have
any difficulty talking whatsoever and i
can't possibly believe that you could
read
so i couldn't believe all this but we
calibrated him it was 52 for him to get
to 60 seconds or whatever i don't
remember the numbers now
and then he'd say all right he said what
do you want me to say barry had a little
lamb i can speak about anything blah
blah blah blah blah blah 52 it's a
minute he was right
and i couldn't possibly do that and he
wanted me to read because he couldn't
believe it
and then we compared notes and it turned
out that when he thought of counting
what he did inside his head is when he
counted was he saw a tape with numbers
that when clink clink clink the tape
would change with the numbers printed on
it he could see
was since it's sort of an optical system
that he's using and not voice he could
speak as much as he wanted but if he had
to read then he couldn't look at his
clock
whereas for me it was the other way and
that's where i discovered
at least in this very simple operation
of counting the great difference in what
goes on in the head
when people think they're doing the same
thing
and so it struck me therefore if that's
already true at the most elementary
level that when we learn the mathematics
and the muscle functions and the
exponentials and
the electric fields and all these things
that the imagery and method by which
we're storing it all and the way we
think about it
could be it really if we could get into
each other's heads entirely different
and in fact why somebody sometimes has a
great deal of difficulty understanding a
point which you see as obvious
and vice versa it may be because it's a
little hard to translate what you just
said into his particular framework and
so on
now i'm talking like a psychologist and
you know i know nothing about this
suppose
that little things
behaved very differently than anything
that was big
anything that you're familiar with
because you see as the animal evolves
and so on as brain evolves it gets used
to handling the brain is designed
for ordinary circumstances
but if the
gut particles and the deep inner
workings were by some other rules and
some other character they behaved
differently they were very different
than anything on a large scale
then there would be some kind of
difficulty in understanding and
imagining reality
and that difficulty we are in
the behavior of things on a small scale
is so fantastic it's so wonderfully
different so marvelously different than
anything that behaves on a large scale
you say electrons act like waves no they
don't exactly they act like particles no
they don't exactly they act like a kind
of a fog around the nucleus no they
don't exactly
and if you would like to get a clear
sharp picture of an atom
so that you can tell exactly how it's
going to behave correctly i have a good
image in other words a really good image
of reality i don't know how to do it
because that image has to be
mathematical we have a mathematical
expression strange mathematics i don't
understand how it is but we can write
mathematical expressions and calculate
what the thing is going to do
without actually being able to picture
it it would be something like a computer
that you put certain numbers in and you
have the formula for at what time the
car will arrive at different
destinations and the thing does the
arithmetic to figure out what time the
car arrives at the different
destinations but cannot picture the car
it's just doing the arithmetic so we
know how to do the arithmetic but we
cannot picture
the car no it's not a hundred percent
because
for certain approximate situations a
certain kind of approximate picture
works that is simply a fog
around a nucleus that when you squeeze
it it repels you is very good for
understanding the stiffness of material
that it's a wave which does this and
that is very good for some other
phenomena all right so when you're
working with certain particular
aspects of the behavior of atoms for
instance when i was talking about
temperature
and so forth that they're just little
balls it's good enough and it gives a
very nice picture of temperature but if
you ask
more specific questions and you get down
to questions like how is it
that when you cool helium down even to
absolute zero where there's not supposed
to be any motion it's a perfect fluid
that hasn't any viscosity has no
resistance flows perfectly and isn't
freezing
well if you want to get a picture of
atoms that has all of that in it i can't
do it you see but i can explain why the
helium base as it does by taking my
equations and sowing the consequences of
them is that the healing will behave as
it is observed today so we know we have
the theory right but we haven't got the
pictures that will go with the theory
and is that
because we're limited and haven't caught
on to the right pictures
or is that because there aren't any
right pictures
for people who have to make pictures out
of things that are familiar to them well
let's suppose it's the last one
but there's no right pictures in terms
of things that are familiar to that
is it possible then
to develop a familiarity
with those things that are not familiar
on hand by study
by learning about the properties of
atoms and quantum mechanics by
practicing with the equations until it
becomes a kind of second nature just
like a second nature to know that if two
balls came toward each other they'd
smash into bits you don't say
the two balls when they come toward each
other
turn blue
you know what they do so the question is
whether you could get to know
what
things do without
better than we do today you know as the
generations develop
will they invent
ways of teaching and where so that the
new people
will learn the tricky ways of looking at
things
and be so trained so well trained
that they won't have our troubles
with the adam picturing
there's still a school of thought
that cannot believe
that the atomic behavior is so different
than large-scale behavior i think that's
a deep prejudice it's a prejudice from
being so used to large-scale
and they're always seeking
to find to waiting
for the day that we discover that
underneath the quantum mechanics there's
some mundane ordinary
balls hitting or particles moving and so
on i think they're going to be defeated
i think nature's imagination is so much
greater than man's
she's never going to let us
relax
[Music]
you
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)