Richard Feynman And A Great Explanation Of Why Science Can Be Hard To Explain

Submitted by: daegog 2 weeks ago in Science


Causes of causes.
There are 27 comments:
Male 1,544
Why?  Because people are frigin idiots...its like trying to explain quantum mechanics to your dog.
0
Reply
Male 1,833
spanz   My dog knows more about quantum mechanics then I ever will.
0
Reply
Male 1,284
casaledana ummm, you know the words 'quantum' and 'mechanics' which is already more than your dog will ever know about quantum mechanics.  So no, you do know more than your dog.  
0
Reply
Male 1,833
I think I understand his point that, to understand something you have to have a large background understanding. But there is a much simpler answer its because its science and if we all understood it we would not need scientists, and if we did not need scientists think of all the people that would be out of a job. So we need it to be complicated so they will have a job explaining science. That,s the simple science truth.
0
Reply
Male 17
casaledana No.  His point is that you need first common grounds, between the two parties, on top of which you can build an answer, otherwise the asker could always choose to argue that the answer is not satisfactory and renders the answering process moot.    
3
Reply
Male 1,833
bearbear01 Try reading my statement again what you allude to is what I said just in a different way. Which  makes makes my point.
0
Reply
Male 3,830
im quite sure everyone has read a feynman book. monkwarrior probably just watched a synopsis of him on youtube and is now a expert on the subject. because he says so. and to 5 cats there is no use talking to him either its the same wall of self deflection, anything contrary you should go fuck a stump, or you arent a real christian read the scriptures. this nanana stick your head in doo doo kind of intellectualism is hilarious. but keep on keeping on because its hilarious
1
Reply
Male 487
"I'm not answering your question, but I'm telling you how difficult a 'why' question is." (3:23)
Asked about magnets - ends up talking about slipperiness of ice. Typical scientists!  

"You have to know what it is that you're permitted to understand and allow to be understood and known and what it is you're not."
Permitted is too strong a word perhaps... Basically, he's saying: know your own understanding/limitations. If all you know about climate science is from the media and non-scientists, maybe you're not "permitted to understand."

Does that mean science is some kind of religion? Hell no! There are plenty of people who have taken the time to study any given scientific field and there is plenty of disagreement you could read in the scientific journals. Anyone can become acquainted within a scientific field, too, but it can take years.

"So, I'm NOT going to be able to give you an answer to why the magnets attract each other, except to tell you that they do." (6:44)
I can picture notable scientists giving up arguing with 5cats/monkwarrior in the same fashion. 
0
Reply
Male 41,611
boredhuman Actually? I posted this on IAB many years ago, Feynman is a genius and he's no fan of AGW I might add...

I try to tell people there's plenty of things science "doesn't know" and that in NO way can AGW Theory be "settled" because... it isn't possible! But some folks place blind trust in anyone with some fancy paperwork and give all their money away to them... and all of other people's money as well :/ 
THAT is where the problem is! If You want to lower your carbon by paying 25% too much for everything? Go ahead! Be my guest! But don't force me (at gunpoint) and millions of others to do the same...

-1
Reply
Male 3,830
5cats lol you are so short sighted
0
Reply
Male 487
5cats "Feynman is a genius and he's no fan of AGW I might add"
How can you tell? My guess is: you rely on the authority of another blogger to make your opinion.
Was it hockeyschtick or WUWT? Tell me you have at least read Feynman's writing and understand it before making claims about his beliefs. 

I'd say you're not "permitted to understand" climate change in the way the interviewer was not permitted to understand how the magnets work.

[EDIT](My guess) What you call "fancy paperwork" is considered good, peer-reviewed scientific literature. You're wrong to believe that "folks place blind trust in anyone", like Sam Carana
0
Reply
Male 41,611
boredhuman Attack the source? never seen THAT before! Wow you should apply for a patent for this brand new thing you've discovered!

No, I have not read every single thing he published. Have you? No? Then why are you making blanket claims about his beliefs? Is it... based on the writings of others perhaps? Isn't that how knowledge is supposed to work? Or does every individual have to 're-invent the wheel' before they can buy or drive a car?

Epic fail, you can haz one! Or two even...
-2
Reply
Male 487
5cats Let's clarify a few things
1) I asked a very specific question: How can you tell [Feynman's no fan of AGW]? What Feynman's literature lead you to this conclusion? Am I wrong to suspect that you were basing your conclusion solely on others' blogs?

2) I have said nothing to attack either hockeyschtick or WUWT here. I have questioned WUWT before, but that's irrelevant to this discussion.

3) I'm trying to get at the root of your understanding. You claim something about Feynman, so I'm trying to understand how you got this idea. Please share it so I, too, can read it and verify your claim.

I have read Feynman's writings both hockeyschtick and WUWT cited and neither showed Feynman's skepticism of climate science. 
0
Reply
Male 41,611
boredhuman 1) because it was in one of his videos that I watched before. I was reminded of it the other day while looking for another similar one. I took a quick look but didn't find it. It may have been in one of the ones you linked, it was not the main topic but came up yes.

2) You sure did, right there...
Of course I 'read about it' since I have not studied every paper Feynman ever wrote, and neither have you. So? Do I have to 're-invent the wheel' to drive a car? I read in a trustworthy source it is so, I saw the video with my own eyes and yes, it is so. So what's wrong with that? 

3) I didn't easily find it, you can do so I have great confidence in you!

I hope you are not a "question troll" who demands I do YOUR research FOR you every single time... that gets really old really fast...
http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.ca/2014/06/catmandos-richard-feynman-primer-for.html

BTW: Search (in Bing anyhow) "Feynman AGW fan" and #1 is:
http://www.i-am-bored.com/index.php/2017/12/richard-feynman-and-a-great-explantion-of-why-science-can-be-hard-to-explain

0
Reply
Male 3,830
5cats 5CATS WATCHED A VIDEO.  so its gotta be true
1
Reply
Male 487
5cats 
1) Keep looking. I'm genuinely prepared to be proven wrong. However, I doubt Feynman would venture outside his area of expertise to make bold claims on climate science: 
In this age of specialization men who thoroughly know one field are often incompetent to discuss another. - Feynman
2) I asked for your source and made a guess what your source could be. I hope you understand if I don't simply trust your word. 

3) I did a quick search and all I could come up with in regard to Feynman and AGW were articles like the ones I linked: hockeyschtick and WUWT. I did my research.

The reason this post comes up in bing search may just be because Feynman never said anything on AGW or climate science. (The term AGW wasn't even popular in his time)
0
Reply
Male 6,644
boredhuman unfortunately i have no reason to argue with most scientists, i'm a person of both science and faith.
-2
Reply
Male 5,308
monkwarrior Nothing I have heard you say leads me to believe you have the intellect or factual reasoning needed to be a scientist.
0
Reply
Male 6,644
markust123 As biased as you've demonstrated you are, that wouldn't surprise me one bit.
0
Reply
Male 487
monkwarrior Care to elaborate on exactly what you mean by "a person of science"? You might find it's not what people call science.

Also, I'm curious on your thoughts about the "On Bullshit" post since you are a kind of expert on the matter. 
0
Reply
Male 6,644
boredhuman The post was lame.  As for a person of both science and faith, i work in a field of science, and i'm a monk.  
-1
Reply
Male 487
monkwarrior "lame" - elegant and concise. 
What field of science is it? Computer science? Pseudoscience? ;)
0
Reply
Male 6,644
boredhuman well that won't get you any further
0
Reply
Male 487
Good, let's leave it here. Resist the urge to reply! :)
0
Reply
Male 3,830
boredhuman his work in science is a study on being really vapid online leads to derpy conversations
1
Reply
Male 6,644
boredhuman fine by me
0
Reply