I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me.
For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions.
Still chewing on my sandwich, I stopped him at one point and asked him to calculate something ... anything ... with his model -- or at least set it up so that I knew in principle the calculation could be done.
He looked at me in all earnestness and said, "Oh, I view myself as sort of the Einstein type. I come up with the Big Idea, and then I let everyone else work out the details."
I stopped chewing, swallowed carefully, and composed my thoughts.
For the next half hour, we discussed what it really meant to be a physicist, how Einstein had to study the state of the art for years before even being ready to work on a Big Idea, and what would be required of this young man on his journey to becoming a theoretical physicist, which is what he wanted more than anything else in the world. Unquestionably, he was shaken. He had no idea that it took more than just intelligence and a blinding stroke of insight.
I have no qualms about having directed him this way. Any profession in the world requires an extraordinary amount of work to become tops in the field, and much of it is grinding toil. Physics is no different. Anyone who enters into such a field should not be shielded from this information, lest the moment of disillusionment come after years of wasted, dreamy ignorance. The good ones will embrace the challenge.
The other aspect of this, though, was my alarm at his perception of how Einstein worked, how he did what he did. Few of the everday Einstein fans recall, for example, that the same year he was publishing his seminal papers, he was struggling to get his PhD thesis approved, and he was working at a side job because no one at the university could find money to support him. In this 100th anniversary of some of his singular accomplishments, I think it's worthwhile reminding people about how much hard work, how much formal training, and how much time spent simply learning, went into those accomplishments.
> I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He > had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department > to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The > department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me.
> For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new > unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic > description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions.
> Still chewing on my sandwich, I stopped him at one point and asked him > to calculate something ... anything ... with his model -- or at least > set it up so that I knew in principle the calculation could be done.
> He looked at me in all earnestness and said, "Oh, I view myself as sort > of the Einstein type. I come up with the Big Idea, and then I let > everyone else work out the details."
> I stopped chewing, swallowed carefully, and composed my thoughts.
> For the next half hour, we discussed what it really meant to be a > physicist, how Einstein had to study the state of the art for years > before even being ready to work on a Big Idea, and what would be > required of this young man on his journey to becoming a theoretical > physicist, which is what he wanted more than anything else in the > world. Unquestionably, he was shaken. He had no idea that it took more > than just intelligence and a blinding stroke of insight.
> I have no qualms about having directed him this way. Any profession in > the world requires an extraordinary amount of work to become tops in > the field, and much of it is grinding toil. Physics is no different. > Anyone who enters into such a field should not be shielded from this > information, lest the moment of disillusionment come after years of > wasted, dreamy ignorance. The good ones will embrace the challenge.
> The other aspect of this, though, was my alarm at his perception of how > Einstein worked, how he did what he did. Few of the everday Einstein > fans recall, for example, that the same year he was publishing his > seminal papers, he was struggling to get his PhD thesis approved, and > he was working at a side job because no one at the university could > find money to support him. In this 100th anniversary of some of his > singular accomplishments, I think it's worthwhile reminding people > about how much hard work, how much formal training, and how much time > spent simply learning, went into those accomplishments.
In article <1110391716.864567.112...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
PD <pdra...@yahoo.com> wrote: >I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He >had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department >to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The >department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me.
I'm not sure what to say about this story, but feel that it should at least be acknowledged. I wonder how many people really think the greats of physics work by daydream and let others handle all that math stuff.
-- "Is that plutonium on your gums?" "Shut up and kiss me!" -- Marge and Homer Simpson
> I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He > had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department > to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The > department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me.
> For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new > unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic > description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions.
> Still chewing on my sandwich, I stopped him at one point and asked him > to calculate something ... anything ... with his model -- or at least > set it up so that I knew in principle the calculation could be done.
> He looked at me in all earnestness and said, "Oh, I view myself as sort > of the Einstein type. I come up with the Big Idea, and then I let > everyone else work out the details."
> I stopped chewing, swallowed carefully, and composed my thoughts.
> For the next half hour, we discussed what it really meant to be a > physicist, how Einstein had to study the state of the art for years > before even being ready to work on a Big Idea, and what would be > required of this young man on his journey to becoming a theoretical > physicist, which is what he wanted more than anything else in the > world. Unquestionably, he was shaken. He had no idea that it took more > than just intelligence and a blinding stroke of insight.
> I have no qualms about having directed him this way. Any profession in > the world requires an extraordinary amount of work to become tops in > the field, and much of it is grinding toil. Physics is no different. > Anyone who enters into such a field should not be shielded from this > information, lest the moment of disillusionment come after years of > wasted, dreamy ignorance. The good ones will embrace the challenge.
The First World root password is "gimme." One is hard-pressed to find a Caucasian face in any reputable contemporary hard science graduate school. Bachelors degrees in remedial studies (high school) are a reality. Awarding a grade lower than B is cause for civil suit.
> The other aspect of this, though, was my alarm at his perception of how > Einstein worked, how he did what he did. Few of the everday Einstein > fans recall, for example, that the same year he was publishing his > seminal papers, he was struggling to get his PhD thesis approved, and > he was working at a side job because no one at the university could > find money to support him. In this 100th anniversary of some of his > singular accomplishments, I think it's worthwhile reminding people > about how much hard work, how much formal training, and how much time > spent simply learning, went into those accomplishments.
Hate language, all of it. The drudgery of objective accomplishment is historic White Protestant European oppression of Peoples of Colour. What objective qualifications are necessary for a university diversity admission, e.g., University of Michigan? None at all! The USSR was dedicated to compensatory advancement of peasant stock and look how far it got (though with a bunch of whipped Jews doing all the skull sweat).
The US utterly despises the Severely Gifted. Massive massively expensive social engineering efforts - Title 1, Title IX, Project Head Start - are directed toward genetic, developmental, and behavioral trash; reproductive warriors, hind gut fermenters, drug addicts, Enviro-whiner Luddites; the stupid, the pathetic, and the Officially Sad. A 170 IQ will get you Aderall and a kick in the pants; spina bifida or Trisomy 21 is a $100K/annum free ride forever. We are purchasing a future we loathe, and at heavily inflated prices.
The child was a nascent social advocate. He is fully qualified to snap a whip over fungible bent backs and be richly rewarded for doing it. How can Management be held responsible when they never lift the heavy end? Management makes decisions, workers make mistakes.
> In article > <1110391716.864567.112...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, > PD <pdra...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>I had a high school student come into my >> office on campus one day. He had been >> encouraged by his mother to come visit >> the physics department to discuss his >> ideas because she thought he was brilliant. >> The department chair, in his infinite >> wisdom, sent the young man to me.
> I'm not sure what to say about this story, > but feel that it should at least be > acknowledged. I wonder how many > people really think the greats of physics > work by daydream and let others handle > all that math stuff.
You can thank or blame popular press for that.
It was inconvenient to have to fly a ship down to the surface (Star Trek), and yet they needed transport to be part of the drama, so the "transporter" was developed. What is impressed on the population is to come up with the ideas, and you can buy the talent to breathe life into it (ads for InvenTech as an example). When difficult and tedious *work* is to be presented to the public, it is cut short by a "fade" to the result. What isn't glamorous is the work. What is noteworthy (in that limited context) are the seed and the fruit.
Not saying it is right. Just saying that is how Mom and Pop are "raised". IMHO.
"PD" <pdra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1110391716.864567.112540@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He > had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department > to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The > department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me.
> For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new > unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic > description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions.
> Still chewing on my sandwich, I stopped him at one point and asked him > to calculate something ... anything ... with his model -- or at least > set it up so that I knew in principle the calculation could be done.
> He looked at me in all earnestness and said, "Oh, I view myself as sort > of the Einstein type. I come up with the Big Idea, and then I let > everyone else work out the details."
> I stopped chewing, swallowed carefully, and composed my thoughts.
> For the next half hour, we discussed what it really meant to be a > physicist, how Einstein had to study the state of the art for years > before even being ready to work on a Big Idea, and what would be > required of this young man on his journey to becoming a theoretical > physicist, which is what he wanted more than anything else in the > world. Unquestionably, he was shaken. He had no idea that it took more > than just intelligence and a blinding stroke of insight.
> I have no qualms about having directed him this way. Any profession in > the world requires an extraordinary amount of work to become tops in > the field, and much of it is grinding toil. Physics is no different. > Anyone who enters into such a field should not be shielded from this > information, lest the moment of disillusionment come after years of > wasted, dreamy ignorance. The good ones will embrace the challenge.
> The other aspect of this, though, was my alarm at his perception of how > Einstein worked, how he did what he did. Few of the everday Einstein > fans recall, for example, that the same year he was publishing his > seminal papers, he was struggling to get his PhD thesis approved, and > he was working at a side job because no one at the university could > find money to support him. In this 100th anniversary of some of his > singular accomplishments, I think it's worthwhile reminding people > about how much hard work, how much formal training, and how much time > spent simply learning, went into those accomplishments.
> I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He > had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department > to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The > department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me.
> For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new > unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic > description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions.
> Still chewing on my sandwich, I stopped him at one point and asked him > to calculate something ... anything ... with his model -- or at least > set it up so that I knew in principle the calculation could be done.
> He looked at me in all earnestness and said, "Oh, I view myself as sort > of the Einstein type. I come up with the Big Idea, and then I let > everyone else work out the details."
> I stopped chewing, swallowed carefully, and composed my thoughts.
> For the next half hour, we discussed what it really meant to be a > physicist, how Einstein had to study the state of the art for years > before even being ready to work on a Big Idea, and what would be > required of this young man on his journey to becoming a theoretical > physicist, which is what he wanted more than anything else in the > world. Unquestionably, he was shaken. He had no idea that it took more > than just intelligence and a blinding stroke of insight.
> I have no qualms about having directed him this way. Any profession in > the world requires an extraordinary amount of work to become tops in > the field, and much of it is grinding toil. Physics is no different. > Anyone who enters into such a field should not be shielded from this > information, lest the moment of disillusionment come after years of > wasted, dreamy ignorance. The good ones will embrace the challenge.
> The other aspect of this, though, was my alarm at his perception of how > Einstein worked, how he did what he did. Few of the everday Einstein > fans recall, for example, that the same year he was publishing his > seminal papers, he was struggling to get his PhD thesis approved, and > he was working at a side job because no one at the university could > find money to support him. In this 100th anniversary of some of his > singular accomplishments, I think it's worthwhile reminding people > about how much hard work, how much formal training, and how much time > spent simply learning, went into those accomplishments.
> "PD" <pdra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:1110391716.864567.112540@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > > I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He > > had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department > > to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The > > department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me.
> > For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new > > unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic > > description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions.
> > Still chewing on my sandwich, I stopped him at one point and asked him > > to calculate something ... anything ... with his model -- or at least > > set it up so that I knew in principle the calculation could be done.
> > He looked at me in all earnestness and said, "Oh, I view myself as > sort > > of the Einstein type. I come up with the Big Idea, and then I let > > everyone else work out the details."
> > I stopped chewing, swallowed carefully, and composed my thoughts.
> > For the next half hour, we discussed what it really meant to be a > > physicist, how Einstein had to study the state of the art for years > > before even being ready to work on a Big Idea, and what would be > > required of this young man on his journey to becoming a theoretical > > physicist, which is what he wanted more than anything else in the > > world. Unquestionably, he was shaken. He had no idea that it took more > > than just intelligence and a blinding stroke of insight.
> > I have no qualms about having directed him this way. Any profession in > > the world requires an extraordinary amount of work to become tops in > > the field, and much of it is grinding toil. Physics is no different. > > Anyone who enters into such a field should not be shielded from this > > information, lest the moment of disillusionment come after years of > > wasted, dreamy ignorance. The good ones will embrace the challenge.
> > The other aspect of this, though, was my alarm at his perception of > how > > Einstein worked, how he did what he did. Few of the everday Einstein > > fans recall, for example, that the same year he was publishing his > > seminal papers, he was struggling to get his PhD thesis approved, and > > he was working at a side job because no one at the university could > > find money to support him. In this 100th anniversary of some of his > > singular accomplishments, I think it's worthwhile reminding people > > about how much hard work, how much formal training, and how much time > > spent simply learning, went into those accomplishments.
Thanks for the complement of starting a new thread just to put me down although I 'm not sure its me as it could be anybody like me that tries to think for themselves but thanks anyway LOL goto new impoved facts v012 but only if you are interested but thank for the memory and I wont post to your threads again. My farther was a teacher so I know how you must feel. Three frames may be needed.
>> I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He >> had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department >> to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The >> department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me.
>> For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new >> unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic >> description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions.
>> Still chewing on my sandwich, I stopped him at one point and asked him >> to calculate something ... anything ... with his model -- or at least >> set it up so that I knew in principle the calculation could be done.
>> He looked at me in all earnestness and said, "Oh, I view myself as sort >> of the Einstein type. I come up with the Big Idea, and then I let >> everyone else work out the details."
>> I stopped chewing, swallowed carefully, and composed my thoughts.
>> For the next half hour, we discussed what it really meant to be a >> physicist, how Einstein had to study the state of the art for years >> before even being ready to work on a Big Idea, and what would be >> required of this young man on his journey to becoming a theoretical >> physicist, which is what he wanted more than anything else in the >> world. Unquestionably, he was shaken. He had no idea that it took more >> than just intelligence and a blinding stroke of insight.
>> I have no qualms about having directed him this way. Any profession in >> the world requires an extraordinary amount of work to become tops in >> the field, and much of it is grinding toil. Physics is no different. >> Anyone who enters into such a field should not be shielded from this >> information, lest the moment of disillusionment come after years of >> wasted, dreamy ignorance. The good ones will embrace the challenge.
> The First World root password is "gimme." One is hard-pressed to find > a Caucasian face in any reputable contemporary hard science graduate > school. Bachelors degrees in remedial studies (high school) are a > reality. Awarding a grade lower than B is cause for civil suit.
>> The other aspect of this, though, was my alarm at his perception of how >> Einstein worked, how he did what he did. Few of the everday Einstein >> fans recall, for example, that the same year he was publishing his >> seminal papers, he was struggling to get his PhD thesis approved, and >> he was working at a side job because no one at the university could >> find money to support him. In this 100th anniversary of some of his >> singular accomplishments, I think it's worthwhile reminding people >> about how much hard work, how much formal training, and how much time >> spent simply learning, went into those accomplishments.
> Hate language, all of it. The drudgery of objective accomplishment is > historic White Protestant European oppression of Peoples of Colour. > What objective qualifications are necessary for a university diversity > admission, e.g., University of Michigan? None at all! The USSR was > dedicated to compensatory advancement of peasant stock and look how > far it got (though with a bunch of whipped Jews doing all the skull > sweat).
> The US utterly despises the Severely Gifted. Massive massively > expensive social engineering efforts - Title 1, Title IX, Project Head > Start - are directed toward genetic, developmental, and behavioral > trash; reproductive warriors, hind gut fermenters, drug addicts, > Enviro-whiner Luddites; the stupid, the pathetic, and the Officially > Sad. > A 170 IQ will get you Aderall and a kick in the pants;
Hah.... you got that right. Concurrently they put you on a antidepressant that is highly addictive and makes it so you cannot think straight. Any bipolar induced creativity is quashed, you end up starving from lack of funding and still have to pay $200 a month to feed the addiction.
> spina > bifida or Trisomy 21 is a $100K/annum free ride forever. We are > purchasing a future we loathe, and at heavily inflated prices.
As they say at CU's disabilities advocation center... "Don't dis our disabilities".
Ebonics is pervasive... even in the peoples republic of Boulder. *sigh*
> I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He > had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department > to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The > department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me. >For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new >unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic >description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions
<Interesting post snipped to save B/W>
What happened to him? Hope he came back with the details!
> I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He > had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department > to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The > department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me.
> For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new > unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic > description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions.
> Still chewing on my sandwich, I stopped him at one point and asked him > to calculate something ... anything ... with his model -- or at least > set it up so that I knew in principle the calculation could be done.
> He looked at me in all earnestness and said, "Oh, I view myself as sort > of the Einstein type. I come up with the Big Idea, and then I let > everyone else work out the details."
> I stopped chewing, swallowed carefully, and composed my thoughts.
> For the next half hour, we discussed what it really meant to be a > physicist, how Einstein had to study the state of the art for years > before even being ready to work on a Big Idea, and what would be > required of this young man on his journey to becoming a theoretical > physicist, which is what he wanted more than anything else in the > world. Unquestionably, he was shaken. He had no idea that it took more > than just intelligence and a blinding stroke of insight.
> I have no qualms about having directed him this way. Any profession in > the world requires an extraordinary amount of work to become tops in > the field, and much of it is grinding toil. Physics is no different. > Anyone who enters into such a field should not be shielded from this > information, lest the moment of disillusionment come after years of > wasted, dreamy ignorance. The good ones will embrace the challenge.
> The other aspect of this, though, was my alarm at his perception of how > Einstein worked, how he did what he did. Few of the everday Einstein > fans recall, for example, that the same year he was publishing his > seminal papers, he was struggling to get his PhD thesis approved, and > he was working at a side job because no one at the university could > find money to support him. In this 100th anniversary of some of his > singular accomplishments, I think it's worthwhile reminding people > about how much hard work, how much formal training, and how much time > spent simply learning, went into those accomplishments.
'Feynman seemed to possess a frightening ease with the substance behind the equations, like Einstein at the same age, like the Soviet physicist Lev Landau - but few others.'
It is this ease with what the equations are saying that is required to make progress in physics - and the work needed to gain that ease is, even for the greats like Einstein, Feynman and Landau a long and difficult journey. Einstein himself remarked that most of his ideas amounted to nothing - only occasionally would it result in progress. Pias in Inward Bound comments it is the ability to ask the right question - but to formulate the right question a lot of hard work and the following of blind alleys needs to have occurred.
> "Schroedinger's Cat" <anonym...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:bzJXd.7340$C47.5119@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com... > > "PD" <pdra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:1110391716.864567.112540@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > > > I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He > > > had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department > > > to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The > > > department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me.
> > > For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new > > > unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic > > > description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions.
> > > Still chewing on my sandwich, I stopped him at one point and asked him > > > to calculate something ... anything ... with his model -- or at least > > > set it up so that I knew in principle the calculation could be done.
> > > He looked at me in all earnestness and said, "Oh, I view myself as > > sort > > > of the Einstein type. I come up with the Big Idea, and then I let > > > everyone else work out the details."
> > > I stopped chewing, swallowed carefully, and composed my thoughts.
> > > For the next half hour, we discussed what it really meant to be a > > > physicist, how Einstein had to study the state of the art for years > > > before even being ready to work on a Big Idea, and what would be > > > required of this young man on his journey to becoming a theoretical > > > physicist, which is what he wanted more than anything else in the > > > world. Unquestionably, he was shaken. He had no idea that it took more > > > than just intelligence and a blinding stroke of insight.
> > > I have no qualms about having directed him this way. Any profession in > > > the world requires an extraordinary amount of work to become tops in > > > the field, and much of it is grinding toil. Physics is no different. > > > Anyone who enters into such a field should not be shielded from this > > > information, lest the moment of disillusionment come after years of > > > wasted, dreamy ignorance. The good ones will embrace the challenge.
> > > The other aspect of this, though, was my alarm at his perception of > > how > > > Einstein worked, how he did what he did. Few of the everday Einstein > > > fans recall, for example, that the same year he was publishing his > > > seminal papers, he was struggling to get his PhD thesis approved, and > > > he was working at a side job because no one at the university could > > > find money to support him. In this 100th anniversary of some of his > > > singular accomplishments, I think it's worthwhile reminding people > > > about how much hard work, how much formal training, and how much time > > > spent simply learning, went into those accomplishments.
> LOL goto new impoved facts v012 but only if you are interested but thank for > the memory and I wont post to your threads again. My farther was a teacher > so I know how you must feel. Three frames may be needed.
> He worked hard, and that is the inescapable theme behind PD's post.
Yes indeed - he worked very hard. And when his work was examined by Hardy and Littlewood it was immediately recognized as the work of genius. True genius is very difficult to suppress - however crank spew is usually easy to spot. And although Einstein early work had a mixed initial reception greats like Plank immediatly recognized he was a master physicist.
In article <1110391716.864567.112...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, "PD" <pdra...@yahoo.com> writes: >I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He >had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department >to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The >department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me.
>For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new >unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic >description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions.
>Still chewing on my sandwich, I stopped him at one point and asked him >to calculate something ... anything ... with his model -- or at least >set it up so that I knew in principle the calculation could be done.
>He looked at me in all earnestness and said, "Oh, I view myself as sort >of the Einstein type. I come up with the Big Idea, and then I let >everyone else work out the details."
>I stopped chewing, swallowed carefully, and composed my thoughts.
>For the next half hour, we discussed what it really meant to be a >physicist, how Einstein had to study the state of the art for years >before even being ready to work on a Big Idea, and what would be >required of this young man on his journey to becoming a theoretical >physicist, which is what he wanted more than anything else in the >world. Unquestionably, he was shaken. He had no idea that it took more >than just intelligence and a blinding stroke of insight.
>I have no qualms about having directed him this way. Any profession in >the world requires an extraordinary amount of work to become tops in >the field, and much of it is grinding toil. Physics is no different. >Anyone who enters into such a field should not be shielded from this >information, lest the moment of disillusionment come after years of >wasted, dreamy ignorance. The good ones will embrace the challenge.
>The other aspect of this, though, was my alarm at his perception of how >Einstein worked, how he did what he did. Few of the everday Einstein >fans recall, for example, that the same year he was publishing his >seminal papers, he was struggling to get his PhD thesis approved, and >he was working at a side job because no one at the university could >find money to support him. In this 100th anniversary of some of his >singular accomplishments, I think it's worthwhile reminding people >about how much hard work, how much formal training, and how much time >spent simply learning, went into those accomplishments.
Worthwhile, for sure. Only, who'll do it? The "zero goal education", as Al calls it? The media, who generally know nothing about it either? Fact is, if you'll ask either well educated people, most of tehm won't have the faintest idea of what was it that Einstein did, they'll just mumbel something to the effect that he "revolutionized physics". If you'll press for more details you'll get something like "he proved that everything is relative":-) And that would be the end of it.
The image the general public has, regarding scientific progress (to the extent that the general public cares at all) is:
1) The scientist sits and ponders. 2) The scientist has a "Eureka" moment and all becomes clear. 3) The scientist announces Idea to other scientists. 4) Everybody immediately recognizes Idea as Great. 5) Closing credits roll.
For added drama step (4) may be replaced by "Scientist is being derided by his peers, has to fight for his Idea till eventually Truth prevails". this can be further elaborated on, of course:-)
Well, nevermind. But, thank you for posting the above. this was worthwhile.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool, me...@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
> He worked hard, and that is the inescapable theme behind PD's post.
He was a "big ideas" person who left the details to others. He could almost never prove his theorems or offer and corroborating detail, but they were almost always (those for which the truth could be ascertained either way) true. While he worked hard, his formal education was relatively thin. I see him as both confirming (by having to work hard) and contradicting (by being ready for big ideas after not mastering the state of the art; i.e. he started his brilliant contributions after only reading what amounts to a dictionary of mathematical formulae) PD's post at once.
news:1110391716.864567.112540@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... | I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He | had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department | to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The | department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me. | | For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new | unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic | description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions. | | Still chewing on my sandwich, I stopped him at one point and asked him | to calculate something ... anything ... with his model -- or at least | set it up so that I knew in principle the calculation could be done. | | He looked at me in all earnestness and said, "Oh, I view myself as sort | of the Einstein type. I come up with the Big Idea, and then I let | everyone else work out the details." | | I stopped chewing, swallowed carefully, and composed my thoughts. | | For the next half hour, we discussed what it really meant to be a | physicist, how Einstein had to study the state of the art for years | before even being ready to work on a Big Idea, and what would be | required of this young man on his journey to becoming a theoretical | physicist, which is what he wanted more than anything else in the | world. Unquestionably, he was shaken. He had no idea that it took more | than just intelligence and a blinding stroke of insight. | | I have no qualms about having directed him this way. Any profession in | the world requires an extraordinary amount of work to become tops in | the field, and much of it is grinding toil. Physics is no different. | Anyone who enters into such a field should not be shielded from this | information, lest the moment of disillusionment come after years of | wasted, dreamy ignorance. The good ones will embrace the challenge. | | The other aspect of this, though, was my alarm at his perception of how | Einstein worked, how he did what he did. Few of the everday Einstein | fans recall, for example, that the same year he was publishing his | seminal papers, he was struggling to get his PhD thesis approved, and | he was working at a side job because no one at the university could | find money to support him. In this 100th anniversary of some of his | singular accomplishments, I think it's worthwhile reminding people | about how much hard work, how much formal training, and how much time | spent simply learning, went into those accomplishments. | | PD
Yep, very good post. Some young punks just need a good slappin' around even if only verbally. ;-) Even being an electronic systems engineer and head of an engineering dept., I spend a good deal of my free time learning new things all the time. It never stops if you want to be one of the best in your field of expertice.
>'Feynman seemed to possess a frightening ease with the substance behind the >equations, like Einstein at the same age, like the Soviet physicist Lev >Landau - but few others.'
>It is this ease with what the equations are saying that is required to make >progress in physics - and the work needed to gain that ease is, even for the >greats like Einstein, Feynman and Landau a long and difficult journey. >Einstein himself remarked that most of his ideas amounted to nothing - only >occasionally would it result in progress. Pias in Inward Bound comments it >is the ability to ask the right question - but to formulate the right >question a lot of hard work and the following of blind alleys needs to have >occurred.
There is something a little bit depressing hidden in this; not everyone can be an Einstein or a Feynman, no matter how hard they try. Just as few people can be a Michael Jordon even if they work day and night at it. Some people are decent athletes in spite of themselves; the couch potato that bends down and picks up 350 pounds on his first deadlift, or the guy riding a unicycle 20 minutes after he first lays hands on it. And some people become decent athletes through hard work and the love of the game. The pros are the ones that would have been good in spite of themselves, but they bust their asses as hard as any starry eyed wannabe can imagine. And an Einstein or a Feynman would have excelled at anything they tried to do; they happened to like physics and they busted their asses doing it. Hard work and inspiring platitudes alone can only make you good, not great. -- "When the fool walks through the street, in his lack of understanding he calls everything foolish." -- Ecclesiastes 10:3, New American Bible
PD wrote: > I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He > had been encouraged by his mother to come visit the physics department > to discuss his ideas because she thought he was brilliant. The > department chair, in his infinite wisdom, sent the young man to me.
> For a half hour, the lad drew pictures on my chalkboard of a new > unified field theory. No math, mind you, just a lot of enthusiastic > description and squiggly figures and semiplausible notions.
> Still chewing on my sandwich, I stopped him at one point and asked him > to calculate something ... anything ... with his model -- or at least > set it up so that I knew in principle the calculation could be done.
> He looked at me in all earnestness and said, "Oh, I view myself as sort > of the Einstein type. I come up with the Big Idea, and then I let > everyone else work out the details."
> I stopped chewing, swallowed carefully, and composed my thoughts.
> For the next half hour, we discussed what it really meant to be a > physicist, how Einstein had to study the state of the art for years > before even being ready to work on a Big Idea, and what would be > required of this young man on his journey to becoming a theoretical > physicist, which is what he wanted more than anything else in the > world. Unquestionably, he was shaken. He had no idea that it took more > than just intelligence and a blinding stroke of insight.
> I have no qualms about having directed him this way. Any profession in > the world requires an extraordinary amount of work to become tops in > the field, and much of it is grinding toil. Physics is no different. > Anyone who enters into such a field should not be shielded from this > information, lest the moment of disillusionment come after years of > wasted, dreamy ignorance. The good ones will embrace the challenge.
> The other aspect of this, though, was my alarm at his perception of how > Einstein worked, how he did what he did. Few of the everday Einstein > fans recall, for example, that the same year he was publishing his > seminal papers, he was struggling to get his PhD thesis approved, and > he was working at a side job because no one at the university could > find money to support him. In this 100th anniversary of some of his > singular accomplishments, I think it's worthwhile reminding people > about how much hard work, how much formal training, and how much time > spent simply learning, went into those accomplishments.
> PD
Logic is wasted on those who are unversed in logical principles. Those who are prone to consider flights of fancy are those who are unversed in logical principles. Complete the syllogism.
Einstein's abilities transcended education. His was the gift of logical abstraction. Confucius says: The ability to sing cannot be learned, but like the cricket among the other insects; some can and some can't.
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 01:42:24 +0000, Gregory L. Hansen wrote: > In article <rALXd.191143$K7.97...@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, > Bill Hobba <bho...@rubbish.net.au> wrote:
>>'Feynman seemed to possess a frightening ease with the substance behind the >>equations, like Einstein at the same age, like the Soviet physicist Lev >>Landau - but few others.'
>>It is this ease with what the equations are saying that is required to make >>progress in physics - and the work needed to gain that ease is, even for the >>greats like Einstein, Feynman and Landau a long and difficult journey. >>Einstein himself remarked that most of his ideas amounted to nothing - only >>occasionally would it result in progress. Pias in Inward Bound comments it >>is the ability to ask the right question - but to formulate the right >>question a lot of hard work and the following of blind alleys needs to have >>occurred.
> There is something a little bit depressing hidden in this; not everyone > can be an Einstein or a Feynman, no matter how hard they try. Just as few > people can be a Michael Jordon even if they work day and night at it. > Some people are decent athletes in spite of themselves; the couch potato > that bends down and picks up 350 pounds on his first deadlift, or the guy > riding a unicycle 20 minutes after he first lays hands on it. And some > people become decent athletes through hard work and the love of the game. > The pros are the ones that would have been good in spite of themselves, > but they bust their asses as hard as any starry eyed wannabe can imagine. > And an Einstein or a Feynman would have excelled at anything they tried to > do; they happened to like physics and they busted their asses doing it. > Hard work and inspiring platitudes alone can only make you good, not > great.
In my opinion one should not care so much. If the subject alone isn't enough to spur one on then why bother? Is it clear Einstein gave a damn what people thought? My bet is he just wanted to know.
in order to be a good pioneering scientist you must * always *osciate*- between your superiority complex and your inferiodity complex! all the best Y.Porat ----------------------------
> > He worked hard, and that is the inescapable theme behind PD's post.
> He was a "big ideas" person who left the details to others. He could > almost never prove his theorems or offer and corroborating detail, but > they were almost always (those for which the truth could be ascertained > either way) true. While he worked hard, his formal education was > relatively thin. I see him as both confirming (by having to work hard) > and contradicting (by being ready for big ideas after not mastering the > state of the art; i.e. he started his brilliant contributions after only > reading what amounts to a dictionary of mathematical formulae) PD's post > at once.
Hmmmmm. I see your point and agree that Ramanujan's standards of mathematical rigor were not the best. But many authors have commented that Einstein's standards of rigor in physical analysis was often also suspect - eg Krietchmans valid criticisms of the principle of general covariance. It has been commented that Newton and Einstein were like sleep walkers - intuitively knowing where they wanted to go but not able to fully elucidate it. My readings of the life of Ramanujan suggests he was also a sleepwalker. I suspect many other great mathematicians and physics were also sleepwalkers eg I suspect Feynman was one as well. It has often been commented Feynman was no ordinary genius - he was a magician - I think Einstein and Ramanujan were magicians as well.
In article <d0ot49$qt...@peabody.colorado.edu>, "Michael Varney" <var...@collorado.edu> wrote:
>"FrediFizzx" <fredifi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:399k3jF60caruU1@individual.net... >> "PD" <pdra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> news:1110391716.864567.112540@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... >> | I had a high school student come into my office on campus one day. He ><SNIP> >> Yep, very good post. Some young punks just need a good slappin' around >> even if only verbally. ;-) Even being an electronic systems engineer
>Oh brother.
heh! Don't dis us engineers...until we try to tell you how to do your job ;-).
> > > He worked hard, and that is the inescapable theme behind PD's post.
> > He was a "big ideas" person who left the details to others. He could > > almost never prove his theorems or offer and corroborating detail, but > > they were almost always (those for which the truth could be ascertained > > either way) true. While he worked hard, his formal education was > > relatively thin. I see him as both confirming (by having to work hard) > > and contradicting (by being ready for big ideas after not mastering the > > state of the art; i.e. he started his brilliant contributions after only > > reading what amounts to a dictionary of mathematical formulae) PD's post > > at once.
> Hmmmmm. I see your point and agree that Ramanujan's standards of > mathematical rigor were not the best. But many authors have commented that > Einstein's standards of rigor in physical analysis was often also suspect - > eg Krietchmans valid criticisms of the principle of general covariance. It > has been commented that Newton and Einstein were like sleep walkers - > intuitively knowing where they wanted to go but not able to fully elucidate > it. My readings of the life of Ramanujan suggests he was also a > sleepwalker. I suspect many other great mathematicians and physics were > also sleepwalkers eg I suspect Feynman was one as well. It has often been > commented Feynman was no ordinary genius - he was a magician - I think > Einstein and Ramanujan were magicians as well.
Feynman exercised magic when he knew where he wanted to go and then plotted the math to get there. Heisenberg and Dirac and Teller (yes, Teller) did exactly the same thing. Ed Witten does the same thing. Lee Smolin does the same thing.
But recall the time that Feynman spent in strip clubs was (famously) spent *calculating*.
|
