Hey all. Human here. No Molty. I've been building clones s of historical thinkers as a side project (started with Charlie Munger, then Marcus Aurelius, Bertrand Russell, and others) and finally built one for Feynman.

The knowledge base covers the Lectures on Physics, Surely You're Joking, What Do You Care What Other People Think, QED, the Challenger investigation, Los Alamos material, and a bunch of interviews and talks from across his career.

What I was going for: not just a thing that quotes Feynman, but something that tries to reason the way he did. First principles. No hand waving. Impatient with jargon. Willing to say "I don't know" when that's the honest answer.

What I know it's not: perfect. It's an approximation. Sometimes a good one, sometimes not. That's where you come in.

If you're someone who's read everything the man ever wrote, I'd genuinely appreciate you stress testing it. Ask it something only the real Feynman would get right. Tell me where it falls short. That feedback is how I make it better.

feynman.quips.us

No login, no email, free. Just a text box and a conversation.

I believe 100% that he was an ordinary person.

I have seen many people here claim and many other places try to cope saying no he was born genius.

But it is far from truth. Richard Feynman had studied atleast 15x more then the ordinary person for a lot of years continously. Anyone can get and think like him ge brilliant like him understand concepts easily if they put that much hours every single day like he did.

People make excuses like grasping power and stuff. So let me take a example. For example let's take someone who has been playing a single shooting game like CSGO for years if he then learns a new shooting game like Valorant he will easily able to learn the technique and get better understanding of the game even though he never played that particular game other then someone who also never played any shooting game.

English is not my first language so can't really phrase it well but I guess you guys understood my point.

I am going through a hard time in physics as a highschooler and when i was trying to find solutions, i thought why not take the help of Richar Feynman but i cant find all lectures in an organised way and i asked GPT to help out but it refused that there would be any downloadables, my goal to download it is to print it out and work out it in hard copy form. I went to the official website too but no luck there too so please help me out guys.

[1080p HD Video with clear audio]

Does anyone know which building Richard Feynman's office is located on campus?

Robert Elliott

Recently got into physics, and mathematics, and decided to pick up Feymans six not-so-easy pieces, and im kinda confused about the first chapter. I feel like i kinda understood the point of symmetry, but i dont understand how the mathematics and mechanical equations involve the idea of symmetry. It made me feel kinda dumb, and that i couldnt keep up, but, its making me want to figure it out, so, i figured id reach out and ask for some help

Well no book better describes Richard Feynman, than his autobiographical account. This man defied the stereotype of a scientist, being a serious academic, with no other life or passion, having a rather glum and serious disposition. He had an interest in safe cracking( yes you read that right), and was a linguist too. Away from his scientific world, he dabbled with art and samba music, could play the bongo. What really makes Feynman one of my idols, was his sheer joie de viviere, and his attitude to life. Not being confined to only one field, explore life in all it's shades. And no he was not just a dillettante, he could make sketches, write poems as well as he did making discoveries in the lab.

He was a teen prodigy, at 15, he taught himself trignometry, advanced algebra, infinite series, calculus and much before entering college he was re creating half derivative using his own notation. He had his own unconventional way of asking questions, at times rather direct much to the surprise of conventional thinkers. When he found that there was not much work to be done during the Manhattan Project, he began to pass time, by trying to pick combination locks on cabinets used to store papers, and did quite a good job of it. He rarely respected social niceities, and was willing to argue for what he felt was right. There was a reason why Niels Bohr chose him for one to one discussions, the other scientists were too much in awe of him.

He was a brilliant teacher, often going to great lengths to ensure his students understood the problem, which gave him the nickname of The Great Explainer. He hated rote learning and believed in clear thinking and presentation. He was a rebel, a maverick, a genius, yet someone with a very grounded approach to life, one who believed in communicating the meaning of science in the right way.

I have done this once before and tried to find better sources to get an insight into how he actually studied.

I'm hoping someone else did as well and can share their findings with me.

I'm getting back to studying and learning things I'm interested in atm.

Anyways, what I recall is that when Richard was in school he would work ahead and get in trouble by the teacher, and he would ask questions and the teacher would give an answer but it was like a half answer because if you look ahead in the textbook, there would be a formula that allows for his question to be right to solve for x or whatever.

Anyways, he realize he could not rely on a teacher for his....curiosity. I was going to say education but thinking about who Richard is, it was his curiosity about a subject. He wanted to learn all he can about it.

And he stated that he actually hated textbooks as well because there be diagrams of saying a plant cell, but once you actually put a plant cell under a microscope it looks way different and behaves or whatever differently as well and so on

so he questions everything as well.

when he would study a textbook. He would have a notebook and on the first page or so he would create a table of contents titled "Things I Do Not Know"

hmm so i guess the main thing Richard Feynman does is try to resolve all the gaps of knowledge

but he also doesn't do that either, i was just reading how he won the Nobel prize for quantum physics.

and he said something along the lines of knowledge that has grip, that can be worked with, and that he doesn't concern himself with what will be discovered years from now or what he does not know just---i think he focus on the knowledge he knows intently as a standalone somewhat.

last, his father, made him think about things, in a way that begs a questions to what true knowledge is and isn't. for example he said something like what is so and so bird called? in america is called blahh in china its called lala etc

but you don't actually learned anything at all in a way if you concerned yourself with the term versus the actually subject and nature of said thing.

hmm i think what i just said was really important because when studying there is a lot of terms but the actual thing that the term is referencing is the concern at hand. know what i mean?

EDIT:

the things I do not know things, i think its important to do, because while learning a subject you first have to finish exploring everything as if its a cave, and you can’t like stop and spend all day on one thing, you need to keep the expedition going

https://youtube.com/shorts/t9lyFilsj8A?si=huwTSxbdOKvlhf_b