Talk:Richard Feynman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Former featured article Richard Feynman is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Good article Richard Feynman has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 2, 2004.
Richard Feynman is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.
Archive
Archives
/Archive 1


Contents

[edit] Cargo Cult Science

Before this goes any farther, should Feynman's coinage of "cargo cult science" be in the lead? I say no: it's already in the main article and isn't important enough for a mention in the lead. Anon 84 says yes: I honestly don't understand hir reasoning at all. What say the good editors of Wikipedia, yay or nay? --Gimme danger 22:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

It's just one thing he did, 33 years ago. I was there. But it doesn't need to be in the lead. Dicklyon 22:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
You were there!!? Truly I lived too late. Would you mind reverting? I'm leaning on the 3RR right now.--Gimme danger 22:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the talk was memorable, even with all the other things on our minds, but I had no idea it would become famous and historic. Dicklyon 22:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Name Pronunciation

The main article states pronunciation as fɑɪnmən, but the IPA page does not list ɑɪ as a vowel combination. I believe it should be faɪnmən instead. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chris Purves (talk • contribs) 15:32:46, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

Good catch! --Kjoonlee 14:06, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Superconductivity

I changed the phrases "forever eluded" to "eluded" and "later solved" to "solved"; Feynman was actually on the track to the solution but BCS got there first, *while* he was still working on superconductivity (so not "later"). 137.82.188.68 03:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

The source for the above comments is the article "Richard Feynman and Condensed Matter Physics" by David Pines, in the 1989 Physics Today Feynman memorial issue; I think the Gleick biography also mentions that Feynman wrote a note to himself before going on a trip that indicated he was focussing in on the phonon interaction that is at the heart of the BCS theory. 137.82.188.68 20:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arista Honor Society link

I checked this link - it leads to an unrelated article on a record label with a similar name. Is it a candidate for changing back to ordinary text, or is the society significant enough to have an article of its' own? Autarch 19:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Diagram

I have heard that Feynman himself referred to the Feynman diagram as "the diagram", with emphasis on "the", implying that it's the most (or even the only) important diagram. Indeed this article says that you can model "all of physics" with the Feynman diagram. Does anyone know if this is true, and can find a citation? — PhilHibbs | talk 21:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Parallel Processing

The fragment of this Richard Feynman article:

In the late 1970s, according to "Richard Feynman and the Connection Machine", Feynman played a critical role in developing the first parallel processing computer and finding innovative uses for it in numerical computing and building neural networks, as well as physical simulation with cellular automata (such as turbulent fluid flow), working with Stephen Wolfram at Caltech.[24]

is misleading, unclear, and dubious. It makes a false impression on a layman that the Connection Machine was build in the 1970s, and that it was the very first parallel processing computer, which is totally false on both accounts. If this statement is more or less left in the article then the name of that first par. proc. comp. should be explicitly given, plus respective proper sources. -- Wlod (talk) 10:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, this is all garbled. I was tempted to delete it entirely but perhaps the person responsible wants to fix it themself. Feynman didn't work with Wolfram at Caltech on the Connection Machine -- this occurred later, in the mid-1980s (when Wolfram was at the Institute for Advanced Study), when both were consulting for Thinking Machines Corp. There may be some confusion here with the Caltech Cosmic Cube parallel-computer project in which Wolfram's Ph.D. supervisor Geoffrey C. Fox played a leading role. 137.82.188.68 (talk) 04:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Challenger disaster

This fragment:

Feynman discovered that the 1 in 105 figure was reached by the highly dubious method of attempting to calculate the probability of failure of every individual part of the shuttle, and then adding these estimates together. This method is erroneous by standard probability theory: the correct way to calculate such risk is to subtract each individual factor's failure risk from unity and then multiply all differences. The product will be the net safety factor and the difference between it and unity, the net risk factor.

is messed up and should be fixed or simplified by removing the not so necessary technical details. -- Wlod (talk) 10:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, in fact this kind of calculation overvalues the probability of failure. The true risk is never higher than sum of probabilities of failure of each part. The engineers of NASA overvalued the risk in this way, so their failure is somewhere else. 83.5.211.142 (talk) 03:05, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Food-fight?

It was at Cornell, that the famous food-fight incident occurred (as highlighted in Feynman's book "Surely you're joking Mr. Feynman").

I don't think I remember this food-fight. Could someone check, please? --Kjoonlee 10:11, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I reverted it. I think I read something about a dish thrown into the air, not about food being thrown at people. --Kjoonlee 12:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] His Death

Why is there nothing in this article about his death? It's certainly relevant. -Kingoomieiii (talk) 03:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but I suspect it is because his biography isn't as widespread or popular as his own writing. I do know he had abdominal cancer, but not much else. --Kjoonlee 12:19, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Use of irregular and archaic Romanisation spelling for Japanese names

Not sure why or who did this but spelling "Sin-Itiro Tomonaga" in this way is out of whack. I lived there for 16 years and rarely encountered this way of spelling--usually used in the early part of the 20th and the later part of the 19th centuries. It is not used by public or private agencies or individuals and this has been the case for generations. The proper spelling is "Shinichiro Tomonaga" and to be accurate it should be spelled Tomonaga Shinichiro. So, who ever did this, you have not provided an accurate edit. --Malangthon (talk) 22:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] xkcd reference?

Is this really necessary? I like the xkcd series a great deal but his appearance in one of their comics seems trivial to his legacy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.145.63.2 (talk) 21:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter

This book is not on the list of books? even though it has a wikipedia page of its own. Holy bazooka 04:48, 11 May 2008 (UTC)