I never understood the appeal of Feynman and these Lectures. It has been a constant topic for years around here.
For example, the Electricity and Magnetism book by Purcell is phenomenal but it is hardly ever mentioned. To quote wikipedia,
Electricity and Magnetism is a standard textbook in electromagnetism originally written by Nobel laureate Edward Mills Purcell in 1963. Along with David Griffiths' Introduction to Electrodynamics, this book is one of the most widely adopted undergraduate textbooks in electromagnetism. A Sputnik-era project funded by the National Science Foundation grant, the book is influential for its use of relativity in the presentation of the subject at the undergraduate level. In 1999, it was noted by Norman Foster Ramsey Jr. that the book was widely adopted and has many foreign translations.
Feynman was a uniquely gifted teacher that made things intuitive and simple. Those other books are course textbooks for physics majors, and they require an order of magnitude more effort and time to understand.
When I was a physics student the best students seemed to use both types of materials simultaneously. A work like Feynmans would give a bigger picture and more intuitive understanding of what is going on and help you not miss the forest for the trees so to speak, the regular textbooks will teach you all of the little details and math tricks you need to actually solve difficult problems with these concepts.
Angela Collier has a 3-hour video on the topic (The Sham Legacy of Richard Feynman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwKpj2ISQAc) with funny takes and criticism. It has been a while, so I cannot remember if she was criticizing Feynman himself to some extent or how his legacy is being portrayed by the media. In the latter case, I am also a bit annoyed how he is constantly portrayed as some kind of a super star by American media, where the rest of the world does not really care that much.
Normal students learn the material from normal textbooks. The Feynman Lectures on Physics are a fantastic supplement and a great reference for people who already have a solid background. They’re not a practical introduction. Feynman acknowledged in his preface that, as an intro physics course, the Lectures were a failed experiment.
Especially as a beginner it’s possible to read along with the Feynman Lectures and think you’re getting it, without really getting very much.
Another way you may hear this same point: “only Feynman could get away with doing things in this crazy unrigorous way. You better do things normal and check obsessively, and understand the normal approach very clearly before you do anything weird.” That’s mostly fair but it’s incomplete. Feynman also checked the living shit out of everything he wrote. He just doesn’t show all the checking, so he appears to be fast and loose.
Feynman was the epitome of "think outside the box" for physics, revisiting most topics with a personnal, "back to first principles" angle. Therefore his lecture notes are engaging and entertaining like no others, and a perfect complementary text to normal text books. When I was in college we used to pair the Feynman lecture notes with the much more dry Landau textbooks. A perfect mix, although probably already outdated at the time.
I'm not sure I'm seeing the mystery - do you mean you think that book is not mentioned enough?
Digestible lectures from a charismatic man (who made the television circuit pretty often) have a different audience than comprehensive textbooks I would think.
One collection that I always loved due to the clear exposition is the one from Walter Greiner[0].
It goes from zero to quite advanced theoretical physics topics in a very nice way. I think that sadly some volumes were never translated, so there is a gap if you read them in English.
I never found anybody taking about Greiner, and at this point, I'm way too afraid to ask why.
1) He had a HUGE amount of personal charisma. Some lecturers are watched because they know a lot or are famous, despite a lack of public speaking skills. Feynman could have gone into acting or politics the guy is genuinely entertaining and a VERY skilled presenter. Feynman's on camera personality is the professor from Gilligan's island but funnier and friendlier.
2) He got his Nobel price in peak boomer years 1965 and then didn't die until the end of the 80s. For boomers he is "their" generation's physicist just like the WWII gen had Einstein as "their" physicist. Who is "the" popular science fad physicist for the X-ers and younger? Hawking, maybe Susskind, possibly even Sabine, I guess?
3) IMHO he was an autodidact who wrote for fellow autodidacts. That is my learning style. His style REALLY STRONGLY resonates with me and my learning style. If you're capable of self-teaching you get a feel for who's your type of author and who is not. Feynman definitely writes books for people like me. His books and notes are all old, of course, which is sad. As for "moderns" who emit similar intense autodidact vibes, I'd suggest Schroeder and his famous "Introduction to Thermal Physics" from the turn of the century. I subjectively like that book. I don't care if there's a better way to learn bachelors thermodynamics by taking a course in a classroom or watching video lecture, I just like the book's style. Not the superficial style like typography but the organization and connectivity of the topics is very autodidactical, just like Feynman's books. To some extent, he's post-education in that once you are done officially learning, the rest of your life you're an autodidact, like it or not, and Feynman's style leans into that. I still remember as a kid in high school, where I took two years of public high school physics, paging thru a copy of Feynman's lectures in the library and it was so clear and so fascinating compared to my experience in "official classes with new textbooks".
I'm saving these files, not for the content, but just to admire the hard work that has gone into writing these pages - all in capital letters with fantastic drawings and equations. These are like pieces of renaissance art.
Almost a thousand pages of presumably well thought out and neatly written notes. For lectures, and not even his own research. I'm always amazed at the productivity and output of the great ones.
At that time there was less publish or perish and fighting to actually obtain a tenured position. In such a comfortable situation, you can invest more times into preparing good lectures.
To clarify, these aren’t the normal Feynman lectures. He lectured at a different institution and the author of this webpage transcribed those lectures to produce this set of notes. The content covered is different from the famous set of lectures.
molteanu|2 months ago
For example, the Electricity and Magnetism book by Purcell is phenomenal but it is hardly ever mentioned. To quote wikipedia,
Electricity and Magnetism is a standard textbook in electromagnetism originally written by Nobel laureate Edward Mills Purcell in 1963. Along with David Griffiths' Introduction to Electrodynamics, this book is one of the most widely adopted undergraduate textbooks in electromagnetism. A Sputnik-era project funded by the National Science Foundation grant, the book is influential for its use of relativity in the presentation of the subject at the undergraduate level. In 1999, it was noted by Norman Foster Ramsey Jr. that the book was widely adopted and has many foreign translations.
Something mysterious is going on here.
UniverseHacker|2 months ago
When I was a physics student the best students seemed to use both types of materials simultaneously. A work like Feynmans would give a bigger picture and more intuitive understanding of what is going on and help you not miss the forest for the trees so to speak, the regular textbooks will teach you all of the little details and math tricks you need to actually solve difficult problems with these concepts.
bsoles|2 months ago
lizknope|2 months ago
I bought the audio book version on CD about 25 years ago.
Now it is on various sites and youtube.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/flptapes.html
This is a video of him giving the lecture.
Feynman's Lectures on Physics - The Law of Gravitation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNO11GLabOc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dW4mctBMI0
oh_my_goodness|2 months ago
Especially as a beginner it’s possible to read along with the Feynman Lectures and think you’re getting it, without really getting very much.
Another way you may hear this same point: “only Feynman could get away with doing things in this crazy unrigorous way. You better do things normal and check obsessively, and understand the normal approach very clearly before you do anything weird.” That’s mostly fair but it’s incomplete. Feynman also checked the living shit out of everything he wrote. He just doesn’t show all the checking, so he appears to be fast and loose.
rixed|2 months ago
nemomarx|2 months ago
Digestible lectures from a charismatic man (who made the television circuit pretty often) have a different audience than comprehensive textbooks I would think.
somethingsome|2 months ago
I never found anybody taking about Greiner, and at this point, I'm way too afraid to ask why.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Greiner
biophysboy|2 months ago
Edit: to be fair though, textbooks are written while lectures are oral. So its hard to compare them.
spicyusername|2 months ago
Richard Feynman is a person well worth remembering, but I'm sure many of his contemporaries that get talked about less were as well.
So it goes.
VLM|2 months ago
2) He got his Nobel price in peak boomer years 1965 and then didn't die until the end of the 80s. For boomers he is "their" generation's physicist just like the WWII gen had Einstein as "their" physicist. Who is "the" popular science fad physicist for the X-ers and younger? Hawking, maybe Susskind, possibly even Sabine, I guess?
3) IMHO he was an autodidact who wrote for fellow autodidacts. That is my learning style. His style REALLY STRONGLY resonates with me and my learning style. If you're capable of self-teaching you get a feel for who's your type of author and who is not. Feynman definitely writes books for people like me. His books and notes are all old, of course, which is sad. As for "moderns" who emit similar intense autodidact vibes, I'd suggest Schroeder and his famous "Introduction to Thermal Physics" from the turn of the century. I subjectively like that book. I don't care if there's a better way to learn bachelors thermodynamics by taking a course in a classroom or watching video lecture, I just like the book's style. Not the superficial style like typography but the organization and connectivity of the topics is very autodidactical, just like Feynman's books. To some extent, he's post-education in that once you are done officially learning, the rest of your life you're an autodidact, like it or not, and Feynman's style leans into that. I still remember as a kid in high school, where I took two years of public high school physics, paging thru a copy of Feynman's lectures in the library and it was so clear and so fascinating compared to my experience in "official classes with new textbooks".
divbzero|2 months ago
jalapenog|2 months ago
[deleted]
zkmon|2 months ago
k2enemy|2 months ago
amelius|2 months ago
aleph_minus_one|2 months ago
gnubison|2 months ago
The normal Feynman lectures are here: https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/
bvan|2 months ago
queuebert|2 months ago
unknown|2 months ago
[deleted]
joebig|2 months ago