3 ms·
If you go to the linked YouTube video, you will see that this one conversation is one of a series of conversations in a larger production. wtallis pointed out e
by simoncion 11y ago
If you go to the linked YouTube video, you will see that this one conversation is one of a series of conversations in a larger production. wtallis pointed out elsewhere in this thread that this was a BBC production for a largely non-technical audience.
You have missed the point because you were unaware of the larger context in which that one conversation sat. :)
- chm 11y agoYou have missed the point because you were unaware of the larger context in which that one conversation sat. :) Why are you so sure? Most commenters who don't agree with me have wrong preconceptions/assumptions about me. I have watched this whole series of videos multiple times over the years. I have always felt that Feynman's sermon was not useful.
- wtallis 11y agoYou're not just claiming that his answer wasn't useful, you're claiming that it could have been even within the context and constraints of that interview. Feynman, who had far better knowledge than we of both the subject matter and the purposes of the interview, did not think that it was possible.
- simoncion 11y agowtallis's reply is better than mine, but you asked me a question, so I owe you a response: > Why are you so sure? For several reasons. The best one is as follows: Any video about science for a non-technical audience featuring a well-respected scientist and lecturer is incomplete without a section that explains that "Why" questions are often the most difficult to answer because of the inherent complexity of even the simplest seeming things.
- kybernetikos 11y ago> largely non-technical audience A largely non-technical audience who wished to have an expert explain these matters to them.
- simoncion 11y agoYeah. Which makes the objections even more mystifying.