4 ms·

But all this begs the question. Why should we believe Gauss's law? No one has the resources to verify the whole of science through first-hand experience so at

by lisper 5y ago

But all this begs the question. Why should we believe Gauss's law? No one has the resources to verify the whole of science through first-hand experience so at some point you have no choice but to trust someone.

abdullahkhalids 5y ago
A student would be optimally correct in trusting authority as far as believing the axioms of the electromagnetic theory goes. However, as ones builds more and more theorems and results based on those axioms, the student should stop believing in authority and start verifying that all claimed results are consistent with the axioms.
- pdonis 5y ago
  > A student would be optimally correct in trusting authority as far as believing the axioms of the electromagnetic theory goes. You don't have to "believe" the axioms. You can test them, by testing whether the experimental predictions derived from them are confirmed or not.
pdonis 5y ago
> Why should we believe Gauss's law? Because experiments show that it's correct. > No one has the resources to verify the whole of science through first-hand experience Courses in science commonly include actual experiments, either done by the professor while students watch, or done by the students themselves in labs, precisely to give the students first-hand experience in the scientific phenomena being studied in the course. > at some point you have no choice but to trust someone You may have to trust other people for first-hand observations of things you didn't observe yourself. But that isn't what's involved here. Here the student had a theoretical law whose consequences she was perfectly capable of working out for herself. She did not have to trust anyone for that. In this particular case, the student even saw the problem with Feynman's statement: her letter says, in reference to the statement in Feynman's book that turned out to be wrong: "This was confusing, as it seemed to contradict all your previous statements." So why did she base her exam answer on the statement she found "confusing"? She should have thought it through for herself.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- foldr 5y ago
  Even with theory it’s not reasonable to expect someone to verify things “all the way down”. For example, it’s reasonable for a beginner in physics to trust that calculus works without fully understanding its foundations.
  - b215826 5y ago
    I don't think people in this thread have realized this, but the issue here is about an application of Gauss's law, not the law itself. If you write in a math test "d^2/dx^2 sin(x) = sin(x)" and complain that you have not been awarded points because a famous book on calculus has this equation in it, then you are appealing to authority instead of making an argument.
    - foldr 5y ago
      Right, but if you read the letter, the student isn't really complaining. She's just asking Feynman for an explanation of what the paragraph means. Another relevant details is that "the class was a survey course for non-majors".
      - b215826 5y ago
        That paragraph is wrong. So it's pointless to wonder why Feynman wrote what he wrote (that is unless you are interested in the man himself). She specifically had a PS in the letter where she said she had "a devious motive in writing to [Feynman] because on the exam [she] answered with the explanation that [Feynman's] book gave". I'm sure Feynman would've had his share of experience with grade grubbers and probably (and a bit unkindly) assumed that this woman was one. She also clearly refused to believe her professor when he explained the problem to her. Yes, Feynman could have been more kinder and more charitable with his time, but if you have worked in academia, then you'll also know that the vast majority of professors would completely ignore correspondence of this sort from an undergraduate.
b215826 5y ago
> But all this begs the question. Why should we believe Gauss's law? This particular incident had nothing to do with the validity of Gauss's law, which is nothing but a restatement of Coulomb's law in electrostatics, and something that has been extensively verified in experiments. Feynman's presentation of Gauss's law is crystal clear. The issue in question was an application of Gauss's law. Feynman likely goofed up (like most of us do) because he didn't think twice and went by his intuition. And he was absolutely right to criticize the student -- saying that something is written in famous book X written by famous author Y is completely irrelevant in science if you cannot make a good argument for why it is right. This is different from many social "sciences" where people often make such claims.
- foldr 5y ago
  This isn't a really a fair reading of the student's letter. It's clear that she was puzzled by the apparent (and in fact actual) contradiction between the erroneous paragraph and the rest of the book. She just asked Feynman for an explanation of what the paragraph meant. It does seem reasonable to give Feynman the benefit of the doubt and assume that there might possibly be a non-erroneous interpretation of the paragraph in question. I think Feynman was getting on a favorite hobby horse about not trusting authority and reading the letter a little uncharitably.
linuxhansl 5y ago
There's nothing to believe, really. If, and as long as, it correctly explains experimental evidence we can use it to make predictions.
throwaway9870 5y ago
That is the point of the scientific method. You don't believe it because you read it once, you believe it when multiple people construct repeatable experiments that yield similar results. It is the essence of science.

by lisper 5y ago

abdullahkhalids 5y ago

A student would be optimally correct in trusting authority as far as believing the axioms of the electromagnetic theory goes. However, as ones builds more and more theorems and results based on those axioms, the student should stop believing in authority and start verifying that all claimed results are consistent with the axioms.

pdonis 5y ago
> A student would be optimally correct in trusting authority as far as believing the axioms of the electromagnetic theory goes. You don't have to "believe" the axioms. You can test them, by testing whether the experimental predictions derived from them are confirmed or not.

pdonis 5y ago

> Why should we believe Gauss's law? Because experiments show that it's correct. > No one has the resources to verify the whole of science through first-hand experience Courses in science commonly include actual experiments, either done by the professor while students watch, or done by the students themselves in labs, precisely to give the students first-hand experience in the scientific phenomena being studied in the course. > at some point you have no choice but to trust someone You may have to trust other people for first-hand observations of things you didn't observe yourself. But that isn't what's involved here. Here the student had a theoretical law whose consequences she was perfectly capable of working out for herself. She did not have to trust anyone for that. In this particular case, the student even saw the problem with Feynman's statement: her letter says, in reference to the statement in Feynman's book that turned out to be wrong: "This was confusing, as it seemed to contradict all your previous statements." So why did she base her exam answer on the statement she found "confusing"? She should have thought it through for herself.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
foldr 5y ago
Even with theory it’s not reasonable to expect someone to verify things “all the way down”. For example, it’s reasonable for a beginner in physics to trust that calculus works without fully understanding its foundations.
- b215826 5y ago
  I don't think people in this thread have realized this, but the issue here is about an application of Gauss's law, not the law itself. If you write in a math test "d^2/dx^2 sin(x) = sin(x)" and complain that you have not been awarded points because a famous book on calculus has this equation in it, then you are appealing to authority instead of making an argument.
  - foldr 5y ago
    Right, but if you read the letter, the student isn't really complaining. She's just asking Feynman for an explanation of what the paragraph means. Another relevant details is that "the class was a survey course for non-majors".
    - b215826 5y ago
      That paragraph is wrong. So it's pointless to wonder why Feynman wrote what he wrote (that is unless you are interested in the man himself). She specifically had a PS in the letter where she said she had "a devious motive in writing to [Feynman] because on the exam [she] answered with the explanation that [Feynman's] book gave". I'm sure Feynman would've had his share of experience with grade grubbers and probably (and a bit unkindly) assumed that this woman was one. She also clearly refused to believe her professor when he explained the problem to her. Yes, Feynman could have been more kinder and more charitable with his time, but if you have worked in academia, then you'll also know that the vast majority of professors would completely ignore correspondence of this sort from an undergraduate.

b215826 5y ago

> But all this begs the question. Why should we believe Gauss's law? This particular incident had nothing to do with the validity of Gauss's law, which is nothing but a restatement of Coulomb's law in electrostatics, and something that has been extensively verified in experiments. Feynman's presentation of Gauss's law is crystal clear. The issue in question was an application of Gauss's law. Feynman likely goofed up (like most of us do) because he didn't think twice and went by his intuition. And he was absolutely right to criticize the student -- saying that something is written in famous book X written by famous author Y is completely irrelevant in science if you cannot make a good argument for why it is right. This is different from many social "sciences" where people often make such claims.

foldr 5y ago
This isn't a really a fair reading of the student's letter. It's clear that she was puzzled by the apparent (and in fact actual) contradiction between the erroneous paragraph and the rest of the book. She just asked Feynman for an explanation of what the paragraph meant. It does seem reasonable to give Feynman the benefit of the doubt and assume that there might possibly be a non-erroneous interpretation of the paragraph in question. I think Feynman was getting on a favorite hobby horse about not trusting authority and reading the letter a little uncharitably.

linuxhansl 5y ago

There's nothing to believe, really. If, and as long as, it correctly explains experimental evidence we can use it to make predictions.

throwaway9870 5y ago

That is the point of the scientific method. You don't believe it because you read it once, you believe it when multiple people construct repeatable experiments that yield similar results. It is the essence of science.