4 ms·

I find it hard to believe that the author started to appreciate physics by reading The Feynman Lectures on Physics before any exposure to physics or even algebr

I find it hard to believe that the author started to appreciate physics by reading The Feynman Lectures on Physics before any exposure to physics or even algebra, and in less than three years went from barely knowing high school math to enjoying advanced mathematical physics and graduate-level quantum physics. It looks this is one-in-a-million level brilliance as learning the sheer amount of requirement knowledge in such a short time is amazingly challenging: analysis, functional analysis, complex analysis, linear algebra, abstract algebra, differential equations, mathematical statistics, and all the physics: mechanics, electromagnetism, thermodynamics, optics, statistical mechanics, relativity, and of course quantum physics, all in less than three years. Kudos if the author is this talented.

whatshisface 5y ago
I agree that this does not on its surface seem possible, but I can think of a few explanations. 1. I recently spent a week on one section of one chapter of a math book. I was able to follow it within an hour on the level of "these are the rules and this is the sequence of their application," but I have stuck with it since then because I wanted to understand it well enough that the proof they chose to use would seem obvious to me. If you saw "understanding math" like the peak of a mountain, you'd get there a lot more quickly, but if you want to try out every permutation of every device and condition anything can take forever. 2. Algebra seems simple in retrospect, and my teenage self was kind of dumb. Maybe with my complete adult brain I'd be able to finish highschool starting from scratch in a few months. Evidence to that point is the pacing of college remedial math classes. Maybe, to a certain extent, people have an innate math setpoint that they will snap to very quickly when given the chance. 3. Intelligence is equally distributed between genders, but most professional physicists are men, which means that for every professor there is almost exactly one corresponding woman who has equal potential but isn't in the system. If you heard that the department chair at a university sat down and read a book about topology without a lot of trouble you wouldn't be surprised at all. In other words, it's not surprising that someone can do this, it's surprising that someone who can do this is not in the social bucket for people that do it, but if you think about the other things you've heard about that, you realize you already knew. I am inclined towards #3 out of all these explanations but all may be true at once.
- paulpauper 5y ago
  women had an advantage over men in regard to memorization. this helps greatly at learning.
- hintymad 5y ago
  > Intelligence is equally distributed between genders, but most professional physicists are men, Why limit yourself to gender? Why not white vs other skin color? Why not the US vs another country? Why not democrat vs republicans? Why not western culture vs whatever other culture? Seriously, this kind of categorization is just ridiculous, especially when you speculate instead of showing evidence. No, I won't be surprised if a STEM professor is reading topology. I will be surprised if a gender-study professor is reading topology. I will be also surprised if some stranger (i.e. I don't know the background of this person) who could only do pre-algebra in high school says Topology without Tears is the first book on Topology that they read and they immediately fall in love with topology. Possible, for sure. Surprising, of course. It's just a matter of probability.
  - whatshisface 5y ago
    I'm not sure what objection is being made. We know that there are lots and lots of women who could be physicists but decided not to. You don't stop existing when you don't get labeled, but you do start surprising people who expect you to have been. >The researchers say that as last author is usually associated with seniority, based on this data, their model predicts that it will be 258 years before the gender ratio of senior physicists comes within 5% of parity. https://physicsworld.com/a/gender-gap-in-physics-amongst-highest-in-science/ https://physicsworld.com/a/gender-gap-in-physics-amongst-hig...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
paulpauper 5y ago
More like one in 50-100 million brilliance, and such people do exist. It's a statistical certainty they exist. Terrance Tao for example.
adastra22 5y ago
> I find it hard to believe that the author started to appreciate physics by reading The Feynman Lectures on Physics before any exposure to physics I'm a physics major. My first exposure to physics was Feynman, and it made me want to become a physicist. I think that's a statement more about Feynman than me though, as I'm not particularly talented. It was a common story among other physics majors too.

whatshisface 5y ago

I agree that this does not on its surface seem possible, but I can think of a few explanations. 1. I recently spent a week on one section of one chapter of a math book. I was able to follow it within an hour on the level of "these are the rules and this is the sequence of their application," but I have stuck with it since then because I wanted to understand it well enough that the proof they chose to use would seem obvious to me. If you saw "understanding math" like the peak of a mountain, you'd get there a lot more quickly, but if you want to try out every permutation of every device and condition anything can take forever. 2. Algebra seems simple in retrospect, and my teenage self was kind of dumb. Maybe with my complete adult brain I'd be able to finish highschool starting from scratch in a few months. Evidence to that point is the pacing of college remedial math classes. Maybe, to a certain extent, people have an innate math setpoint that they will snap to very quickly when given the chance. 3. Intelligence is equally distributed between genders, but most professional physicists are men, which means that for every professor there is almost exactly one corresponding woman who has equal potential but isn't in the system. If you heard that the department chair at a university sat down and read a book about topology without a lot of trouble you wouldn't be surprised at all. In other words, it's not surprising that someone can do this, it's surprising that someone who can do this is not in the social bucket for people that do it, but if you think about the other things you've heard about that, you realize you already knew. I am inclined towards #3 out of all these explanations but all may be true at once.

paulpauper 5y ago
women had an advantage over men in regard to memorization. this helps greatly at learning.
hintymad 5y ago
> Intelligence is equally distributed between genders, but most professional physicists are men, Why limit yourself to gender? Why not white vs other skin color? Why not the US vs another country? Why not democrat vs republicans? Why not western culture vs whatever other culture? Seriously, this kind of categorization is just ridiculous, especially when you speculate instead of showing evidence. No, I won't be surprised if a STEM professor is reading topology. I will be surprised if a gender-study professor is reading topology. I will be also surprised if some stranger (i.e. I don't know the background of this person) who could only do pre-algebra in high school says Topology without Tears is the first book on Topology that they read and they immediately fall in love with topology. Possible, for sure. Surprising, of course. It's just a matter of probability.
- whatshisface 5y ago
  I'm not sure what objection is being made. We know that there are lots and lots of women who could be physicists but decided not to. You don't stop existing when you don't get labeled, but you do start surprising people who expect you to have been. >The researchers say that as last author is usually associated with seniority, based on this data, their model predicts that it will be 258 years before the gender ratio of senior physicists comes within 5% of parity. https://physicsworld.com/a/gender-gap-in-physics-amongst-highest-in-science/ https://physicsworld.com/a/gender-gap-in-physics-amongst-hig...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

paulpauper 5y ago

More like one in 50-100 million brilliance, and such people do exist. It's a statistical certainty they exist. Terrance Tao for example.

adastra22 5y ago

> I find it hard to believe that the author started to appreciate physics by reading The Feynman Lectures on Physics before any exposure to physics I'm a physics major. My first exposure to physics was Feynman, and it made me want to become a physicist. I think that's a statement more about Feynman than me though, as I'm not particularly talented. It was a common story among other physics majors too.