3 ms·

For years now, I've been finding Kaku's writing style (and speaking engagements) really sub par. Too, bad... because he had the potential to say and write so mu

For years now, I've been finding Kaku's writing style (and speaking engagements) really sub par. Too, bad... because he had the potential to say and write so much more interestingly, I thought. His stuff is ... borderline ... condescending?

chatmasta 3y ago
I went through a phase where I (as a layman) consumed a lot of quantum physics YouTube content. My favorite people to listen to were Brian Greene, Roger Penrose and Leonard Susskind. If there is a video of one of them speaking for more than an hour, I've probably watched it. I also watched some videos with Michio Kaku, including one where he was on a panel with Penrose, and I got major "huckster" vibes from him. It felt like he was trying to sell me something. Maybe that's an unfair interpretation. But it seemed really obvious, especially when contrasted with the others.
- wrycoder 3y ago
  Spot on, that's been my take on Kaku for the last fifteen years. The problem is, my local library keeps buying his books, to the exclusion of much better stuff. Einstein, Kaku, Feynman, Einstein, Kaku, Feynman....
- cshimmin 3y ago
  I have a PhD in particle physics (and work in the field). So more than a layman's familiarity with quantum mechanics/field theory. I have no idea who this guy is; I know the name and for some reason I know he looks like a white-haired composer (I guess that's a publicist doing their job well) but other than that I literally have no clue. Is he a professor somewhere? Similarly, I know the name Brian Greene; my grandma bought me one of his books when I was in highschool, which I never read. On the other hand, I know very well who Penrose and Susskind are, familiar with their research, have met them both at normal academic events. So, n=1 but take what you will from that information...
  - cthalupa 3y ago
    > Is he a professor somewhere? CCNY, though I'm not sure how much he does for them these days. My (very casual, could very possibly be wrong) understanding is that he did most of his significant research and paper writing in the 70s and 80s, with some in the 90s, before transitioning to mostly doing popular science writing and TV/Podcast/Youtube appearances in the 2000s through today.
tomxor 3y ago
I've found in academia in general, when someone is condescending they are also often provably but stubbornly incorrect. I suspect this is more than correlation, since a degree of humility is needed to learn deeply about particularly hard areas.
- katamarimambo 3y ago
  This is often correct here on HN, with the complication that some here think many complex areas are banal (e.g. architecture, social sciences etc) therefore no humility is needed at all.
cthalupa 3y ago
Kaku is certainly a far smarter person than I am, so I don't say this as someone who thinks he knows better. But he's also made a career of talking about whatever random interesting/popular/flavor of the month topic there is in science, and over the years, and as someone who has a hobbyist level understanding of many of those subjects, it has seemed to me that he has a tendency for taking whatever the more "interesting" stance is on any particular subject, as long as it's even remotely defensible based on the body of evidence. Couple that with finding the same sort of condescending attitude you mention, and I've gone out of my way to listen to/read material from other sources. A good example is the recent stuff over the JWST, age of the universe, larger galaxies than we expected, etc. For those that haven't kept up, basically, the JWST has been looking at some very old galaxies - some of the oldest we've been able to view. And we have a lot of computer models about how big galaxies should be early on in the universe, with these galaxies falling outside of what those models predicted. This has lead to a lot of sensationalist news about this imagery from the JWST disproving the big bang, and Kaku has joined in on this. But when you dig deeper, you find out that the disparity isn't huge... and even more damning to that narrative is that our more modern models done with significantly more compute power and able to have significantly more precision have shown these galaxies to be within the expected range. It's basically only a story if you ignore the past 6-7 years of work in this area. I think it's a perfectly rational way for him to approach things - it's his interview appearances, books, etc. paying his bills, so I don't think he's wrong for doing this - just not my cup of tea.

chatmasta 3y ago

I went through a phase where I (as a layman) consumed a lot of quantum physics YouTube content. My favorite people to listen to were Brian Greene, Roger Penrose and Leonard Susskind. If there is a video of one of them speaking for more than an hour, I've probably watched it. I also watched some videos with Michio Kaku, including one where he was on a panel with Penrose, and I got major "huckster" vibes from him. It felt like he was trying to sell me something. Maybe that's an unfair interpretation. But it seemed really obvious, especially when contrasted with the others.

wrycoder 3y ago
Spot on, that's been my take on Kaku for the last fifteen years. The problem is, my local library keeps buying his books, to the exclusion of much better stuff. Einstein, Kaku, Feynman, Einstein, Kaku, Feynman....
cshimmin 3y ago
I have a PhD in particle physics (and work in the field). So more than a layman's familiarity with quantum mechanics/field theory. I have no idea who this guy is; I know the name and for some reason I know he looks like a white-haired composer (I guess that's a publicist doing their job well) but other than that I literally have no clue. Is he a professor somewhere? Similarly, I know the name Brian Greene; my grandma bought me one of his books when I was in highschool, which I never read. On the other hand, I know very well who Penrose and Susskind are, familiar with their research, have met them both at normal academic events. So, n=1 but take what you will from that information...
- cthalupa 3y ago
  > Is he a professor somewhere? CCNY, though I'm not sure how much he does for them these days. My (very casual, could very possibly be wrong) understanding is that he did most of his significant research and paper writing in the 70s and 80s, with some in the 90s, before transitioning to mostly doing popular science writing and TV/Podcast/Youtube appearances in the 2000s through today.

tomxor 3y ago

I've found in academia in general, when someone is condescending they are also often provably but stubbornly incorrect. I suspect this is more than correlation, since a degree of humility is needed to learn deeply about particularly hard areas.

katamarimambo 3y ago
This is often correct here on HN, with the complication that some here think many complex areas are banal (e.g. architecture, social sciences etc) therefore no humility is needed at all.

cthalupa 3y ago

Kaku is certainly a far smarter person than I am, so I don't say this as someone who thinks he knows better. But he's also made a career of talking about whatever random interesting/popular/flavor of the month topic there is in science, and over the years, and as someone who has a hobbyist level understanding of many of those subjects, it has seemed to me that he has a tendency for taking whatever the more "interesting" stance is on any particular subject, as long as it's even remotely defensible based on the body of evidence. Couple that with finding the same sort of condescending attitude you mention, and I've gone out of my way to listen to/read material from other sources. A good example is the recent stuff over the JWST, age of the universe, larger galaxies than we expected, etc. For those that haven't kept up, basically, the JWST has been looking at some very old galaxies - some of the oldest we've been able to view. And we have a lot of computer models about how big galaxies should be early on in the universe, with these galaxies falling outside of what those models predicted. This has lead to a lot of sensationalist news about this imagery from the JWST disproving the big bang, and Kaku has joined in on this. But when you dig deeper, you find out that the disparity isn't huge... and even more damning to that narrative is that our more modern models done with significantly more compute power and able to have significantly more precision have shown these galaxies to be within the expected range. It's basically only a story if you ignore the past 6-7 years of work in this area. I think it's a perfectly rational way for him to approach things - it's his interview appearances, books, etc. paying his bills, so I don't think he's wrong for doing this - just not my cup of tea.