4 ms·
I think he’s fascinating and capable. I read American Prometheus a few years ago, which is the biography of him that’s really in depth and factually accurate. O
by constantly 3y ago
I think he’s fascinating and capable. I read American Prometheus a few years ago, which is the biography of him that’s really in depth and factually accurate. One note I thought was interesting was that Einstein was considered from a different generation of physicists and people looked at him differently.
But the book compares Oppy’s contemporaries like Hans Beta to Oppy and reaches the same “no Einstein” conclusion. But my read was that that wasn’t a bad thing, Oppy was extremely capable in physics, but his real natural talent was in bringing out the true insights from others rather than making those insights himself directly, and was otherworldly good at coordination leadership. Which is why he led the Los Alamos project.
I don’t think I view “no Einstein” as a dig, but rather a factual truth presented in the best biography of the man and meant to highlight his world beating talent.
- jhbadger 3y agoBeing a scientific administrator (which was Oppenheimer's primary job in the Manhattan Project) is a different job than primarily being a researcher, and Oppenheimer was quite good at it which is all the more impressive given that this was his first administrative role.
- foobarian 3y agoThis is kind of like those software engineers who end up great technical managers and eventually directors or above. There is a very valuable skill involved that is not necessarily the same skill that makes a good IC.
- StackOverlord 3y ago> "Oppy". Hell no.
- naijaboiler 3y agoBeing damn good enough to warrant a comparison to Einstein, even if it to mention that you fall short, makes you pretty damn remarkable