Scan barcode
michaelgauchat's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
relaxing
sad
slow-paced
5.0
theseventhl's review against another edition
4.0
This was a wonderful, comprehensive biography of Feynman. I was surprised to learn about aspects of his life barely touched upon or glazed over in other texts. A good mixture of his personal life and his scientific career. If you don't get emotional at the last chapter, I don't know what to tell you. Looking forward to reading CHAOS, which is by the same author.
yates9's review against another edition
5.0
I really enjoyed the insight into the person of Feynman. He was, as any other physicist, a human with positive and negative characteristics. This is an important book because it captures this balance, which I believe is intrinsic to any "Genius" because the term focuses on some exceptional characteristics while ignoring the rest of the person.
The mental patterns I found most interesting in how Feynman thought were his reliance on fundamental characteristics of a physical relation and to visualize this in a way that he could gain a personal insight into the big picture of what was going on. He cared more about the units of measurement in a relation than the values. This is an example of what we might call genius because it is an unconventional focus on how to do physics.
And yes of course the maverick was also a bit of an asshole. I think anyone that dedicates that much time and energy to abstract processing suffers a price in social value alignment.
The mental patterns I found most interesting in how Feynman thought were his reliance on fundamental characteristics of a physical relation and to visualize this in a way that he could gain a personal insight into the big picture of what was going on. He cared more about the units of measurement in a relation than the values. This is an example of what we might call genius because it is an unconventional focus on how to do physics.
And yes of course the maverick was also a bit of an asshole. I think anyone that dedicates that much time and energy to abstract processing suffers a price in social value alignment.
painalangoisse's review against another edition
5.0
I thought Gleick did an excellent job exploring Feynman’s life and science. As a physics student, I found that the explanations of physical phenomena, particularly of problems Feynman struggled with, were succinct and interesting. I particularly appreciated his choice not to rely on the material of Surely You’re Joking, Mr Feynman too heavily; I thought he did a good job of at least trying to separate the man from the myth. Overall, the book presented slightly less of Feynman’s personal life than I expected compared to his professional life. This was fine, though, as I felt I learned quite a bit about the state of the physics community throughout the twentieth century. I am eager to read Gleick’s biography of Newton next.
toltzboy456's review against another edition
5.0
Feynman is one of those 'world's most interesting men' that I love to read about. Especially since his area of expertise involves math and science, fields that are of interest to myself.
This really helps de-mystify the man while emphasizing what made him extraordinary. Like Einstein, there are a few aspects I wouldn't want to emulate, but overall I'm left with a lot of admiration, primarily for his ability to figure out the world in his own way rather than rely on explanations from others (no matter how complicated the topic), and also for his willingness to embrace doubt and not-knowing as a principle of life, and of course, his ability to made event the most convoluted and complex of topics understandable and approachable. For someone who disavowed philosophy, I'd say he had a pretty good philosophical view of life.
Be warned: some of the descriptions of particle physics will absolutely push your ability to conceptualize abstract concepts.
This really helps de-mystify the man while emphasizing what made him extraordinary. Like Einstein, there are a few aspects I wouldn't want to emulate, but overall I'm left with a lot of admiration, primarily for his ability to figure out the world in his own way rather than rely on explanations from others (no matter how complicated the topic), and also for his willingness to embrace doubt and not-knowing as a principle of life, and of course, his ability to made event the most convoluted and complex of topics understandable and approachable. For someone who disavowed philosophy, I'd say he had a pretty good philosophical view of life.
Be warned: some of the descriptions of particle physics will absolutely push your ability to conceptualize abstract concepts.
timdams007's review against another edition
4.0
A memoir that doesnt shy away from scientific explanations, hooray!
egglet's review against another edition
4.0
What in the what was that final paragraph?
“Then he returned home, as he now knew, to die.”
Feynman was a rockstar of physics. He veered slightly out of the main, cultivated an animated persona, cherished approaching problems freshly and intuitively, he worked through several bouts of rare cancer forms, and was very very human. Lives lived like his are rare and will never occur again.
It is worth noting that he was above all human. His story is worth knowing because it shows how flawed he was and that he was a predatory sexist person. He aided in many military scientific developments (like all at Los Alamos) that lead to great war crimes (even if the science paved the way in other uses, Los Alamos was used to make a fist and beat the opponent into a bloody submission before we could be beaten and it was another instance of letting fear, paranoia, and greed tainting our development as humans.). When he was at Los Alamos he was what we consider to be a “young man” or a boy (late stage child?) in his 20’s. It is inconceivable how this person lived and existed. A fascinating human story that doesn’t fit the 438 pages of this book.
A note: if you come across someone playing the role of apologetic to Feynman’s behavior, then they may not have the ability to appreciate an individuals achievements/existence without mythologizing/idolizing them. That’s not a desirable trait for inquisitive minds to find in someone. (IE: don’t let the person off the hook. Confront them that behaviors and acts can be condemned and that they shouldn’t idolize individuals. It creates a sense of excusing predatory behaviors by writing them off as acts that a par for individuals of those time’s. Playing what about-isms in order to avoid seeing the past/history as vividly as we can only does us a disservice to our own understanding and intellectual growth.)
“Then he returned home, as he now knew, to die.”
Feynman was a rockstar of physics. He veered slightly out of the main, cultivated an animated persona, cherished approaching problems freshly and intuitively, he worked through several bouts of rare cancer forms, and was very very human. Lives lived like his are rare and will never occur again.
It is worth noting that he was above all human. His story is worth knowing because it shows how flawed he was and that he was a predatory sexist person. He aided in many military scientific developments (like all at Los Alamos) that lead to great war crimes (even if the science paved the way in other uses, Los Alamos was used to make a fist and beat the opponent into a bloody submission before we could be beaten and it was another instance of letting fear, paranoia, and greed tainting our development as humans.). When he was at Los Alamos he was what we consider to be a “young man” or a boy (late stage child?) in his 20’s. It is inconceivable how this person lived and existed. A fascinating human story that doesn’t fit the 438 pages of this book.
A note: if you come across someone playing the role of apologetic to Feynman’s behavior, then they may not have the ability to appreciate an individuals achievements/existence without mythologizing/idolizing them. That’s not a desirable trait for inquisitive minds to find in someone. (IE: don’t let the person off the hook. Confront them that behaviors and acts can be condemned and that they shouldn’t idolize individuals. It creates a sense of excusing predatory behaviors by writing them off as acts that a par for individuals of those time’s. Playing what about-isms in order to avoid seeing the past/history as vividly as we can only does us a disservice to our own understanding and intellectual growth.)