Anyone explain this Feynman quote?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers around a quote by Richard Feynman that critiques the exclusivity of mathematicians, suggesting they may be unaware of their own misconceptions and intimidating others. The quote is sourced from a book discussing economyths, likely addressing the misuse of statistical correlations in economics. The poster expresses difficulty in understanding economics compared to physics and reflects on Feynman's intense engagement with calculus, as noted in his second wife's divorce complaint.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Richard Feynman's contributions to physics and mathematics.
  • Familiarity with the concept of economyths and statistical correlations.
  • Knowledge of the historical context of Feynman's life, particularly his marriages.
  • Basic comprehension of calculus and its applications in problem-solving.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research Richard Feynman's biography for insights into his philosophy on mathematics and science.
  • Explore the concept of economyths and their implications in economic studies.
  • Study the role of statistical correlations in interpreting economic data.
  • Investigate the psychological aspects of personality disorders in historical figures.
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, economics enthusiasts, historians interested in Richard Feynman's life, and individuals studying the intersection of mathematics and psychology.

pergradus
Messages
137
Reaction score
1
I was bored last night and look at Wikipedia's article on Feynman when I saw this quote:

...He also slammed the exclusivity of some mathematicians, saying "I have great suspicion that (mathematicians) don't know, that this stuff is wrong, and that they're intimidating people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_feynman#Challenger_disaster (bottom of top paragraph)

Can anyone put this into some context and explain what he was talking about?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That is a truly odd place to insert that quote. The source of the quote is a book about economyths and most likely refers to statistical studies correlating some economic factor to another? I don't know, because I haven't read that book, so my interpretation of what it might mean would be biased due to my opinion of statistical correlations (they only help you figure out what questions to ask; not give you answers to your questions).

I find economics to be a lot harder to understand than physics.
 
The next paragraph in that article is more interesting:

He was married a second time in June 1952, to Mary Louise Bell of Neodesha, Kansas; this marriage was brief and unsuccessful:

He begins working calculus problems in his head as soon as he awakens. He did calculus while driving in his car, while sitting in the living room, and while lying in bed at night.
—Mary Louise Bell divorce complaint[41]p.168

What in the world was wrong her?! Clearly she suffered from some type of personality disorder.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 107 ·
4
Replies
107
Views
22K