Murray Gell-Mann talks about Richard Feynman

[@mitsterful]

I think people in the comments section have forgotten that this guy worked with Richard Feynman for a number of years. He knew Feynman's behaviour and mannerisms and actually engaged with him. He's entitled to make a criticism on Feynman's personality, whether it be a good or bad criticism, he still understood Feynman better than anyone in the comments section.

[@td866]

Some of the anecdotes aren't in good taste since Feynman is dead and can't defend himself. Also, when Gell-Mann talks about Feynman being an egomaniac he can't saying how Feynman loved his research and thought he was so brilliant....an egomaniac himself!

[@The268170]

I like Feynman. I don't know this guy but, anybody who has some vague negative things to say about him just come off as envious.

[@eastwestcoastkid]

mitsterful well I know one of Feynman’s students, George Zweig, who came up with the concept of Aces, which effectively accounted for strangeness the same way as Gell-Mann’s quark theory. Gell-Mann however published first and won the Nobel. Gell-Mann -he has some stories to tell about Gell-Mann and his views and his quirks. I think that one need not say these things now that someone is gone.

[@The268170]

Well, as a bigly fan of Mr. Dick., I can only forgive this guy for bein' a bit critical of the almighty Feynman, and despite bein' the ultimate physical representation of "Layman", (which is my actual last name, as well as my first) I'm confidant that this bloke's words won't hurt Lord Feynman's reputation, and thus isn't worthy of further reprimandation. It's probly all he's got anyway. Let him be. :)

[@eastwestcoastkid]

The268170 oh he too is gone-just stating the view of him from the other side. They were both great-but the point about Gell-Mann above by Zweig I think is closer to so than not.

[@Bootmahoy88]

In the 70s while working on my degree in physics at The U of Minnesota, a group of students from Cal Tech came over to work with some students at The U of M on theoretical concepts of elementary particles. Murray Gell-Mann led the group. He was just brilliant, amazingly so! I learned so much from him. I'd never seen such a quick mind. He was also the biggest self-righteous, egotistical and judgmental prick I'd ever met before or since.

[@karabomothupi9759]

😂😂😂

[@lonesomequark]

Ironically this interview turns out to be yet another great anecdote about Feynman.

[@ashutoshverma5980]

true

[@avebgrejs4448]

you know he was mocking him the entire time right?

[@danchatka8613]

This is a refreshing video. I like Feynman a lot. He's one of my heroes. Yet this criticism of Feynman's ego sounds correct. It's nice to see a less flattering side of Feynman. It makes him more human. Thanks for posting it.

[@ludvigwittgenstein9609]

Gell Mann was just as bad tho!

[@nysewerrat6577]

@@ludvigwittgenstein9609 source?

[@adamfattal9602]

@@nysewerrat6577 Watch the damn video lol

[@nysewerrat6577]

@@adamfattal9602 doesn't mean he is bad wtf?

[@adamfattal9602]

@@nysewerrat6577 Ah sorry, youre right. He's more tame here. But if you see his other interviews (theres a whole web series on YT), you'll see what Ludvig means

[@chizhang2765]

"Years ago, when I was an assistant professor of physics at Berkeley [1960-66], I used to be invited down to Caltech about once a year to give a talk. It was usually the low point of my year. In the audience at Caltech were two leaders of modern physics, Murray Gell-Mann and Richard Feynman, who interrupted with frequent questions, ruthlessly probing to see if I really knew what I was talking about and had anything new to say. Of the two, Feynman was the more frightening. Gell-Mann was mostly interested in finding out whether there was anything in my talk that he should know about, so he was no problem if I did have anything worthwhile to say. Feynman was having fun." - Steven Weinberg, Nobel laureate in physics 1979.

[@fiveredpears]

Gell-Mann is one of the greatest physicists of the 20th century. His achievements are outstanding. How many people watching this are even qualified to say if Feynman was a greater physicist. I don't know, I know that. Feynman had the knack of making his work seem accessible and was good at making people feel like they understood physics. The truth is only a small group of elite physicists really understand what Gell-Mann did and what Feynman did and who did the greater work.

[@Unexpectedthings007]

Are u a physicist?

[@dodatroda]

No he isn’t. He was a fraud who only wanted to get a Nobel. He was a tragedy for physics.

[@MS-fg8qo]

He derided Heisenberg, who is undoubtedly more important than Gell-Man.

[@UnstableVolt]

I found it funny that he starts by saying he hated how Feynman always made anecdotes about himself and then finishes by telling an anecdote about Feynman while smiling and laughing.

[@derekxiaoEvanescentBliss]

Mathew Cornelius I think it's reasonable to end up disliking someone but still have many fond memories of them, just because you find that you personally don't mesh well with someone doesn't mean they aren't interesting /hilarious /brilliant. I think both sides of Feynman should be seen.

[@grammaticus2800]

Yes. And it's also not surprising that anecdotes about another are less annoying than anecdotes about oneself.

[@mrnarason]

It's kinda evidence to his point that Feynman would intentionally do idiosyncratic things for his namesake

[@ketogenicespirita9182]

He was clarifying that he forced the situation to create a kind of anectode to tell people later, like the jacket and tie. Even though he already use it to go to work, he would leave it in his office, just to create a scene, or an embarrassing situation, in the club, the cafeteria, etc. And that's not funny at all, Gell-man wasn't laughing because he find it funny, it's obvious it is a scorning laugh; he was demonstrating what he has just stated about Feynman : that he forced those kind of situations, like an annoying stand up comedian. It wasn't funny... It was ridicule.

[@wmchan3364]

@@ketogenicespirita9182 Feynman was trying to show others in the club that he did not respect "authority", and so he ridiculed the club's rule in Feynman's way.

[@MuonRay]

Rest in Peace Professor Murray Gell-Mann after a vibrantly rich degree of life and research at the very frontiers of physics.

[@jc333jc]

He taught me for a year. Weird, freaky and utterly captivating individual. It was an utter joy to hear his- to my Scottish ears- Noo Yoik accent describing things with such clarity of thought was enlightening and uplifting. I am better for having heard him, deeply indebted too. But it has to be said that he made me realise that i could never be anything more than mediocre as a physicist. I remain interested in physics but made my poverty stricken life as a musician....no bongoes...:-)

[@Hyumanity]

How did he make you realize that?

[@Polarcupcheck]

The jacket and tie story was hilarious.

[@maxwellagbavorsetsofia4826]

I cant stop lauging

[@trefod]

I can completely understand how the antics of Feynman would wear somebody down. At the same time that is what made him our favorite screwball scientist... And with Feynman as the gateway drug of science fandom, people like Gell-Mann and Bethe become known as well.

[@trav-c137]

trefod this is true for me no doubt. without being interested in Feynman, I would've never known about this 1969 Nobel prize winner

[@Ace0077]

very well said

[@toddtrimble2555]

Well, there's so much hero-worship surrounding Feynman that it's actually refreshing to hear Gell-Mann speaking about him in slightly less than reverent tones. The idea that Feynman spent a great deal of time burnishing the Feynman legend has a certain ring of truth to it, doesn't it?

[@brad1368]

That's part of the job of famous scientists. You don't make nearly as much money or get nearly the recognition if you're name isn't out there constantly. Einstein constantly played to his fame (by pretending to hate it) all the time. Part of the job is to popularize science, which requires some ego and effort.

[@cslloyd1]

I tend to agree. I find Feynman’s insights of particle physics to be the clearest I’ve heard. But what Gell-Mann says does not surprise me. However, I do wonder if he felt regret for disparaging Feynman (or anyone) so publicly. Doing so can make one look petty and vindictive. At least he’s not stabbing Feynman in the back, it’s a frontal stabbing.

[@patekswiss9521]

Yes, and equally so for Gell-Mann,

[@sergeysmyshlyaev9716]

@@cslloyd1 Gell-Mann is cunningly brutal and will stab Feynman in the front, while Mann-Gell is brutally cunning and will stab Feynman in the back.

[@karabomothupi9759]

​@@brad1368 where is the evidence that Einstein played to his fame?

[@KeithJones-yq6of]

He loved Feynman really, you can tell. Opposites attract. Both absolutely brilliant scientists

[@MrGOTAMA420]

i think gell mann misses the oldguy

[@mariothepookster]

Whatever Richard Feynman's personal eccentricities were, he seemed like a fun guy who took mathematics & science as a serious endeavor & who enjoyed life in many ways. There are those who probably resented Feynman's personality & were jealous of him (and I don't mean Dr.Gell-Mann). I'm not a scientist, but I appreciated him for his iconoclastic approach to life and science. He wasn't perfect; just a guy who seemed to enjoy sharing his love of science & physics, & exploring the natural world.

[@MuonRay]

Good comment. This is a good example of the differences between Gell-Mann and Feynman, Gell-Mann found out rules by following rules where Feynman found out rules by breaking them. In the Caltech Physics Department they were called comically called "The Jaguar and the Mosquito" because Gell-Mann would apparantly be like a nagging housewife, telling Feynman to quiet down with the bongo drums and to wear a suit in staff photos and so on.

[@qbtc]

The Jaguar and the Fox?

[@missdee4927]

It's funny that the things he criticizes Feynman for in this interview are why we like him. If I were around someone that quirky and unique, even if it were calculated, I would just let him be and be entertained. It wouldn't make me bitter towards him. This guy wanted to commit suicide because he didn't get into a school after getting into many. These are just two very different personalities. Perhaps he needed to lighten up and have more fun in life like Feynman did. And I think Feynman genuinely was an independent thinker.

[@ketogenicespirita9182]

He was clarifying that he forced the situation to create a kind of anectode to tell people later, like the jacket and tie. Even though he already use it to go to work, he would leave it in his office, just to create a scene, or an embarrassing situation, in the club, the cafeteria, etc. And that's not funny at all, Gell-man wasn't laughing because he find it funny, it's obvious it is a scorning laugh; he was demonstrating what he has just stated about Feynman : that he forced those kind of situations, like an annoying stand up comedian. It wasn't funny... It was ridicule. Don't be naive. Don't try to defend him.

[@adamfattal6382]

Yeah but try being in a room with him for a couple of years xD

[@HelterMcSkelter]

Great video -- one of the only accounts I've heard with a critical eye toward Feynman's big personality. A word about that: there are a lot of people here defending Feynman, and if you have a logical argument, then I think that's just fine. But if we've learned anything from the man's life, it's that walking around with a automatic fan-boy reverence for Feynman is like walking around wearing a store-bought t-shirt of John Lennon. He would want us to question his worthiness as a role model.

[@petercollin5670]

Richard Feynman said in his own books that he offended some people without meaning to. He had such a direct way of communicating that it came across as tactless.

[@TotheFirstWorld]

this is probably the best comment around here

[@ramiroofaragon9323]

Dick Feynman = die-hard direct Brooklyner

[@fiveredpears]

I think what is so attractive about Feynman is that he never lost interest in even the most basic physics. You never hear Witten or Gell-Mann talking about how their work relates to everyday experience. Feynman wanted to know why the world, as it confronted him, was the way it was. He had to go into deep and abstract ideas to answer this question, however he never lost sight of why he was doing it. Not many great physicists would be as excited about the way a plate wobbles or the way spaghetti breaks as they would be about advanced quantum theory.

[@AritraDaddy]

+fiveredpears Yes, that's true. He really was a combination of a physicist and an engineer.

[@vincent7520]

+fiveredpears also he loved life !...

[@metatron5199]

You couldn't be more wrong about Edward Witten lol, you obviously never listened to him lecture on quantum theory as a whole etc...

[@JaySandesara94]

fiveredpears precisely

[@Chase-b5t]

Good to see you around on the internet, Ron. Are you still posting on any physics-related forums? Physics Stack Exchange isn't the same without you

[@johny1577]

I find it hilarious that Gell-Mann can't help giggling while sharing Feynman anecdotes after complaining about Feynman crafting anecdotes to build his legacy.

[@ketogenicespirita9182]

He was clarifying that he forced the situation to create a kind of anectode to tell people later, like the jacket and tie. Even though he already use it to go to work, he would leave it in his office, just to create a scene, or an embarrassing situation, in the club, the cafeteria, etc. And that's not funny at all, Gell-man wasn't laughing because he find it funny, it's obvious it is a scorning laugh; he was demonstrating what he has just stated about Feynman : that he forced those kind of situations, like an annoying stand up comedian.

[@MrHuddo]

@@ketogenicespirita9182 Hmm, I wouldn't speak of Gell-man's attitude re his last anecdote with such certainty unless of course you're a mind reader. I do think his slow growing disdain for Feynman's ostensible desire for attention is genuine. I do not, however, think his laugh at the end was scorning but actually nostalgic. If he truly thought that this anecdote was the move of an asshat, he would either not be laughing at all, appear somewhat disappointed, or chuckle derisively. At least, those are my thoughts. Appreciate your comment anyhow.

[@bablobko]

Legendary Physicist, feynman had his own flaws. Fully accepted.

[@nasim09021975]

2 geniuses. But 2 opposites. Yet 2 legends. End of story. :D

[@EarlLedden]

+Nasim Hussain Beginning of story.

[@MakeMeThinkAgain]

I don't doubt that he was annoying, but have you ever noticed that EVERY physicist's best stories are about Feynman?

[@stoolpigeon4285]

I've noticed that they don't mention him

[@eastwestcoastkid]

Ben Webb bingo. They don’t mention Gell-Mann.

[@JohninBoulder1]

Murray Gell-Mann is not just one of the world's most intelligent and inspiring people, but he must surely rank with the best storytellers. A delight!

[@raydredX]

I didn't expect to find so much fanboying here. Putting Feynman on a pedestal as if he was somehow perfect. The guy was amazing, but stop deifying him and burning any blasphemer who dares to speak ill of him.

[@ienjoyapples]

Most other people who knew him say the same things as Gell-Mann, but in a positive light. He was competitive, egotistical, and outrageous, but that made working with him fun. Gell-Mann comes off as bitter and resentful.

[@aljaz182]

Bitter and resentful? When did he mock Feynman? He said he enjoyed working with him but as time went on he got tired of him. It's an opinion and he sounded respectful to me in the video. Not everybody has to share the same opinion, experience eevrything the same way or express themselves the same way.

[@kenbabcock5876]

For an important counterpoint, please see Leonard Susskind's TED talk on his view of Feynman (available on KZbin). Very entertaining, and a view that I think is much more typical of physicists who worked with him. (I grew up in the Cal Tech milieu, and have met Feynman and many who knew him.)

[@physicsno1]

Did Gell Mann think Feynman was a little "quarky" I wonder.

[@guilhermesilveira5254]

Feynman and Gell Mann were great science thinkers.

[@panographic]

Gell-Mann outlived Feynman by 31 years. Rest in peace, Murray

[@worldstatic]

Because he brushed his teeth...

[@navneetmishra3208]

He was washing his hands

[@deezynar]

I own two books filled with funny stories that Feynman told about himself. They are extremely entertaining, but also reveal that the man was indeed full of himself. It is very possible to admire someone and still see their warts. It's good that some balancing stories about Feynman are told, they don't take away from his accomplishments, they just illuminate the side of him that he didn't choose to brag about. I bumped into a comment about Feynman years ago that was written by a former student at Cal-Tech. While he was there, he heard that Feynman had had sex with the wives of many of his fellow professors. I don't know if that is true or not, but it fits with the stories he's told about himself. And it fits with female psychology, that they are attracted to men who are confident, well placed, humorous, and dynamic.

[@Mike-H_UK]

I heard that the affairs were at Cornell.

[@VeteranVandal]

So Gell-Mann confirmed a suspicion I had for a long time that Feynman actually crafted almost every aspect of his life just so he could have the kind of legacy he has - this was the kind of evidence I was looking for to confirme such suspicion. I know this is not exactly bad - as I don't think a Feynman would be possible without that, and I do not think lowly on the idea of surviving through your legacy, which I actually think seems to be a very good way of life - and maybe it is not exactly good - because Feynman was probably competitive to the point were he could annoy you or even make collaborating with him have a bad tool on the way you both interacted. But what that achieved for him, now I see, is what he wanted to achieve. I respect such a way of approaching life, even if I find it a little too much over the top, honestly. And Gell-man himself has his fair share of unjustifiable choices - as well as any of us. He declared once that he couldn't understand what others saw in Freeman Dyson's work or the interest it raised (which is kind of odd, as reading some of his work shows you that he done some very important scientific contributions)... I should emphasize that I think Gell-Mann never really seem to have known how great of a scientist he was (before people actually told him) and this is evidenced by the fact that he said he never really knew throughout his entire scientific career what was really a good thing to publish - and probably had to rely on discussion with others in that respect. Which is not exactly bad (as this just means he can be a little clueless, sometimes, which is OK), but not exactly good either - for obvious reasons (like the fact that some of his important results ended up being more hidden than what would have been ideal - think that he himself once told in another interview). As you can see, there no such a thing as a formula to reach a great scientific status, and you might not even understand yourself very well at that, and I think both those scientists give us a very vivid example of that. I can't help not noticing something they have in common, in my opinion: they are very good story tellers, from the videos I saw of them. Very good. Each with its style, but great in their own ways. Not that anybody will read this, but I just thought it would be cool to share what this video made me realize about both those great names in our scientific history.

[@nevertheless123]

VeteranVandal ditto...agree with everything you say.

[@VeteranVandal]

***** "I think Gell-Mann never really seem to have known how great of a scientist he was (before people actually told him) and this is evidenced by the fact that he said he never really knew throughout his entire scientific career what was really a good thing to publish - and probably had to rely on discussion with others in that respect." Add that to your mentioned handicap and you'll end with why Gell-Mann always had a problem publishing his ideas (at least from his point of view, nowadays). He also never considered to be a very bright kid, but, as clueless as Gell-Mann is about this kind of stuff, I don't know if I can trust his opinions about himself... While I can at least put his opinions about others in some perspective (as this is easier in this particular case). Thanks for the information about Feynman. I was unaware of that.

[@fiveredpears]

***** Feynman was like Newton in that respect. When Feynman came up with his version of QED, the story goes that a friend locked him in a room and forced him to write a paper on it. Feynman was notorious for deriving results in a few hours that took other physicists months, and not bothering to tell anyone. Newton's work on gravity is only known due to a chance conversation he had with Halley, in which Halley asked Newton if an inverse square law could predict the elliptical orbits of the planets. Newton had done the work years before and never told anyone. I guess if you're Newton or Feynman you're in a league of your own, other people must seem tiresomely stupid.

[@nevertheless123]

fiveredpears I guess you would disagree with history which says that Hooke suggested inverse square law to Newton through his letters and also explained why he believes its true.. Newton not only disagreed with him, but later did not acknowledgeHooke after stealing his ideas. Newton also did not agree with the wave theory of light (chuckle) and was tring to convert everything into gold before he discovered Newtons laws...and gave trouble to a lot of people who disagreed with him. Read books by Rupert Hall and VI Arnold for more details. I think Feynman was a FAR batter human being than Newton.

[@fiveredpears]

***** Newton was a dickhead. There's no doubt about that. What Newton did though was prove that the inverse square law could account for the motion of the planets and explain Kepler's laws. I'm sure he had his own reasons for his corpuscular theory of light. History proved him half right in the end. Yeah, he did spend a lot of time on alchemy. He was a nut. He was also a genius.

[@CamiloSanchez1979]

Interesting. Feynman did have a little bit of an ego, come on...we know he did.

[@eastwestcoastkid]

CamiloSanchez1979 you think Gell-Mann didn’t.

[@dhiohidayatullah7326]

how about "well, all humans do."

[@achildofgod9954]

Well deserved ego.

[@OscarReyes-zh8ub]

I can perfectly picture Feynman trying to pull Gell-Mann's leg, and Gell-Mann being amused by Feynman's mischievousness

[@babulalmarandi1243]

Lol

[@zichbold]

Feynman was a multi-faceted and talented man who knew how to make his insights and experiences in life and in science accessible to a wider audience in the form of entertaining anecdotes and to encourage people to think about the world and life in a scientific way. His didactic skills and his talent as a writer have given him a popularity that is unusual for a scientist. What's wrong with that? By the way, a nephrologist, senior physician in a German hospital, once explained to me that the disgust for urine is not due to its toxicity, but is caused by culture. Urine is inherently non-toxic. You can even drink it without harm, provided you overcome your disgust for it.

[@edwardjones2202]

Freeman Dyson said, in a podcast on Spotify with Graham Fermelo just before Dyson died, that Feynman was "just a calculator" and Gell-Mann's discovery of quarks was the most impressive discovery of post-war physics. This surprised me, as Dyson was clearly a huge admirer of Feynman, even claiming to be Ben Johnson to Feynman's Shakespeare

[@qbtc]

Other physicists like Yuval Ne'eman had come up with the eight-fold way through group symmetry around the same time Gell-Mann did. Gell-Mann popularized it better with his clever naming and so got most of the credit. Feynman diagrams were done decades earlier by Ernst Stueckelberg who was too ahead of his time and too obscure in his writings to be accepted by journal editors of the time. Both physicists are great and deserve all the credit they received but physics would have marched on without them. No disrespect intended to either.

[@mikezappulla4092]

@@qbtc your just repeating what MGM said about Feynman diagrams. Feynman diagrams are independent systematic derivations of these diagrams from particle formalism. They expand greatly on Stuekelbergs idea of positrons traveling backward. Feynman had multiple diagrams too.

[@gwales]

Gell-Mann is entitled to criticise Feynman (who I admire enormously), if he saw Feynman as a flawed person. Feynman was certainly no saint - he sometimes slept with his colleagues wives, paying for their abortions. He was still a brilliant and fascinating man, no question - one of my heroes, actually. Gell-Mann is not as interesting, but he was a brilliant scientists also.

[@fiveredpears]

Ted Taylor Thanks for sharing that, I found what you said very interesting. I think if Feynman had been anything less than a genius people would have had no time for him. If you worked in an office and behaved like Feyman people would think you were a pretentious idiot. Even if Feyman had been merely an outstanding Physicist he wouldn't have got away with it. His colleagues to had cover for him not performing academic duties, he slept with their wives and used his genius to belittle lesser physicists.

[@fiveredpears]

I think I read that in James Gleick's book.

[@Ch1n4Sailor]

Absolutely... No doubt he (Feynman) was one of the most brilliant physicist of the 20th century, and everyone has their own little quark's, not everything you hear about larger than life people is always flattering. Both of these men were geniuses.

[@BlueCosmology]

Gell-Mann is entitled to criticize Feynman ofcourse, but he goes well beyond what he's entitled to. Gel-Mann wrote in Feynman's obituary criticizing him which is just well beyond what is an acceptable thing to do.

[@oneeyedman99]

fiveredpears Yes, that's in the Gleick book, in considerable detail. Feynman kept a ton of his old papers, including letters from a number of former lovers, and his widow Gweneth apparently let Gleick look through all of them. Gleick portrays Feynman as quite the cad before his marriage to Gweneth, but as close to a model husband and father afterward.

[@StephenDoty84]

Finally memories of Feynman that were not fawning! I suspect Gell-Man was right. Feynman wrote two memoirs and some tales show he had a very competitive nature and liked adulation, as when his sister sent him a postcard in Japanese. He spent a lot of time practicing how to write Japanese and sent her a postcard in return, as if he needed to one-up her. She took it to a man in Japan and asked him what it said. The man said the penmanship was carefully crafted and it said, "Brother speaks it too."

[@kenbabcock5876]

You should ask his sister if she felt Feynman was trying to one-up her. She adored him, and loved how he took the time to teach her about science when they were kids. Feynman was not perfect but I see in these comments a lot of glee in tearing down Feynman's image based on a few foibles and outright exaggerations that pale in comparison to his fun idiosyncrasies and towering achievements.

[@StephenDoty84]

Ken Babcock I think one-upmanship can be fun and a mainspring for good performance. Feynman used it for his own delight and achievements, it seems, as did Lennon & McCartney in their competitive songwriting in the Beatles. That's to be distinguished from empty put-downs like "Marilyn Monroe was a fat, homely head-case," said by some brunet actress.

[@ArielBerdugo]

Hahaha

[@gustavosilvacm8932]

the postcard was in Chinese.

[@hekikoka5792]

He's merely expressing his own opinions and experience with Feynman. Others say he was a delight to have around. He was multitalented and charismatic and extroverted and probably that annoyed some and mesmerised others. Doesn't take away Feynman's achievements or legacy one bit. They speak for themselves. He was the grand wizard of his time.

[@JeffreyAguilera]

I ate at the Athenaeum many, many times without a jacket and tie ... even once with Feynman, Ramo, Goldberg, and Franklin.

[@mimo1983]

Who hasn't?

[@ericmelton4630]

" then I don't get any spaghetti sauce on my jacket or tie. See..."

[@andrewdeen1]

everything murray says here made me like feynman more. i love how irreverant he was - and it is precisely the fact that he was different that he is as well-known as he is. That's not a bad thing, it was Richard Feynman's 'fun to imagine' series on the BBC that was the catalist for me becoming interested in physics - the way he was almost giggly with excitement speaking about such seemingly mundane subjects as light and rubber bands. He injected tremendous energy into the way he spoke about science - energy that broke barrier between him, a renowned theoretical physicist, and me - a laymen with NO knowledge of physics at the time. I remember putting the rubber band in my mouth and stretching it to see if it really warmed up like he was talking about. I don't think if Murray was speaking about rubber bands it would have caused me to go to the drawer and get one out and try it. Feynman was great.. and people like Murray denigrate him by saying he "spoke like a bum" - we need more people like Richard Feynman to come down from pompous mountain and inspire us little people.

[@HazemGhander]

Thank you so much Andrew, I got depressed of this little video, and those who made fun of my hero "Feynman" ,however your comment really refreshed my heart. I'm so grateful.

[@moc5541]

I was in graduate school in physics when I first read the Feynman Lectures series of three books. I too then tried the rubber-band in the mouth test. At no time did Gell-Mann bother to try to explain physics to anyone but fellow academicians.

[@Oodle-ox2vf]

I know it is 12 years ago, but I am having a nostalgia moment.. This man certainly presented a lot of anecdotes for a guy who was criticizing Dick for doing it.... Dick was definitely a different kind of guy, and seemed to be hard work sometimes, but I still enjoy his unique lecture style. As a slightly strange high functioning autistic myself, I understand his difficulties at fitting in. We are all different. 🙂

[@abhinavvatsa7832]

I get his criticism of Feynman’s ego, but Feynman didn’t actually advocate for not brushing your teeth on national television. He just wanted people to think about the things that they do perpetually without questioning them. Other than that, great video!

[@reedfrey9120]

I love to hear his stories, just don’t forget that he was just as self-involved as Feynman, Feynman was ist more open about it.

[@Jipzorowns]

Thank you for posting: I really like listening to a legend, talking about a legend!

[@JxH]

...and Murray Gell-Mann then proceeds to tell us several interesting anecdotes about Richard Feynman. Well played Dick, ...well played.

[@RossMcgowanMaths]

I like the Gell-Mann interviews. He swipes away all the nonsense and gets down to the nitty gritty. I have always laughed at the whole , this guys ,girl is a genius , I mosstly see the term genius used as an excuse for others who are just not interested enough of willing to work long or hard enough, ' he can do it because he is genius' , much easier to say this than, 'I could do it but I'm not interested or willing enough to put the work in.' You also find that most (if not all) people with 'mythological' status within their professions have been keen self promoters. Bill Gates always made me chuckle when he talked about sleeping 4 hours a night and reading hundreds of books a year and going through huge books speed reading in no........ self promotion, 'did you hear about Bill Gates- a Genius'. The frailities of the human mind.

[@omegalamda3145]

Gell-Man was a good rudder for Feynmans ideas to appropriate at the time. Feynmans upbringing allowed him to express himself w/out a lot of self check. His seemingly random disregard of alumni or belonging to a set of rules was tedious affair during the 60’s. Feynmans manner of thinking about how things work was tedious enough. He didn’t need the waste of his energy on status quo rules. Such stuff was antithesis of his personality. Richard Feynman sister Joan, an Astrophysicist, said on his deathbed he quipped “Dying is so boring, I’m happy I only have to do it once!” She also once told him to “Think about very thorny problems as if you were a student again.” He created a cheat sheet w his sum of the histories Feynman diagrams. That said a lot about his free thinking get to the point character to me.

[@adespade119]

Two legends of Modern physics

[@Dalroc]

I think the reason Feynman wanted so many anecdotes from his own life and experiences, is because it is a good tool for teaching and getting people drawn in, when he is talking from experience!

[@adamfattal9602]

No it's because he had daddy issues

[@adespade119]

I like listening to Fenyman on Physics, equally though, I like the stories he used to recount.

[@QuantumAstrophile]

It is interesting that the wisdom should be classified as the human. To me, wisdom just is. And for that, I'm grateful to the embodyment which captured, processed, and presented it. To all those who desire to bring new wisdom, and all those who wish to be known as a bringer of new wisdom, may your path be your own and may the world let you walk it in silence.

[@irfanlone9032]

I must say that most people who are commenting here haven't either carefully listened to what Gell-man is saying or don't understand the language he's speaking fully and therefore are jumping the gun in judging both Feynman as well as Murray. All he's saying is that in his later years Feynman became more abd more interested in projecting his image. This means that Feynman was already an old man now. It does happen with most people that in their old age they feel a need to remain relevant and feel appreciated. So Feynman was nothing different in that regard. After all the physics that Feynman and others helped create in the 1940s that's QED was at the time this gentleman is talking of known to be just one instance of a quantum field theory and there were many other important and more general contributions that people like Weinberg, Salaam, Yang, Mills and others and even Gell Mann himself had already made. For instance you should know that conventional quantum mechanics doesn't work when it comes to the description of strong nuclear force and u need something called Quantum Chromodynamics of Gell Mann to do that. Thanks. Enjoy!

[@AnnaFava_ThePsychedelicWeb]

totally love this, had a good laugh too :-)

[@colinluby5950]

Gell-Mann matices. Thanks Murray, that is a few more years of academic pain for me!!! (love you really, you old genius, lol!!).

[@MakeMeThinkAgain]

Would it be accurate to say that Feynman's subject was everything that moves at C while Gell-Mann's subject was everything caught in a Higgs Field? Anyone know?

[@jeffknott7360]

Genius's are often eccentric and hard to get along with - doesn't change the fact they're genius's!

[@ragestarfish]

The description has some errors. First of all it's SU(3) and SU(2), not SO(2)/SO(3). Then it should probably be called Yang-Mills-Lagrangian, not Dirac Lagrangian. Also these SU(N) invariant fields are acted on by the respective matrices, not represented by. There's probably more but I'm lazy so...

[@Studentofgosset]

3:00 Feynman didn't do that at all, you can actually go and see the clip here on youtube. His point was that without evidence was not scientific, and he clearly stated that he wasn't trying to say brushing teeth is useless but that without evidence you can't claim it as fact. Annoying that MGM seems to purposely misstate Feynman.

[@EiziEizz]

Seems Gell-Mann also had trouble keeping his ego in check.

[@flamechick6]

When you're weird what else can you do but be weird! What a funny guy, Feynman!

[@DanFrederiksen]

To his credit he didn't but keep in mind Gell-Mann worked with him. He probably didn't see him on tv and formed an opinion based on that.

[@michelloenneberger8146]

and you were always right, Murray

[@jceepf]

Gell-Mann has a point. And I think it was Drell at Stanford who also said that Feynman advocated always doing things his own way. It worked for him but for most physicists it is a carreer killer said Drell. Most people better be lemmings on the whole.

[@Reginald-rr1gh]

I saw a comment someone made about an interview with Freeman Dyson how humble and generous Dyson was toward his past associates, in contrast to Gell Mann. I think this video of Gell Mann trashing Feynman supports his point.

[@reginaldcornwalingford6210]

richard feynman is the only nobel prize winner who was also a black belt in Brazilian Ju Jitsu

[@SAL-9000]

Also if you watch one of his other interviews, he admits that he was an avid bird-watcher (a person who spots birds and learns mostly the names and the identification methods), and Feynman in one of his interviews, recounting a talk he had with his father, had sorta made fun of bird-watchers that never really learn anything about the birds, to convey the distinction between 'knowing something' and 'knowing the name of something'. Maybe Gell-Mann is just pissed that Feynman dissed on his childhood pastime. It is specifically evident in that line about "insisted on being different... his father had taught him that" and "frequently it doesn't pay to be different than doing regular things, okay!?".

[@DanFrederiksen]

In the light of Gell-Mann's testimony and Feynman bringing up tooth brushing as a possible silly ritual, it seems quite possible that Feynman may have tried to be a contrarian to a fault in that regard. And I'm certainly not a conformist, my default is to question convention but I wouldn't stumble on trivialities like oral hygiene. And notice Feynman didn't end his example by saying obviously tooth brushing is beneficial, he left it open.

[@stevewallace1270]

Seems as if Gell-Mann is a Jeal-Man

[@jeffevey5763]

I actually find that some of Feynman's greatest contributions are along the lines of how to apply a scientific thinking to normal everyday problems, and in that he made his personality and insights accessible to people outside of physics. I think he devoted a lot of time to thinking about how to make his personality and his insight better known, especially I think in his later years. I think it's part of his genius : that is why we are still talking about him now, while we generally don't discuss any other scientists as much. Einstein is better known but less widely discussed and less influential in terms of his personal philosophies than Feynman. I think people tend to view Feynman's emphasis as self-serving, when it may have actually been a very well-considered decision to affect other people. Consider the long term effect of the Rogers Commission, or the discussions on cult science, or the educational system in Brazil - his influence as a scientific thinker has extended beyond any of his colleagues, and I personally view it as entirely helpful and beneficial, and interesting and fun.

[@michaelwright8896]

Not self serving by serving yourself to make yourself famous huh?

[@jeffevey5763]

@@michaelwright8896 if you want to have any influence, you have to become known.

[@glashoppah]

Gell-Man was Confucius to Feynman's Lao Tse. Gell-Man didn't really understand Feynman very well.

[@xenofurmi]

This is a really enlightening clip.

[@dpowens]

Agreed. It seems to me that Feynman simply just did not care what most other people thought about him, and (this is a lot of speculation on my part) went into a spiral after the death of Arlene. A personal spiral - it clearly didn't stop him from contributing professionally.

[@dewaynewashington8933]

Interesting. I'd always had a vague feeling that Feynman was sometimes just a little too bit much, sometimes seemed to be even trying to make a point of being eccentric. I can see that a steady diet of Feynman trying so hard to live up to the image he had of himself could be very annoying. As for Murray, I remember him as being very pleasant, always smiling, easy to laugh, very polite, almost humble.

[@eleanorporter]

Feynman was a self-taught safecracker. There were a lot of formulae and other things at Los Alamos that were locked up in filing cabinets or actual safes. None of them was actually safe. He could get into any of them at will. It might take him ten or even more minutes, but the son-of-a-gun could do it every time! I admire him in several ways, but he was not the kind of person who would make a good friend, or even colleague. A superiority complex is an ugly thing. Most really smart people feel "special," but he was over the top.

[@xenofurmi]

I don't really think that's the message that Murray Gell-Mann was trying to get across. Feynman had a need to be constantly unique. For people who already respect and like you for who you are on the day-to-day, this can get annoying. The were good friends and colleagues, at least at some point. Gell-Mann probably finally found him tiresome.

[@kasimirdenhertog3516]

Funny, how he says ‘and so on, and so forth’ just like Feynman often does. Perhaps because they worked together or it is/was a popular expression among physicists.

[@johnbull1568]

I won't dispute his brilliance, but Feynman was something of a raconteur, and embellished and exaggerated his anecdotes. I never get tired of watching Orson Welles talk about the time he met Winston Churchill, but the story itself is almost certainly not true,

[@richardhines8622]

The austerity of jealousy can lasso the best of them .

[@QuantumChance]

I find it sad that Gell-Mann saw Feynman's adventuring as publicity seeking. Gell-Mann seems almost resentful that Feynman wouldn't stick to the rules...Napoleon complex perhaps (for gell mann)?

[@ChristopherSykesDocumentaries]

A great clip!

[@thomastoups3451]

I would have liked to meet Feynman. I think he was the most interesting - and fun - person to have worked at Los Alamos.

[@mr.mohagany8555]

Yeah I'm with Gell-Mann on this one. Feynman was as brilliant self-promoter as he was a scientist. Similar skewed judgements play out in science all the time. For example, Watson and Crick stealing the glory from the quiet but talented Rosalind Franklin (whose work was of course THE essential element in assigning the structure of DNA). Yet you'd think they were the alpha and omega of DNA structure solving to hear them speak. Funny that questioning Feynman's towering genius seems like a very Feynman-esque thing to do.

[@MewCat100]

+Mr. Mohagany Watson and Crick didn't steal anything from Franklin. She didn't understand what she had and couldn't work it out. She wasn't much more than a tech. It took Watson and Crick to understand the meaning behind the images.

[@mr.mohagany8555]

Okay that is a good point she didn't know what to do with the data. But I think other people, for example Linus Pauling, could have solved it just as quick as Linus and Crick if he had the data. Anyway she should be mentioned right along with those two. They did what she couldn't do, but they couldn't do what she did. I'm sure it's not at all easy getting a useful diffraction pattern on a molecule shaped like DNA.

[@MewCat100]

Mr. Mohagany She usually is mentioned right along with Watson and Crick. In fact, James Watson has said as much himself. You are correct that she was the only one to get those diffraction patterns. That doesn't mean no one else would have, but she was certainly the first.

[@MewCat100]

***** Watson didn't go through anyone's papers and neither did Crick. Wilkins, was the one who showed Photo 51 to the duo, who were already close to solving the problem themselves. That photo was the final thing they needed. That Wilkins did that was due in part to his thinking that he, not Franklin, was in charge of the DNA research. He resented her a great deal because ".T. Randall, director of King's Biophysics Unit, sent Franklin a letter telling her that she would be in charge of DNA research, all the while allowing Wilkins to think that DNA would remain his territory and that Franklin would assist him. Communication between Franklin and Wilkins all but disappeared, and Wilkins didn't learn of Randall's letter to Franklin until years after her death." Note that Wilkins just thought Franklin was being a jerk because she did not divulge the letter she had received. More important is the fact that that photo wasn't actually taken by Franklin. It was made by Raymond Gosling, a PhD student who had originally worked with Wilkins, had then been transferred to Franklin (without Wilkins knowing), and was then transferred back Wilkins because Franklin was leaving the terrible atmosphere at King’s and abandoning her work on DNA. Read that last line carefully. Franklin was abandoning her work on DNA. The photo wasn't even hers. Even if she wasn't leaving, her heavy focus on DNA A may have cost her months to get to the right conclusion or may have even led her to the wrong conclusion. We'll never know.

[@MewCat100]

***** Send me the direct quote.

[@polymathematics_]

Goes to show you how everyone brings their own bias to the table. Gell-Mann who I don't know much about is obviously tremendously successful and a great scientist. His memories of Feynman are cool to hear, but they still come with some erroneous details. The brushing teeth thing is available on KZbin. Feynman explicitly says he isn't advocating people stop brushing. It was a kind of thought experiment to force yourself to examine our own strange habits and beliefs.

[@00beasis]

maybe this guy knows more than just watching a youtube video?

[@u.v.s.5583]

GENERATING anecdotes the Feynman way was actually living the thing.

[@joeschmoe8685]

I think he is simply stating aspects of a personality that would come into play when interacting with anyone on a personal and continuous basis. He is saying as much about himself as he is Feynman. I could easily picture Feynman in the exact same scenario saying "Gell-Mann was a great scientist whom I greatly admire but had little sense of adventure when it came to his concept of self. He could not stop associating ones idiosyncrasies with ones ego. To which I say, " " what is life but to live!" ".

[@adamfattal468]

RIP LEGEND!!!

[@WillN2Go1]

This is funny. I don't think Feynman spent all that much time generating stories about himself because he mostly told the same basic set of stories, not one of them included 'well he really admired me.' or anything close. (They were however full of people seeing him and asking or thinking, "Who is this nut?" ) Doesn't make Gell-Mann a bad guy, just reveals his insecurity and while it's clear Feynman was human, it's good to find out Gell-Mann was also one of us. Is there any video of Gell-Mann working this bit with Feynman nearby? That could be really funny. Someone should make a compilation video, Great Physicists at Home. Then a bunch of grainy clips looking through windows of old men pulling on their trousers, one leg at a time. And then maybe Gell-Mann complaining, "I told all those guys if they just sat down on the bed they could do both legs at the same time. They just never got it." About being different.... Feynman I have read made a point of keeping his Brooklyn accent, and he did seem to seek out being a bit of a beatnik, so Gell-Mann got this right. But Gell-Mann seems to have always made a point of being the know it all, like his habit of telling people they were pronouncing their own surnames wrong. As for Feynman's Brooklyn accent? When you're the kid from the wrong side of town but you really know your stuff, it's fun, first you lower expectations and then you set the fancy guys right. It makes up for not having had a pony or having gone to private school. Now I get it. Feynman did some of this stuff just to drive OCD Gell-Mann a bit nuts.

[@sandworm9528]

Amazing! Hearing this story i cant help but hope i can instill such a flamboyant love of generating anecdotes in my son. Feynman's father was the real hero 😂

[@nicosmind3]

I love Feynman and have much respect for him, but this is an interesting take on him. I wouldn't be surprised if more people had the same opinion or other negative thoughts but they don't want to talk I'll of him for whatever reason.

[@znhait]

Remember that Gell-Mann essentially knew him for 30 years. Eventually, they probably got on each other's nerves. I guess the problem Gell-Mann had with him is that Feynmann did a lot of weird things just for the sake of it, not because it came naturally to him.

[@jimnyenhuis560]

It's interesting that Gell-Mann seems to be the different one now, in that he DOESN'T praise Feynman to the skies. I don't think he's under any illusions as to the quality of Feynman's work or status as a physicist, at least in this video. Feynman was certainly a wise person with a larger-than-life personality -- the kind that makes people WANT to have liked him. For that reason, I'm not sure we can take ANYone's reminiscences about him strictly at face value.

[@ktuluflux]

Sadly a big part of Feynman’s legacy seems to be his rabid and sometimes obnoxious fans which he appears to have taken great care to cultivate. I loved reading “surely, you must be joking” as much as the next science loving 16 year old but you can’t help but think (especially as you get older) how affected his irreverent cowboy among the genteel schtick must have seemed with his (equally gifted) colleagues. The truth is probably somewhere in between Feynman’s carefully constructed image of himself and his so-called detractors.

[@SAL-9000]

Read the below account of Gell-Mann's own life to see if he was a miserable old guy or not: Gell-Mann graduated from Yale with a bachelor's degree in physics in 1948 and intended to pursue graduate studies in physics. He sought to remain in the Ivy League for his graduate education and applied to Princeton University as well as Harvard University. He was rejected by Princeton and accepted by Harvard, but the latter institution was unable to offer him any of the financial assistance that he needed. He was accepted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and received a letter from Victor Weisskopf urging him to attend MIT and become Weisskopf's research assistant, which would provide Gell-Mann with the financial assistance he needed. Unaware of MIT's eminent status in physics research, Gell-Mann was "miserable" with the fact that he would not be able to attend Princeton or Harvard and considered suicide. He stated that he realized he could try to first enter MIT and commit suicide afterwards if he found it to be truly terrible. However, he couldn't first choose suicide and then attend MIT; the two were not "commutable", as Gell-Mann said.

[@Razsteroid]

All the reasons this guy didn't like Feynman seem like things I'd enjoy him for.

[@PaulSchober]

*All the reasons this guy didn't like Feynman seem like things I'd enjoy him for.* Would you like him if he was always the center of attention when around you, got all the girls and accolades, and took credit for the work you collaborated on equally? Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge Feynman fan, but I don't think the guy was a saint. Let's face it, he had an enormous ego and had to always be the center of attention.

[@wowsa0]

I think his point wasn't so much that you should never be different, but rather that you shouldn't be different for the sake of being different any more than you should conform for the sake of conforming. That's what I took it to mean anyway.

[@Danyel615]

On 2:58 it seems really weird to me that he says that about brushing. Go and watch Feynman talk about this topic here, right at the very beginning: kzbin.info/www/bejne/hqTKc6eFi997gas Feynman explains the issue himself and basically says the *opposite* of Gell-Mann. How to take him seriously then?

[@shroomskaiev]

Feynman once said " the shell game we play is technically called renormalization, having to resort to such hocus pocus has prevented us from proving that the theory of QED is self consistent, i suspect that remormalization is not mathemathicaly legitimate "

[@MuonRay]

Thanks. I try to provide a service that encourages good information retrieval that is entertainment but is not insulting to viewers intelligence. It would be very easy to just post video after video of meme-styled videos to get views but they have little substance and a kind of closed connectivity.

[@stevedabish9107]

such wonderful human being

[@03Kabbotta11]

I think he meant that he generated stories that other people would tell about him. As a huge admirer of Feynman's, I can completely believe this was true.

[@MichaelMa84]

What's wrong with anecdotes? Whenever I listen to Feynman it reminds me of Mark Twain. They both have a knack for story telling - the kind where you're always waiting for the punch line with anticipation. This interview, on the other hand, sounds like gossip you would hear at a barber shop.