Now on ScienceBlogs: The 1/6th People

Seed Media Group

Collective Imagination

Built on Facts

An exploration of physics and the quest to understand our world.

Profile

profile.jpg Matt Springer is a graduate student of physics at Texas A&M university. He is also an occasional writer and tinkerer, and he is probably too curious for his own good.

Search

Feeds/Networks

http://www.wikio.com

Donate

Help Matt not starve! Use this link to amazon.com when you order from Amazon, and a fraction of the purchase price will be sent to me at zero cost to you. Much obliged, and thanks for your patronage.


Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Physics/Math Blogs

My Other-Than-Science Reading (variable, very incomplete)

« Cliff's Notes on NCIS. | Main | Space Shuttle: Electric Boogaloo »

Greatest Physicists #5 - Richard Feynman

Category: Greatest Physicists
Posted on: October 23, 2008 10:00 AM, by Matt Springer

#5 - Richard Feynman

feynman.jpg

I'm probably going to take some flack for this one. Feynman was and is so popular as a scientific writer, raconteur, and honest-to-goodness celebrity that his staggering scientific accomplishments are sometimes lost in the shadow of his own popular legend. But if we want to try to make a more-or-less honest ranking of the top ten, we have to give him the vast credit he deserves.

Feynman got his start as a physicist in roughly the most dramatic way possible. Pulled fresh out of Princeton in the middle of the Second World War, he was assigned as one of the thousands of scientists and engineers working in great secrecy on what became the icon of 20th century physics - the Manhattan Project. He was not central to the project, but he quickly established a reputation as one of the most brilliant scientists working there at Los Alamos.

So how did he get to be the 5th greatest physicist? First, there's his Nobel Prize winning work on quantum electrodynamics. QED was the staggeringly successful extension of the quantum mechanics of particles to the quantum mechanics of fields. Its description of electric and magnetic fields has proved to fit the experimental reality exactly. Indeed its agreement with experiment is widely considered to be the most precisely verified theory in all of physics. Not even the great Dirac had managed to solve the problem of the quantization of fields despite his best efforts. Even after Feynman and his collaborators succeeded in formulating QED, Dirac wasn't happy with its mathematically questionable renormalization methods. Neither was Feynman, actually. But renormalization works perfectly so far as we can tell, and that's the true test of a theory.

Feynman also developed the path integral formulation of quantum mechanics, which of all the various equivalent formulations of QM is the one I personally find the most elegant. It describes the time evolution of a system in terms of an integral over all possible paths, classically possible or not. While it's not often useful for doing problems, it had great theoretical merit and it forms a foundation for many quantum field theories. In some ways it's considered more fundamental than the more common ways of formulating quantum mechanics.

He developed Feynman diagrams and worked in superfluidity, particle decay, quantum gravity, and kept up a friendly (Maybe. Sometimes I'm not sure...) rivalry with Murray Gell-Mann over their approaches to the strong nuclear force. And those are just the high points of his physics career. Aside from physics, he became well known for his successes at everything from the drums to safecracking to art and womanizing. He was, um, a bit of a ladies man. For better or worse, there's not many physicists who can say that.

He was a prolific writer. His humorous memoir Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman! is still a classic, and his books on physics are universally regarded as among the best of the genre. In my opinion, his best is The Character of Physical Law
, but I don't think anything he wrote is less than excellent.

When the Challenger disintegrated on launch Feynman was asked to be a menber of the investigatory commission. Had NASA brass known how this would end they might not have been so eager to invite him, but his effort was a beautiful and merciless instance of massacring bureaucracy in the service of truth. The story is well worth reading. So is his actual report.

Are there physicists who contributed more to physics? Yes. But just four, by my very unscientific ranking. Of all the scores of truly brilliant 20th century physicists, Feynman stands nearly without peer.

The list so far (click the category name for links):
5. Feynman
6. Rutherford
7. Schrodinger
8. Dirac
9. Thomson
10. Pauli

Share this: Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/84050

Comments

1

No flack from me.

Posted by: Dave Gill | October 23, 2008 11:38 AM

2

Let us evaluate Feynman as would any Tenure Committee. His technical publication list is very modest - at most 85 refereed papers over a lifetime, averaging 1.4 papers/year,

http://users.physik.fu-berlin.de/~kleinert/feynman/feynmanpub.htm

He produced almost no graduate degrees. He brought in little grant funding. He was a white male sexual addict and preditor (a Howard Wolowitz!). No professional manager would let Feynman's CV pass by the circular file. Diversity and compliance are the three cornerstones of a robust academic community. (If you cannot see the third cornerstone - no tenure track for you.)

Look what Feynman did to the Challenger anomaly! Do you have any idea how many PERT charts and spreadhsheets had to be rewritten? How many managers had to be laterally promoted to justify their productivity bonuses? How many meetings had to be held to put things back the way they were? Oh, if it weren't for Sally Ride sitting there smiling! Her purchased loyalties were never in doubt. 100% American!

Posted by: Uncle Al | October 23, 2008 12:22 PM

3

As a well read layman I can only say this: Other than the sheer (almost shocking) size of the Einsteinian and Newtonian contributions I have not been influenced by ANY physicist as much as by Feynman.

The depth of his genius is simply staggering.

I would put him number three.

Posted by: Clive van der Spuy | October 24, 2008 7:37 AM

4

Feynman's behavior at the Challenger hearings was both embarrassing and offensive. He arrogantly hectored and debased decent engineers (who had been over-ruled by political hacks) in an area in which he had virtually no knowledge and in which they themselves were fully expert. His whole career was indelibly tarnished by that tantrum

Posted by: Bob S | October 24, 2008 8:39 AM

5

BobS - you're kidding, right?
Did you read his own account of the incident (in "what do you care..."), where he makes very clear that he was put on the right track by someone else? And did you read his report appendix where he clearly states that it is *not* the engineers fault and that the engineers had a much clearer understanding of true probabilities?

Posted by: MartinB | October 24, 2008 12:41 PM

6

No flack from this engineer. Shame he didn't make it to Tuva.

Posted by: Devo | October 24, 2008 12:42 PM

7

I'm really curious now for the top 4 of the list. Einstein, Newton and probably Maxwell should be given, but who is the fourth? There are at least two more I'd like to see on a top ten list: Boltzmann and Faraday.

Posted by: MartinB | October 24, 2008 2:41 PM

8

Jeez, there seems to be an overabundance of people who studied really small scale stuffs in this list. When are we going to get to the classical stuff? :)

Posted by: IBY | October 25, 2008 7:35 PM

9

I had the great pleasure of being an undergraduate at Caltech while Feynman was a professor there. I learned physics from his textbooks, heard him lecture and got drunk with him at parties. Truly one of the renaissance men of our generation

Posted by: lorne schachter | October 28, 2008 10:27 AM

10

Missed this when it was first posted ... Definitely one of the greats. This bit:
"Even after Feynman and his collaborators succeeded in formulating QED, Dirac wasn't happy with its mathematically questionable renormalization methods. Neither was Feynman, actually. But renormalization works perfectly so far as we can tell, and that's the true test of a theory."
reminded me of my favorite physics joke ...

How many theoretical quantum physicists does it take to change a light bulb?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
One. One to hold the ladder, one to turn the bulb, and one to renormalize the wave function.
:-D

Posted by: Scott Simmons | November 20, 2008 11:52 AM

Post a Comment

(Email address is entirely optional, but a consistent email - fake is fine - helps the system identify repeat commenters as not spam.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Enter to win a free copy of The Monty Hall Problem
Visit the Collective Imagination blog
Advertisement
Collective Imagination

© 2006-2009 Seed Media Group LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of Seed Media Group. All rights reserved.

Sites by Seed Media Group: Seed Media Group | ScienceBlogs | SEEDMAGAZINE.COM