Curse of knowledge

Re:Curse of knowledge by hunta2097 on Sunday April 23, 2017 @06:02AM (#14177426)

I think the reason why Richard Feynman was such a great orator is that he could overcome this gap to a certain extent.

Matt O'Dowd on PBS Space Time also has a great way of breaking down really complex theories (especially if you watch a set of presentations in order).

[PBS Space Time (YouTube)] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7_gcs09iThXybpVgjHZ_7g

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Curse of knowledge by EdwardCoffin on Sunday April 23, 2017 @10:20AM (#14178254)

> he could overcome this gap to a certain extent

I wonder whether this was due to his habit of regularly re-evaluating his understanding of more advanced concepts from first-principles. If so, that could be a technique to counter the curse of knowledge.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Curse of knowledge by bike4beer on Sunday April 23, 2017 @07:10AM (#14177645)

I love Feynman he was an entertainer, but honestly, even CalTech admitted that nobody really advanced in understanding or created anything out his works, its all like intellectual mind candy.

People who understand things who can roll up their sleeves, and get the job done, are a rare breed, this stuff can't be taught.

Later, after you create you can return to Feynman, have a cold-beer, and listen to his lectures and have a good laugh.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Curse of knowledge by pmoriarty on Sunday April 23, 2017 @12:50PM (#14178939)

"even CalTech admitted that nobody really advanced in understanding or created anything out his works"

Oh, you mean the work Feynman did for which he got the Nobel Prize in Physics?

Good to know that CalTech considers that worthless.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Curse of knowledge by patrickg_zill on Sunday April 23, 2017 @11:31AM (#14178533)

I am no expert, but do people no longer use Feynman diagrams? Were all his theories on QED superceded by new work?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Curse of knowledge by throwaway7645 on Sunday April 23, 2017 @08:41AM (#14177946)

Yea...his intro series seems to be physics concepts for the non math based majors.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Curse of knowledge by tgb on Sunday April 23, 2017 @09:36AM (#14178102)

Have you read the Feynman lectures? They're not exactly trivial. They have some diversions towards casual descriptions, but they're quite grounded in mathematics. I haven't watched his course lectures, but I have a hard time believing that they're that different.

He does write explicitly non-math based works as well, like the (IMO excellent) QED book. But I also have his lectures on computation book here, and I had to leave a good number of problems in it unsolved.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Curse of knowledge by throwaway7645 on Tuesday April 25, 2017 @07:39AM (#14192546)

Yea, you can watch on YouTube. They aren't very math based. Of course the theory is mathematical, but you won't get that without equations. I'm just talking about his intro course and have never read QED or his lectures on computation. A great scientist making more accomplishments in an afternoon than I will make in my lifetime :).

[ Parent | on HN ]