Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:26, 1 April 2024

This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Books This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook Physics: Publications Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Publications Taskforce.

Comments

Ya, the reason it is funny when he asks for both is not that it's not "customary" to put both lemon and milk in tea. It's because if you put those both in a tea they would curdle into little bits of cheese. It wasn't a stiff british faux-pas thing it was a 'you probably don't want cheese tea' kind of thing. -Maverick

Richard Feynman, Physics Nobel laureate in 1965 for his work in electrodynamics, may be percieved as an eccentric and free spirit. His works in the fields of mechanics and astronomy are the works of a genius. His book, 'Surely You're Joking, Mr.Feynman', is a compilation of numerous events that when collated, summarise the person that is Feynman. It contains everything from humorous anecdotes to his true feelings when his first wife, Arline, died prematurely. The book is a must-read for all those who are ambitious to make it big in life, and not ONLY for those who aspire to become physicists.

--219.65.104.191 08:30, 25 July 2005 (UTC)Mukundh Vasudevan.

Feynman was revealing his naiveté, not absentmindedness.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nodttiurp (talk • contribs) 02:02, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Definitely not absentmindedness. This should be changed to "naively". The story in the book is self-deprecatingly drawing attention to his own inexperience at dealing with the customs of Princeton University's high society. 165.120.144.232 (talk) 17:56, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Me again - actually ignore that, I just checked the book, and it's complicated. It was his first afternoon at Princeton, at the welcoming Dean's Tea ("I didn't know what a 'Tea' was", meaning the event), and he's overwhelmed by the formality. But when he famously says "both", it's because he's trying to work out where to sit and he's not concentrating, and "I realized what I had said". So, he did know better but was distracted. 165.120.144.232 (talk) 18:25, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

How The Book Came About

I feel like the article should do a much better job of describing how the book actually came about. It says "the anecdotes were edited from taped conversations that Feynman had with his close friend and drumming partner Ralph Leighton". Were the anecdotes edited by Feynman himself, and if not - by whom? Why would anyone tape conversations with their close friend - what's the story here? Were they taped specifically with the intent of publishing them? On whose initiative?

Arlene vs. Arline

I have a copy of Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman in front of me.

The introduction reads: "I got married to Arlene in 1941...".

Let's keep her name spelled correctly. -- Starwiz 18:07, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Agh. Check out Talk:Richard_Feynman to see why I'm wrong. Changing it back. --Starwiz 18:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

publish date

what is the original publish date? I've seen conflicting reports and this article isnt clear. thoughts? Stuph 05:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

It says 1985 in the publication data section. What other date have you seen? - DavidWBrooks 15:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Title

Any reason why the anecdote behind the otherwise strange title is not given? --22:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Some explanation of the title would improve the article. I've always wondered why the speaker of the title used "Mr." rather than "Dr." Robert K S (talk) 17:22, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Robert K S: The reason is that the quote originated while Feynman was either still an undergraduate or coursing his post graduate studies, so he hadn't earned the Dr. title yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.109.42.205 (talk) 17:36, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

gorgorat.com

The link to gorgorat.com here seems odd, since there's no explanation of why the complete text is hosted there (and has been for some time). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.88.77.145 (talk) 23:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Plus, is it legal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.23.2 (talk) 07:03, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Merge from cargo cult science

On December 11, User:AndyTheGrump opened a discussion at Talk:Cargo cult science, stating that the description of "cargo cults" in that article was based on outdated and chauvinistic portrayals of Melanesians under western colonial domination. User:Hemiauchenia expressed some agreement with these objections. After more than a month of discussion, User:ReyHahn suggested that the concept of CCS in discourse relied so heavily on Feynman's authority that it was not really a separate subject and should be merged to his bio article. Hemiauchenia then opened a merge discussion for that purpose. The discussion settled on this article as the more appropriate merge target and while it was in progress, I added a small section on CCS to this article with footnotes intended to address some of Andy's concerns (first edit). The merge discussion was closed with consensus to merge here.

Hemiauchenia then replaced my section with the entire text of the CCS article, including all of the material (such as Feynman's misleading description) that Andy had originally objected to. This is has led to an edit war between Hemiauchenia and myself, with other editors also reverting while falsely stating that my edits are "unexplained." I know of no policy or guideline that requires a merge to be a verbatim copy/paste. I know of no policy or guideline under which a successful merge proposal also implies a consensus to preserve the merge source's text as it was. Any such policy would be dubiously enforceable. (How does one know which parts of an article were merged?) In this instance it would also trample on WP:COATRACK, as the CCS chapter is just one of 39 in the book but its section is now more than half the article. 2601:642:4600:D3B0:56C:3F16:53EF:5265 (talk) 17:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

• Start-Class Book articles
• WikiProject Books articles
• Start-Class physics articles
• Low-importance physics articles
• Start-Class physics articles of Low-importance
• Start-Class physics publications articles
• Physics publications articles