Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it.
Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it.
I have argued flying saucers with lots of people. I was interested in this: they keep arguing that it is possible. And that's true. It is possible. They do not appreciate that the problem is not to demonstrate whether it's possible or not, but whether it's going on or not.
For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
Full report
When playing Russian roulette the fact that the first shot got off safely is little comfort for the next.
The inexperienced, and crackpots, and people like that, make guesses that are simple, but you can immediately see that they are wrong, so that does not count. Others, the inexperienced students, make guesses that are very complicated, and it sort of looks as if it is all right, but I know it is not true because the truth always turns out to be simpler than you thought.
For those who want some proof that physicists are human, the proof is in the idiocy of all the different units which they use for measuring energy.
We can't define anything precisely. If we attempt to, we get into that paralysis of thought that comes to philosophers… one saying to the other: "You don't know what you are talking about!". The second one says: "What do you mean by talking? What do you mean by you? What do you mean by know?"
It doesn't seem to me that this fantastically marvelous universe, this tremendous range of time and space and different kinds of animals, and all the different planets, and all these atoms with all their motions, and so on, all this complicated thing can merely be a stage so that God can watch human beings struggle for good and evil -- which is the view that religion has. The stage is too big for the drama.
Reprinted in Perfectly Reasonable Deviations from the Beaten Track, ed. by Michelle Feynman, Appendix I (2006).
Scientists take it for granted that it is perfectly consistent to be unsure -- that it is possible to live and not know. But I don't know whether everyone realizes that this is true.
There is one feature I notice that is generally missing in 'cargo cult science'... It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty —a kind of leaning over backwards... For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid —not only what you think is right about it... Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you know them.
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself -- and you are the easiest person to fool
There is one feature I notice that is generally missing in "cargo cult science"... It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty — a kind of leaning over backwards... For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid — not only what you think is right about it... Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you know them.
WIST is my collection of quotations I find meaningful, moving, amusing (intended or not), well-phrased, and/or to which I just say I "Wish I'd Said That." But just because I quote it here doesn't mean I actually agree with it. If you have any comments, corrections, or suggestions, please don't hesitate to
Use the Fast Search search box to look for text in quotations or their sources.
To search for an author, go to the All Authors page. Or you can also use the custom Google search below for quotes and authors: