A famous great anecdote about Dirac (and Bohr and Rutherford) was in Absolute Zero Gravity:
--
Young Dirac arrived at Niels Bohr’s institute with a glowing recommendation from the great experimentalist Ernest Rutherford. A few months later, Bohr remarked to Rutherford that this marvelous Dirac hardly seemed so special: he said nothing and he did nothing. Legend has it that Rutherford replied with the following story:
A man went to a pet shop to buy a parrot. There was a gray parrot that knew a few words selling for one hundred dollars. There was a blue parrot that could sing and tell stories for two hundred dollars. There was a beautiful green and purple bird that spoke several ancient languages for five hundred dollars. And there was a nondescript brown bird priced at a thousand dollars.
“A thousand dollars!” exclaimed the would-be buyer. “That must be some bird - how many languages does he speak?”“Just English,” admitted the shopkeeper.
“His vocabulary is extraordinary, perhaps?”The shopkeeper shrugged. “Not really”.
“Does he sing, then?”“No,” said the shopkeeper. “Most days this parrot doesn’t even talk”.
“Well, does he do acrobatic tricks or something? What on earth is so valuable about that parrot?”
> 'Why do you dance?' Dirac asked [Heisenberg]. 'When there are nice girls, it is a pleasure,' Heisenberg replied. Dirac pondered this notion, then blurted out: 'But, Heisenberg, how do you know beforehand that the girls are nice?'"
The difference between a theoretician and a scientist. Heisenberg was clearly the scientist.
The book "the strangest man" goes in depth about his life and how weird that guy was. No surprise a psychologist suggested me to read it while I talked about the possibility of being autistic. Of course you can't diagnose a dead person, but let's say it wouldn't have been surprising had he discovered to be nd
I happen to be reading the book Neurotribes which is a decent (although sometimes pathologizing) treatment of autism, and it retrospectively diagnoses Dirac as on the spectrum. Silberman, the author, does reference and seems to rely heavily on the biography The Strangest Man.
With regard to the "effect", what about listening to an intellectual hero of the beginning of the XX Century, and seeing him active near the end of the XX Century, discussing thus the experimental contributions of "radar" (1940), "atomic clock" (1955), "spacecrafts on Mars" (1964) and the "Viking lander" (1976)...
No, it was a pretty low value comment, but I don’t think I can DM you to give you the feedback. I did intend to give my feedback with respect if that makes any difference.
I read in Friedrich Hund's Wikipedia biography that while he was in Jena in after WWII in East Germany, the head of the Thuringen state government awarded him in 1949.... a voucher for a pair of shoes (a copy of the letter is on Wikipedia) as recognition of his academic merits.
He ended up emigrating to the West in 1951, and thus avoided the bloody 1953 Soviet repression of unions demands in Jena. Question to Germans: Was the shoe voucher a more or less hidden message, or just typical postwar East German socialism?
Not an expert either, esp. because I'm too young and socialized in West Germany with family ties to Thuringia, though.
What always struck me was Eastern Germans' tendency to practical things (and an enormous creativity in fixing broken stuff!).
In addition, this is 1949 Eastern Germany, the country was devastated and this part under Soviet rule. It might sound a bit weird as a gift from today's wealthy point of view but historically "a good pair of shoes" was always something people appreciated throughout all times and cultures.
> historically "a good pair of shoes" was always something people appreciated throughout all times and cultures
(It seems I am indulging in anecdotes a bit in this page, but anyway) In the portrait of "Lenin" Ulyanov by Paul Johnson in Modern Times, you will read
> Lenin left Zurich to return to Russia on 8 April 1917. [...] At Stockholm, comrade Karl Radek bought him a pair of shoes, but he refused other clothes, remarking sourly, ‘I am not going to Russia to open a tailor’s shop’.
I think they are both talking in Received Pronunciation (RP). At first I almost thought Dirac was mimicking the slight German tinge, but he was also a fluent German speaker so maybe this was natural to him too. I remember reading he stopped speaking German during one of the world wars so not sure if he still did at this point.
Paul Dirac looks and sounds a lot like my father's father, though he delivers his words faster and with more emotion. I almost never heard my grandfather speak.
First I've heard of it. It's very safe to say that nothing ever came of any supposed discrepancy between physical (atomic) time and the time-related terms in Einstein's theories. Countless people doing science in countless places and contexts would have noticed any shenanigans along the lines of what they're discussing here.
I'm pretty sure it's considered unproven about whether gravity is weakening over time, or that the passage of time is changing in any other way other than what General Relativity specifies, which is essentially an observer effect, and not a "change" in the strength of gravity itself or time.
Everyone is waiting for a breakthrough to merge quantum mechanics and general relativity. What kind of intellectual bombshell will that take? What kind of mind will it take to have such an insight?
Amazing to think there was a similar vibe in the 1920’s around trying to merge quantum mechanics and special relativity. They seemed incompatible at a basic level, yet this cool guy on the autism spectrum came along and said here ya go fixed that for you.
Some great stories about Dirac's "unusual" personality: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Dirac#Personality
One of my favorite theologians, physicist-turned-Anglican-priest Dr. John Polkinghorne FRS, did his Ph.D in Dirac's group. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Polkinghorne
A famous great anecdote about Dirac (and Bohr and Rutherford) was in Absolute Zero Gravity:
--
Young Dirac arrived at Niels Bohr’s institute with a glowing recommendation from the great experimentalist Ernest Rutherford. A few months later, Bohr remarked to Rutherford that this marvelous Dirac hardly seemed so special: he said nothing and he did nothing. Legend has it that Rutherford replied with the following story:
A man went to a pet shop to buy a parrot. There was a gray parrot that knew a few words selling for one hundred dollars. There was a blue parrot that could sing and tell stories for two hundred dollars. There was a beautiful green and purple bird that spoke several ancient languages for five hundred dollars. And there was a nondescript brown bird priced at a thousand dollars.
“A thousand dollars!” exclaimed the would-be buyer. “That must be some bird - how many languages does he speak?” “Just English,” admitted the shopkeeper.
“His vocabulary is extraordinary, perhaps?” The shopkeeper shrugged. “Not really”.
“Does he sing, then?” “No,” said the shopkeeper. “Most days this parrot doesn’t even talk”.
“Well, does he do acrobatic tricks or something? What on earth is so valuable about that parrot?”
“Sir, this parrot thinks”.
Rutherford concluded, “Dirac thinks”.
Beautiful.
> 'Why do you dance?' Dirac asked [Heisenberg]. 'When there are nice girls, it is a pleasure,' Heisenberg replied. Dirac pondered this notion, then blurted out: 'But, Heisenberg, how do you know beforehand that the girls are nice?'"
The difference between a theoretician and a scientist. Heisenberg was clearly the scientist.
The book "the strangest man" goes in depth about his life and how weird that guy was. No surprise a psychologist suggested me to read it while I talked about the possibility of being autistic. Of course you can't diagnose a dead person, but let's say it wouldn't have been surprising had he discovered to be nd
I happen to be reading the book Neurotribes which is a decent (although sometimes pathologizing) treatment of autism, and it retrospectively diagnoses Dirac as on the spectrum. Silberman, the author, does reference and seems to rely heavily on the biography The Strangest Man.
"There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet".
Please note that there also exist video lectures from Dirac on YT:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GwctBldBvU
Oppenheimer once wrote a letter of recommendation for Richard Feynman and called him: "a second Dirac, only this time human."
I'm not a physicist, but it's very pleasant listening to a conversation between two old intellectuals.
With regard to the "effect", what about listening to an intellectual hero of the beginning of the XX Century, and seeing him active near the end of the XX Century, discussing thus the experimental contributions of "radar" (1940), "atomic clock" (1955), "spacecrafts on Mars" (1964) and the "Viking lander" (1976)...
[flagged]
(On which basis?! Do you think it made any sense to intervene throwing on the table random unjustified stances?!)
No, it was a pretty low value comment, but I don’t think I can DM you to give you the feedback. I did intend to give my feedback with respect if that makes any difference.
I read in Friedrich Hund's Wikipedia biography that while he was in Jena in after WWII in East Germany, the head of the Thuringen state government awarded him in 1949.... a voucher for a pair of shoes (a copy of the letter is on Wikipedia) as recognition of his academic merits.
He ended up emigrating to the West in 1951, and thus avoided the bloody 1953 Soviet repression of unions demands in Jena. Question to Germans: Was the shoe voucher a more or less hidden message, or just typical postwar East German socialism?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Brief_Eg...
Not an expert either, esp. because I'm too young and socialized in West Germany with family ties to Thuringia, though.
What always struck me was Eastern Germans' tendency to practical things (and an enormous creativity in fixing broken stuff!). In addition, this is 1949 Eastern Germany, the country was devastated and this part under Soviet rule. It might sound a bit weird as a gift from today's wealthy point of view but historically "a good pair of shoes" was always something people appreciated throughout all times and cultures.
> historically "a good pair of shoes" was always something people appreciated throughout all times and cultures
(It seems I am indulging in anecdotes a bit in this page, but anyway) In the portrait of "Lenin" Ulyanov by Paul Johnson in Modern Times, you will read
> Lenin left Zurich to return to Russia on 8 April 1917. [...] At Stockholm, comrade Karl Radek bought him a pair of shoes, but he refused other clothes, remarking sourly, ‘I am not going to Russia to open a tailor’s shop’.
At the time clothes were typically made to last and did, with shoes being a weak point due to the harsher wear and tear of rubbing against the ground.
Not an expert but this reads like typical DDR to me
Vouchers were common under communist rule in periods of scarcity.
I can imagine 1949 East Germany to not have overabundance of shoes maybe.
Had to listen to see if Dirac had a Bristolian accent, but unfortunately not.
I think they are both talking in Received Pronunciation (RP). At first I almost thought Dirac was mimicking the slight German tinge, but he was also a fluent German speaker so maybe this was natural to him too. I remember reading he stopped speaking German during one of the world wars so not sure if he still did at this point.
Paul Dirac looks and sounds a lot like my father's father, though he delivers his words faster and with more emotion. I almost never heard my grandfather speak.
Same
Was the Moon time discrepancy to atomic clocks ever proven or disproven?
First I've heard of it. It's very safe to say that nothing ever came of any supposed discrepancy between physical (atomic) time and the time-related terms in Einstein's theories. Countless people doing science in countless places and contexts would have noticed any shenanigans along the lines of what they're discussing here.
I'm pretty sure it's considered unproven about whether gravity is weakening over time, or that the passage of time is changing in any other way other than what General Relativity specifies, which is essentially an observer effect, and not a "change" in the strength of gravity itself or time.
Everyone is waiting for a breakthrough to merge quantum mechanics and general relativity. What kind of intellectual bombshell will that take? What kind of mind will it take to have such an insight?
Amazing to think there was a similar vibe in the 1920’s around trying to merge quantum mechanics and special relativity. They seemed incompatible at a basic level, yet this cool guy on the autism spectrum came along and said here ya go fixed that for you.
[dead]
[flagged]