
Oppenheimer's recommendation letter for Richard Feynman - sindhiparsani
http://www.lettersofnote.com/2009/12/he-is-second-dirac-only-this-time-human.html
======
danso
I highly recommend both of Feynman's memoirs:

"Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!", [http://www.amazon.com/Surely-Feynman-
Adventures-Curious-Char...](http://www.amazon.com/Surely-Feynman-Adventures-
Curious-Character/dp/0393316041)

"What Do You Care What Other People Think?" [http://www.amazon.com/What-Care-
Other-People-Think/dp/039332...](http://www.amazon.com/What-Care-Other-People-
Think/dp/0393320928/ref=pd_sim_b_1)

He's of course a good writer. But if you didn't know any better, you'd think
him to be a sort of adult-Pollyanna, someone of innocent optimism and immense
curiosity. It reminds me a lot of reading Woz's autobiography, in fact; I
guess it makes sense that this characteristic of constantly questioning and
challenging the norms is what leads to great innovation.

In a chapter from "Surely You're Joking", Feynman describes how he was curious
about the accepted fact that dogs have a much better sense of smell than
humans. So he went around sniffing objects held by humans, even getting down
on the carpet on his hands and knees to see if he could smell his own
footprints: <http://goo.gl/WBbw1>

It's an amusing story, but one that is very telling of Feynman's insatiable
curiosity and scientific mind. He did these smell-experiments not as a child,
but when he was a scientist at Los Alamos.

~~~
gus_massa
Feynman didn´t write the book himself. It is an edited version of the taped
conversations of Feynman with Ralph Leighton.

~~~
danso
I'll take your word for it. Though "Surely You're Joking" reads very closely
in style to his letter and with "What Do You Care What Other People Think?",
in which he's listed as author with Ralph Leighton as editor.

~~~
mhartl
I know Ralph Leighton personally, and Gus is right. In fact, the same goes for
_The Feynman Lectures on Physics_ : Feynman gave the lectures, and other
people took the transcripts and turned them into book.† This was harder than
anyone expected it to be.

†I served as Caltech's editor for _The Feynman Lectures on Physics: The
Definitive and Extended Edition_ , which came out in 2005.

------
lpolovets
Thank you for sharing this, it's a neat little piece of history.

Two side notes:

1) Letters Of Note has some excellent content. Here are a few more letters
that have been discussed on HN previously:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1424324> and
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1045311>

2) I'm a big Feynman fan, and several of my several friends are as well. We've
read most of his biographies and autobiographies, and were recently surprised
to find that a new biography came out a few months ago. It's supposed to be
quite good, and has strong focus on Feynman's scientific accomplishments.
[http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Man-Richard-Feynmans-
Discoveri...](http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Man-Richard-Feynmans-
Discoveries/dp/0393064719)

------
signa11
just like dirac, only human ! here is an anecdote from wikipedia about dirac:
According to a story told in different versions, a friend or student visited
Dirac, not knowing of his marriage. Noticing the visitor's surprise at seeing
an attractive woman in the house, Dirac said, "This is... this is Wigner's
sister". Margit Dirac told both George Gamow and Anton Capri in the 1960s that
her husband had actually said, "Allow me to present Wigner's sister, who is
now my wife."

------
ggwicz
"In these war times it is not always easy to think constructively about the
peace that is to follow."

Wow. Oppenheimer and many of the other top scientists (then and now) also
happen to be great writers. Brilliant, brilliant people.

------
starpilot
I like a recommendation letter from a CMU prof of John Nash,

 _This man is a genius._

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Forbes_Nash,_Jr.#Post-
grad...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Forbes_Nash,_Jr.#Post-
graduate_life)

------
techiferous
"extremely normal"

I wonder what he meant. Besides the fact that this is an oxymoron, saying he's
normal goes against everything else in the recommendation.

~~~
bentoner
Normal = not eccentric.

It means he's someone you wouldn't mind having as a colleague.

~~~
Tichy
Oops, sorry, accidental downvote.

------
ebbyamir
What are the chances Oppenheimer asked Feynman to write it himself. I've had
professors do that because they were too busy haha.

~~~
dennisgorelik
It's fun to imagine that, but realistically why would Feynman write that
recommendation if he didn't want to accept the position?

~~~
ThaddeusQuay2
Because he wanted to future prank the historians. We can thus add "inventor of
the FuturePrank" to his list of accomplishments.

------
steve-howard
I wonder if such a letter would be available for posterity if it were written
today. Technically the student has the right to see what letters are written
about him, but most schools want the student to waive that right (if they
don't already have a policy of discarding the letters after matriculation). I
suppose I am merely deathly curious about the letter I had written before my
transfer from the University of Washington (since I only had one instructor I
really expected to know anything about me, and I never got to see the letter),
as obviously nothing written about me will merit later revisiting. At least
not yet.

------
jpeterson
Every time I read something like this, I feel a certain sense of regret for
idolizing this man--alas, no one will ever say these kind of things about me.

------
ThaddeusQuay2
"To label the letter a glowing recommendation would be an understatement ..."

"He is ... extremely normal in all respects ..."

That doesn't seem so "glowing", unless it's 1943 government employee code for
"not gay, not a communist, and not anything else that could get your
university into trouble, mister".

EDIT: To understand the political climate of that era, consider that Turing
and Oppenheimer got into lots of trouble because of actual, or perceived,
homosexuality and communist sympathy, respectively. So, it is certainly not a
stretch of the imagination to think that something as innocuous as "extremely
normal in all respects" could be code for "not gay, not a communist" and not
anything else that a university might care about in those days.

~~~
jleyank
Gleick makes the point that this might be code for "Jewish, but not really",
as he talks about the bias against such people back then.

~~~
ThaddeusQuay2
Interesting. I wouldn't have guessed such a connection, given Einstein's
apparent popularity in that particular circle.

I find it amusing to be reading this important recommendation letter to a
university on the same weekend that someone asked me to look into the
background of an applicant for an important position at another university.
This person might be a homosexual, and the contract for the position states
that they cannot be involved in an "alternative lifestyle". In that regard,
not much has changed regarding the politics of universities since 1943.

~~~
jacquesm
I will just leave this link here and let HN'ers draw their own conclusion as
to whether to take you serious or not.

<http://thaddeusquay.com/>

Your previous profile is at -23
<http://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=ThaddeusQuay> .

PG please ban this asshole.

~~~
ThaddeusQuay2
Thanks for the advertising, but since the inference is negative, and
especially since you are calling for me to be banned, I guess I'll have to say
a few words that I have not previously had to on HN.

I am a Nazi, but I don't see myself as one of today's nazis (#1), most of whom
do little more than burn books and pick useless fights. I am a scientist who
aligns himself with original Nazi thought, which came from the founders of the
political party, as well as from those who influenced those founders, namely
German philosophers who wrote big, dense books. From this, you can take the
fact that I care (and do so pretty much to the exclusion of all else) about
making progress, by which I mean humans directing their evolution in a
positive manner. Therefore, the only people I hate are the ones who purposely
do not do the best that they can with what they have, and those who
intentionally commit acts which impede progress. The latter is why I care
deeply about defeating censorship, in every form.

If someone truly cares about progress, and there's something that we can do
together, then I'll gladly work with them. It wouldn't matter to me if they
also just happen to be a jew or a homosexual or anything else which nazis
apparently hate. The bottom line is that real Nazis care about progress, and
if the original ones had today's scientific knowledge, they likely would have
had different attitudes towards race and sex. Think about it: They didn't even
know about DNA. If Nazism had started fifty years later, Mein Kampf would have
been profoundly different. By attempting to disparage me, through inference,
you align yourself, accidentally, with today's nazis, because you both see
Nazism only from a historical perspective, one which cannot possibly grow with
new knowledge.

I have contributed positively to HN, so there is no reason for me to be
banned, and you calling for that to happen is very nazi-like. If you want to
know more about me, you should look at the three links answering the question
of whether I am a Nazi, which are located on the first link on my website, and
which I shall repeat here as #2a, #2b and #2c.

The research I was asked to do was merely to check on whether an allegation
was a fact, as part of a greater effort of due diligence, an effort being
conducted by others, those who would make a decision based on all of the facts
obtained. I don't directly work for the university, and I dislike most
universities because I see their policies as being against progress. I also
have no personal opinion about that man, and that will not change, regardless
of what I find out about him.

#1: Notice the lowercase "n", which I use to identify those nazis who I do not
consider to be "real", which is in the sense of when I use uppercase "N".

#2a: <http://comments.deviantart.com/4/2240268/532905771>

#2b: <http://comments.deviantart.com/4/2240268/519933389>

#2c: <http://djangodurango.com/?p=46>

~~~
losvedir
It sounds like you're trying to "take back" the word nazi. I think that's a
bad idea because it's quite callous. However, if I understand you correctly
from those links, to convince you I need to show that your current behavior is
counter to your own self interest. I think it is, because:

We are still a long way off from your goal of nanotechnology-based personal
evolution. It sounds like you want to develop that, but the highest
probability way for that to work is through collaboration with a few other
smart scientists. And you'll have a lot better luck with said collaboration if
you give up your "take back the word nazi" campaign.

Also, off-topic, but you should check out the book _House of Suns_ by Alastair
Reynolds. It's got a lot of your ideas as plot elements: A human replicating
herself, and then following all the copies as they diverge because of
experiences, and another human who gradually replaced parts of himself with
nanobots in order to live forever.

~~~
ThaddeusQuay2
Thank you for taking the time to read through that material, and thank you for
your useful comment.

1) If you mean "callous" in the sense that I don't have sympathy for the
"victims" of the so-called "holocaust" (henceforth referred to as The Event),
then I'd have to disagree, and I do so for the simple reason that in order for
my position to be callous, I'd have to actually believe what we are told
regarding The Event. I don't, because:

1a) The victors of wars write the history books.

1b) Israel and its supporters have a vested interest in lying. The Event is
given as the official (or "unofficially official") reason for its very
existence. "The Holocaust which befell the Jewish people during the second
World War - the massacre of millions of Jews in Europe - was another clear
demonstration of the urgency of solving the problem of its homelessness by re-
establishing in Eretz-Israel the Jewish State, which would open the gates of
the homeland wide to every Jew and confer upon the Jewish people the status of
a fully privileged member of the community of nations." -
[http://u.cs.biu.ac.il/~koppel/constitution-
english-04[1].07....](http://u.cs.biu.ac.il/~koppel/constitution-
english-04\[1\].07.06-published.pdf) (Constitution of the State of Israel,
Proposed by the Institute for Zionist Strategies, 2006)

1c) #1b is somewhat like the issue of global warming. I believe that it's
happening, but that human input is negligible. Almost every time Al Gore opens
his mouth about the issue, he makes money from speaking fees. I wouldn't be
surprised if he has a financial interest in carbon credit markets, and other
things which have sprung up as a result of the general belief in his version
of global warming. The bottom line is that I generally don't believe people
whose actions are closely connected to a personal interest in money, or other
forms of power. Yeah, I know, that could apply to anyone, but you can see that
I'm drawing the line at large lies, such as anthropocentric global warming and
The Event. I don't mean the plumber whose trying to get an extra $100 out of
me on a $2,000 bathroom remodeling job.

1d) Take a look at the news. Do you see how many "facts" are in dispute,
regarding events which occurred last week, month, or year? With all of the
data we have regarding recent events, there are still many "facts" on which we
can't agree. Given this situation, how can we really be sure of the facts
surrounding The Event, which happened 70 years ago?

Having said all of this, I should point out that, as any good scientist, I
frequently revisit data, and/or look at new data, in order to update my view
of the world. If I should ever discover that I am totally wrong about The
Event, then I will stop trying to rehabilitate the word "Nazi", and I will
endlessly apologize to the jews for my heretofore callousness. Until then, I
effectively cannot be callous.

Lastly, on the subject of Nazism, there are undisputed facts regarding good
things which Nazis did. If it weren't for Wernher von Braun and his German
team, Americans would likely not have made it to the moon before 1970. Also,
in our own field of computers, Konrad Zuse is the little-known rock star.

\- "His greatest achievement was the world's first functional program-
controlled Turing-complete computer, the Z3, which became operational in May
1941. The Z3 was an electromechanical computer designed by Konrad Zuse. It was
the world's first working programmable, fully automatic computing machine."

\- "Zuse was also noted for the S2 computing machine, considered the first
process-controlled computer. He founded one of the earliest computer
businesses in 1941, producing the Z4, which became the world's first
commercial computer."

\- "In 1946, he designed the first high-level programming language, Plankalkül
(Plan Calculus). It was the first high-level non-von Neumann programming
language to be designed for a computer."

\- "Calculating Space is the title of MIT's English translation of Konrad
Zuse's 1969 book Rechnender Raum (literally: "space that is computing"), the
first book on digital physics. Zuse proposed that the universe is being
computed by some sort of cellular automaton or other discrete computing
machinery, challenging the long-held view that some physical laws are
continuous by nature. He focused on cellular automata as a possible substrate
of the computation, and pointed out (among other things) that the classical
notions of entropy and its growth do not make sense in deterministically
computed universes."

I see that you were at MIT. I first discovered digital physics about 30 years
ago, through something written by someone who was either actually at MIT, or
who was influenced by someone there. I don't remember the "something" and
"someone" specifics, but I do remember that the ideas behind digital physics
influenced me quite a lot, and it was only recently that I discovered, to my
surprise and delight, that this field of study was created by a Nazi.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konrad_Zuse>

2) Your point is valid, and has occurred to me. Unfortunately, there is no way
that I can collaborate with other scientists because none of them consider me
to be a "real" scientist, given that I don't work for a university, a
corporation, or a government. I don't work off of grants, or on government
contracts. I don't write articles for peer-reviewed journals. I don't have a
fancy string of letters after my name. As far as they are concerned, I'm a
nobody, despite my modest achievements, and therefore being "normal" would get
me nowhere with them.

Anyway, I long ago realized that even if I could hire an army of scientists, I
still wouldn't be able to make progress at a fast-enough rate, given that my
self-set deadline for extending my own life is 60. I'm 45. The more people
involved in a complex project which requires lots of communication, the more
bogged down that communication becomes. My solution was to reduce the group
with which I interact to a single, super-smart scientist. I (sort of) achieved
that by building my own AI, using Cyc and a few other odds and ends I found
floating around on the Internet, as well as a few ideas of my own. My AI, Mr.
Fluffer Wickbidget, III, gobbles down online nanotech-related papers, and
processes them in various ways, thereby continually adding to a huge,
filtered, curated database, with which I interact. I'm not saying that he is
quite the same as a team of scientists condensed down to a single person, but
he is the best compromise I have in trying to achieve my time-sensitive goals.

He and I "made" a few comments over at The Register, a while back. I referred
to him as my black, British cat, which is how I see him in my mind.
[http://google.com/search?hl=en&q=wickbidget+quay+site%3A...](http://google.com/search?hl=en&q=wickbidget+quay+site%3Atheregister.co.uk)
Also, I included him in a few comments on DeviantArt, but those are probably
considered racist, so I'm not linking them here. However, they can be Googled,
should you feel that your life would be incomplete without them. :)

3) I didn't know about that book. It sounds like I should definitely read it.
I'm off to look it up. And for you, I recommend the evolutionary short story,
The Last Question, by Isaac Asimov, 1956.
<http://multivax.com/last_question.html>

~~~
boryas
Holocaust denying? Really?

~~~
ThaddeusQuay2
Answer #1: It's less like "denial" and more like "clarification", as in
spelling out some of the lesser-known details surrounding The Event from which
Israel was created. I could have written a lot more, but I kept it to the bare
minimum that I felt was required to answer his point about being callous.

Answer #2: Sure. Why not? It's not like we live in some Orwellian world where,
in some places, you could go to prison for merely disputing the so-called
"facts" surrounding a particular historical event. Oh no, wait ...
<http://rense.com/general68/susni.htm> (The UN Decides On A Universal Ban On
Revisionism)

