Showing posts with label quantum theory. Show all posts
Showing posts with label quantum theory. Show all posts

Saturday, June 14, 2014

Feynman's Rainbow: A Search for Beauty in Physics and Life (Leonard Mlodinow)

One day early this year, I arrived at my workstation surprised to find a book entitled "Feynman's Rainbow" on my desk. It came with a note that read "Something to start the week on an upbeat note. Have a wonderful day, Melo. :) J". Reading the title, I immediately thought of the famous physicist Richard Feynman and quickly scanned the back blurb and was happy to be the recipient of such a book. Another item in my collection, and something related to quantum physics!

I brought the book with me to Bohol and started to read a few pages while in Dumaluan beach in Panglao, Bohol. I didn't finish it though because the allure of the scenery was quite distracting and I kept looking far out into the sea. At that time though I was more than excited to read about one of the biggest minds that I admire, Richard Feynman the physicist.

I first learned of the him as a college freshman in UP Diliman. One of his essays was part of our reading list for Natural Science 1 class, a course I unfortunately failed to enjoy because of the large class and I often fell asleep despite whatever resistance I put up. Later on, getting hooked on chaos theory and ultimately to quantum physics mainly because of Dr. Amador Muriel's talk in our STS class in my final year, I would always encounter his name in the books that I read.

Later on, curious about the man, I did a quick search on the net and downloaded an ebook entitled "Sure You're Joking, Mr. Feynman", read the first few pages and decided that the man is bigger than I thought. His is a curious mind since his childhood days as he spent his early years tinkering with radios and shortly after doing repair jobs while young.

So having a book written by a younger physicist about his encounter with Feynman thoroughly made my day. I wanted to see how others viewed him, how he influenced and inspired others, and also look into how his mind works, what he's like as a person. I didn't expect to be teary-eyed after reading "Feynman's Rainbow".

The book narrates Mlodinow's arrival in Caltech where he was worrying about what physics problem to work on, aside from his doubts if he has what it takes to be a scientist. Meeting Richard Feynman, then already a big man in the physics world, made him realize many things. According to Mlodinow, Feynman loved math and physics but disliked philosophy and psychology, something I found weird since I've always thought that math and philosophy could make very good bedfellows. Despite this, I found the man pretty much like those ancient philosophers who can offer great insights into many things.

Many passages in the book made me imagine scenes were the book  made into an animé, and I am more than sure that if this book were adapted to a film or series, I would certainly cry. I was thinking of the animé Honey and Clover, that series which I consider as one of the best series for its profound insights into human relationships, happiness, and life in general. In the same way, this book, although focusing on physicists and physics, has that power to inspire its readers. Personally, getting to know more about Feynman, I think I share an affinity with the man and it comforts me that I am and will be alright, too, because we share the same outlook in life--- never wasting time on things that do not rouse interest, being imaginative and intuitive and a bit pragmatic, not minding much if what we work on is deemed significant or not by others as long as it retains interest and enthusiasm, and most importantly, looking at the world through a child's lens and appreciating the beauty of phenomena and getting inspired in the process. I am also amused at how he would attend a seminar just for the cookies, something I am guilty of doing in most cases.

For instance, when asked if Mlodinow has that something special to be a scientist, Feynman answers that being a scientist is not different from the average person in that we all think in a constructive way, we all use our imagination, that the only difference is that scientists analyze things thoroughly like a detective out to solve a mystery with only a handful of clues. I love how Feynman does not elevate the status of scientists as most are wont to do because they feel they are intellectually superior to other human beings.

The book contains a lot of wise words from Feynman and here are some of them:

"(...) When there is a hard problem, one has to work a long time and has to be persistent. In order to be persistent, you have got to be convinced that it's worthwhile working so hard, that you're going to get somewhere. And that takes a certain kind of fooling yourself." (p.59)

"When asked if it would be wise to work on something that everyone else thinks is nonsense, Feynman simply says, "only under one condition (...) that you don't think it's nonsense." Continuing, he says, "Maybe you just don't know enough, or haven't known it long enough, to be spoiled by what you know. Too much education can cause trouble." (p.78)

"(...) Whatever you choose to work on, be your own worst critic. And don't do it for the wrong reasons. Don't do it unless you really believe. Because if it doesn't work out, you could end up wasting a lot of time." (p.94)

And the following dialogue when the topic shifted to rainbows:

 ‘Do you know who first explained the true origin of the rainbow?’ I asked.
‘It was Descartes,’ he said.  After a moment he looked me in the eye.
‘And what do you think was the salient feature of the rainbow that inspired Descartes’ mathematical analysis?’ he asked.
‘Well, the rainbow is actually a section of a cone that appears as an arc of the colors of the spectrum when drops of water are illuminated by sunlight behind the observer.’
‘And?’
‘I suppose his inspiration was the realization that the problem could be analyzed by considering a single drop, and the geometry of the situation.’
‘You’re overlooking a key feature of the phenomenon,’ he said.
‘Okay, I give up. What would you say inspired his theory?’
‘I would say his inspiration was that he thought rainbows were beautiful.’

I especially loved the latter part of the book when, as Feynman was nearing his death due to his sickness, he would talk about his family, how he would regret not seeing his daughter grow up (though he did see her reach adulthood), how he shared that he loved his wife Arlene but that he didn't grew resentful even after her death and just accepted that there are things beyond our control (something I am trying hard to learn). I love reading about the humane side of big people, they inspire all the more when we can see their struggles. Another thing I loved about the man is how generous he had been, as he shared bits of wisdom to enlighten a lost man.
---------------------------
To J whoever he/she is, thank you for giving me this book. I don't know what's on your mind when you picked it for me but whatever it is, thank you for thinking of me.

Saturday, August 11, 2012

Science, Math, and Chaos


Taking up an STS (Science, Technology, and Society) course in college has a profound effect on my life. Not only was I able to learn many new things about science, I learned to appreciate the role of science in our  everyday life. STS let me see that science indeed plays a vital role in addressing the problems the world faces today. In highschool, I used to think of science as the reason why everything got extra complicated in this world. The advent of new technologies contributed to increasing social fragmentation, not to mention destruction of the environment. But the very reason why I shunned science was because I really didn't believe anything I learned in high school- I always thought something was amiss, like all those theories do not really mirror phenomena in reality. So in college, while I considered to take up Mathematics, I decided to pursue foreign languages instead, with my love for literature and etymologies prevailed over mathematical abstractions. (Or perhaps blame it to the fact that I wasn't much informed about possible careers after studying Mathematics in college... It came too late.)

In STS class, which I took three years ago, the students are lucky to listen to lectures by different professionals, from engineers and scientists to historians, forensic experts, and archaeologists. The topics are diverse but the main point is that one cannot escape science as it pervades every aspect of our reality. In particular, I was very much inspired by the lecture given by Amador Muriel. He talked about turbulence and quantum theory, though mostly he just talked about himself which made me view him as an egocentric, self-centered old man who keeps on enumerating his achievements and how he survived in the West although he came from a poor family in a Third World Country. Despite my aversion to all those self-praise talk, I must say that I honestly admire this man for his struggles, how he made it big despite his poor origins. Another is that in enumerating his numerous mentors, one can say that he takes pride in his academic pedigree and as such gives credit to and rightly acknowledges the people who have contributed to who he is now.


Back in college, my friends know me as a spendthrift who only buys books from Booksale and who seldom gets the required readings. But when he announced that his book is now available, I didn't think twice. I just had to have the book. The book isn't that expensive, which is a good thing, and students could get autographs right then and there. I bought his book "Folding Water: The Search for a Quantum Theory of Turbulence" which was co-authored by Ninotchka Rosca. I almost never had the book autographed because of students suddenly flocked to him like moths to a flame. I braved the crowd. He asked me what I am studying and I answered, "European Languages." He wrote a short note on the first page of the book:

"Melo:
              Look up to the
       allusions to
       Europe.
                   A. Muriel"

It was the first time I got a book signed by the author. It instantly became one of my prized books. And when I read it from cover to cover, I was more than sure that never shall this book go out of my collection. It's more detailed compared to the lecture and I wasn't at all surprised that this book is also a memoir in addition to its being a book on quantum mechanics meant for the layperson.

Not long after, I got interested in chaos theory. Reading short articles online increased my appetite for chaos. At that time, I described my life as chaotic. I was a lost kid in a jungle of civilization. Suddenly everything I know crumbles, it feels like being a witness to widescale destruction a la Inception (yes, that movie by Christopher Nolan where scenes of crumbling edifices are many) and I didn't know where to start from.


One day as if by chance, I found a book at Booksale which costs just P75. The title of the book is "Chaos: Making a New Science", authored by James Gleick. I knew I had to buy it. As soon as I got home, I read the book and was enlightened as to why I became averse to science in high school. In high school, we were taught that this happens assuming this is the case. In short, it was highly idealistic. But chaos, as Gleick writes, "poses problems that defy accepted ways of working in science." Moreover, high school science lacked the interdependence of disciplines and thus provided an unrealistic view of phenomena. Physics for example was isolated from biology and chemistry. Each subject was compartmentalized. Chaos on the other hand, brings together different disciplines in an attempt to investigate global nature of systems. When a child, who yearns to make sense of the world around her and who sees the intricate web of relations of things, is made to study a subject without reference to other disciplines, she quickly loses interest. I do not know if this holds true to others but it does to me.

Gleick's book is meant for the layperson. It traces the beginnings of the study of chaotic systems and chaos itself. It narrates the development of such subject as other disciplines like mathematics, physics, chemistry, and biology advanced, or the other way around. Gleick also briefly sketched the important contributors to chaotology (study of chaos), from Lorenz to Mandelbrot, to Feigenbaum and Libchaber, to the scholars of Santa Cruz. I also appreciated how the book attempts to enumerate the many applications and relations of chaotology in other dsiciplines including economics, philosophy, art, and literature.

Reading the book made me wonder what if I took up Mathematics instead of foreign languages. Then maybe I would be very good at working with computers. Then maybe I would be dabbling in chaos. Then maybe I would be able to offer an explanation as to why my life is chaotic.