firewalker
5 HN recommenders · recommended in 19 months, 2019–2026
7:33 · 5.5M views · Apr 2, 2012
A short clip of Richard Feynman answering an interviewer's question about why magnets repel, explaining that a 'why' question depends on a shared framework of understanding. It illustrates how hard it is to explain fundamentals to a layperson.
Cited constantly as the classic answer to 'why' questions, on explanation, frames of reference and the limits of physics.
20 comments from Hacker News
And we can actually listen here Feynman's answer to " what is the meaning of... " and " why " questions: this video Note, despite the title of somebody presenting this segment of his talk, he definitely doesn't talk just about "magnets" but really about "the meaning" and "why" questions (the youtube poster got it). About the needed "expected framework" to avoid "perpetual why questions" etc. Even the things that we take for granted, e.g. using electricity in our day to day life, or the eventual "why" we don't fall through the floor can't be properly explained using just our "common" intuition. In another direction, it works, we are "used" to see some effects of the electrical forces all the time, so that's what is "intuitive" to us because we're familiar with it. So back to the original title of the article submission here: "why ... shrugged off the paradoxes..." it can be easily seen that once one is getting an answer inside of the expected framework, one doesn't "shrug it off," one is actually satisfied with the answer.
Regarding "fully" understanding physics, I like to refer people to Feynman's answer to a question about why magnets repel each other[0]. "Assuming something" is one integral part of the scientific method. You formulate a question, you build a hypothesis from prior knowledge, you make predictions, you test them, you analyze your results which might lead you to change your hypothesis or not. "Greatness" is finding simple hypotheses (like "the laws of physics are the same as viewed from any inertial frame and the speed of light is the same for every observer") that predict/"explain" effects that were inconsistent with prior hypotheses. Of course you can never really prove a model of the world is correct - another model that predicts differences that are too small for us to measure might be the "truth", but, until we can measure it, there isn't much use in pondering ... [0] this video
There's a really good clip by Richard Feynman on explanations and frames of reference: this video I think he does an excellent job of explaining why it's so hard to explain this type of thing.
It's not simple thing to explain non simple things in a way that it's comprehensible to a layman. I think this video is a very good illustration of this fact this video
Richard Feynman addresses a similar "why" question in a great way in this interview[1], and how "why" questions are problematic in science. [1]: this video