Before I came here, I was confused about this subject. Having listened to your lecture, I am still confused -- but on a higher level.
Experimental confirmation of a prediction is merely a measurement. An experiment disproving a prediction is a discovery.
It is not good to try to stop knowledge from going forward. Ignorance is never better than knowledge.
Before I came here I was confused about this subject. Having listened to your lecture I am still confused. But on a higher level.
Never underestimate the joy people derive from hearing something they already know.
When asked what he meant by a miracle: Oh, anything with a probability of less than 20%.
The fact that no limits exist to the destructiveness of this weapon [the 'Super', i.e. the hydrogen bomb] makes its very existence and the knowledge of its construction a danger to humanity as a whole. It is necessarily an evil thing considered in any light. For these reasons, we believe it important for the President of the United States to tell the American public and the world what we think is wrong on fundamental ethical principles to initiate the development of such a weapon.
Where is everybody? Humans could theoretically colonize the galaxy in a million years or so, and if they could, astronauts from older civilizations could do the same. So why haven't they come to Earth?
An experiment disproving a prediction is discovery.
Young man, if I could remember the names of these particles, I would have been a botanist.
I remember my friend Johnny von Neumann used to say, 'with four parameters I can fit an elephant and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk.'
There are two possible outcomes: if the result confirms the hypothesis, then you've made a measurement. If the result is contrary to the hypothesis, then you've made a discovery
It does not say in the Bible that all laws of nature are expressible linearly!
If I could remember the names of all these particles, I'd be a botanist
Whatever Nature has in store for mankind, unpleasant as it may be, men must accept, for ignorance is never better than knowledge.
Although the problem of transmuting chemical elements into each other is much older than a satisfactory definition of the very concept of chemical element, it is well known that the first and most important step towards its solution was made only nineteen years ago by the late Lord Rutherford, who started the method of the nuclear bombardments.
I hope it won't take long.
One might be led to question whether the scientists acted wisely in presenting the statesmen of the world with this appalling problem. Actually there was no choice. Once basic knowledge is acquired, any attempt at preventing its fruition would be as futile as hoping to stop the earth from revolving around the sun.
The fundamental point in fabricating a chain reacting machine is of course to see to it that each fission produces a certain number of neutrons and some of these neutrons will again produce fission.
It is clear that the use of such a weapon cannot be justified on any ethical ground which gives a human being a certain individuality and dignity even if he happens to be a resident of an enemy country.
When asked what characteristics Nobel prize winning physicists had in common ؛ I cannot think of a single one, not even intelligence
