PDF Summary:Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!, by Richard Feynman

Award-winning scientist Richard Feynman is more commonly remembered for his colorful personality and quirky sense of humor than for his achievements in the world of theoretical physics. His scientific discoveries were merely one result of his lifelong love of learning, his spirit of adventure, and his determination to live life to its fullest. His memoir Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman! demonstrates his drive to solve puzzles, his joy at new discoveries, and his sense of inquisitive delight.

In this guide, we’ll chart Feynman’s life from his college days to his years on the team that developed the atomic bomb, and finally to his academic career that led to his Nobel Prize. We’ll examine his values of curiosity, persistence, and scientific rigor while comparing Feynman’s personal philosophy with the writings of others on the scientific process, the value of education, and getting the most enjoyment out of life.

(continued)...

(Shortform note: Caltech played a pivotal role in the US’s scientific and technological advancement during the 1950s. In addition to the theoretical work done by Feynman and others, Caltech was the birthplace of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, which came under the auspices of NASA after the successful launch of the first US satellite, Explorer 1, in 1958. In the field of astronomy, Fritz Zwicky used Caltech’s Palomar Observatory to create a catalog of 35,000 galaxies, greatly expanding our understanding of the universe, while the National Geographic Society conducted a complete photographic survey of the entire northern sky. Meanwhile, Caltech’s electrical engineering department did pioneering work on electronic circuit design.)

The climax of Feynman’s academic career was the Nobel Prize he won in 1965 for his work in quantum electrodynamics. Instead of being elated by the award, Feynman says that at first, he tried to turn it down. He was annoyed by the sudden attention and put off by the pomp and circumstance that went along with receiving the award. In the end, he was persuaded that declining a Nobel would stir up a bigger furor than simply accepting it. Nevertheless, Feynman complains about the celebrity status that the Nobel conferred. After winning the prize, he could no longer simply be “Professor Feynman.” Now, he had to live with being a star of the scientific community.

(Shortform note: Feynman shared the 1965 Nobel Prize in Physics with Julian Schwinger and Sin-Itiro Tomonaga for work on the development of quantum electrodynamics, which deals with the interaction between electromagnetic fields and charged particles such as electrons. Feynman’s best-known contribution was the creation of a graphical diagram system that allows physicists to visualize complex interactions between particles, simplifying the math and making it easier to calculate the probability of those interactions occurring.)

Richard Feynman’s Family

In his memoir, Feynman says little about his family after the death of his first wife, Arline. He was married to his second wife, Mary Louise Bell, from 1952-1958. In Quantum Man, biographer Lawrence M. Krauss relates Bell’s complaint to their divorce judge that Feynman did nothing but work math problems day and night. Feynman then married Gweneth Howarth in 1960 after she moved from England to the US, and they remained married until his death from cancer in 1988. Gweneth Feynman passed away in 1990.

Richard and Gweneth Feynman had two children: Carl, born in 1962, and Michelle, born in 1968. Carl Feynman studied at MIT and pursued a career in computer engineering. Michelle Feynman became a freelance photographer and edited several collections of her father’s work, including The Quotable Feynman and Perfectly Reasonable Deviations From the Beaten Track.

Richard Feynman’s Values

Though Feynman’s recollections in his memoir may seem to bounce from topic to topic at random, they all exemplify certain key values that underlie Feynman’s idiosyncratic personality. At Feynman’s core is a deep love of learning, which expresses itself in a variety of ways. In the remainder of this guide, we’ll explore how Feynman’s values shaped his approach to problem-solving, teaching, intellectual honesty, and living life to its fullest.

Curiosity and Persistence

When Feynman talks about his life, one trait that stands out is his determination to understand how and why things work. He applied his curiosity to everything in life, not merely his scientific endeavors, and coupled it with a dogged persistence that made him stand out from his peers, often in unusual ways. Feynman’s childhood curiosity led him to pursue an education in math and science, but as an adult his curious nature expanded his horizons into fields such as safecracking and artistic expression.

Feynman recalls that as far back as his early teens, he was already tinkering with electronics. For him, it was more like play than formalized science or engineering. He didn’t follow any standard procedures—instead, he fiddled with wires, gears, and bulbs and observed what worked and what didn’t. He bought broken radios and tried to fix them, ran electrical wires all over his home, devised his own burglar alarm system, and almost inadvertently set his house on fire. Every project, both his failures and successes, was accomplished by nonstop trial and error. What Feynman took away from his early years was that persistence is the key to solving problems.

(Shortform note: Beyond simple perseverance, Feynman also demonstrated a willingness to take risks while viewing each failure as a learning opportunity. In Make Your Bed, Admiral William H. McRaven lists both these qualities—persistence and learning from failure—as essential ingredients for personal success. Since failure is an inevitable part of life, McRaven says that turning it to your advantage will better prepare you for future problems you’ll encounter. Meanwhile, persisting through your difficulties lets you remain in control of your life, whereas quitting before achieving a goal can only lead to frustration and regret.)

Feynman was so driven to solve problems that in school, he’d invent math puzzles for himself. This pushed him ahead of other students, who’d come to him with problems of their own. Feynman claims to have worked out many of the principles of trigonometry just for kicks, and even invented his own form of mathematical notation because he didn’t like the ones used in his textbooks. All of this garnered him a reputation as a budding genius, a label that he frequently downplays, instead attributing his success to perseverance. He also says that by approaching math and science as play, he worked out shortcuts to mathematical problems that made him seem smarter than he actually was.

(Shortform note: The way that Feynman downplayed his intelligence in favor of the process of working problems out indicates an attitude that likely enhanced his intellectual development. In Limitless Mind, educator Jo Boaler argues that labels such as “smart” or “gifted” are detrimental to children because they create the false belief that intelligence levels are fixed from birth instead of something you grow into. Students who struggle and work hard at solving problems end up creating more and stronger neural pathways in their brains than children for whom the answers come easily. As a result, learners like Feynman who relish the process of learning more than the end result end up being higher achievers over the long run.)

One thing Feynman discovered through his childhood exploration was that the world was a more complicated place than the simplified version in his textbooks, and this drove his curiosity further. When in college, he’d carry a toy microscope around campus so he could observe things such as ant behavior. When he took a summer job at a metal-plating company, he worked out chemical processes by trial and error, even though he wasn’t an expert in the field. Even in the case of puzzles where he could have looked up the answer, Feynman says that he didn’t because that would have spoiled the fun. To scratch his curiosity’s itch, he felt compelled to figure things out for himself.

(Shortform note: What Feynman describes is a process of experiential, self-directed learning, which can be practiced by anyone wishing to develop new skills and areas of expertise. In Ultralearning, Scott Young suggests that self-directed exploration can serve as both an enhancement and an alternative to traditional education. In particular, he touts the benefit of direct learning—the process of developing skills and ideas in the hands-on environment in which they’ll be applied, much like Feynman’s trial-and-error chemistry experiments while already on the job. Young says that key elements of direct learning are self-directed projects, immersion in the process, and holding yourself to high performance standards.)

Feynman the Safecracker

Prior to his work on the Manhattan Project, Feynman already had a general interest in picking locks as a technical and intellectual exercise. Once he arrived at Los Alamos, however, he discovered that the site had been built in such a rush that all of its documents and sensitive papers were being kept in simple wood filing cabinets that were easily broken into. Feynman says his puzzle-solving compulsion went into overdrive. Not only was he itching to find out how long it would take to break into the project’s top secret files, but he also thought it was his patriotic duty to do so in order to expose the limits of their security.

When cabinets arrived with sturdier locks, Feynman took it as a personal challenge. First, he dismantled his own filing cabinet to understand how it worked. After much trial and error, reminiscent of his childhood tinkering days, he worked out a system to quickly run through every possible locking combination. He also discovered that it was possible to find out what other people’s combinations were if they left their files unlocked. As a result, he made it a habit to collect his colleague’s combinations behind their backs, so that if he needed a file from their office, he could simply break into their cabinet and get it.

Feynman describes how his reputation as a safecracker grew to the point that everyone else assumed he could break into anything, which wasn’t the case (although he was successful more often than not). According to Feynman, the biggest impact of his safecracking skills—besides infuriating his colleagues—wasn’t an increase in overall security but a mandate from on high for all other staff to do a better job of protecting their combination locks from him.

Would Feynman Have Been a Hacker?

Feynman’s attitudes toward the security measures at Los Alamos are analogous to those of modern-day computer hackers. Research has shown that whether computer hackers work on the side of the law or act as criminals, their primary motivation is the intellectual reward of using creative thinking to solve complex problems. Just as Feynman did with cabinet locks, computer hackers build a mental model of the system they’re trying to break into by prodding it from different angles and testing its reaction to different forms of input.

Hackers who work on behalf of institutions to uncover their own security weaknesses are referred to as “white hats,” as opposed to criminal “black hats.” Unlike Feynman, who was acting on his own, ethical hackers operate with the consent of their organization and are mindful of the privacy rights of other employees. However, the threats they have to ward off are more widespread, since cybercriminals don’t even have to be in the same country as their target, much less in the same room, as was the case at Los Alamos.

Feynman the Artist

Later in life, Feynman’s curiosity led him toward projects even he’d never dreamed he’d consider—for instance, becoming an artist. He never believed that he had any aptitude, but he always imagined that art might be a way to express the sense of awe he felt about scientific discovery. When an artist friend of his challenged him to learn how to draw, Feynman had doubts, but he gave it a try. Feynman says he wasn’t very good right away, but he learned from the way that art teachers taught. His instructors didn’t focus on Feynman’s mistakes, but instead turned everything he did “wrong” into something positive that he could build on.

(Shortform note: Positive reinforcement such as Feynman’s art teachers provided is a valuable educational tool, but it must be applied with care. In Mindset, psychologist Carol S. Dweck explains that praising a student’s ability promotes the belief that skills are inherent, not developed over time, whereas praising a student’s learning process highlights the fact that effort produces improvement while giving the teacher an avenue to suggest where the student should focus their efforts. Dweck illustrates this by providing examples of several great artists and performers who showed little intrinsic talent when young but who developed their skills through hard work and commitment.)

The experience opened Feynman’s eyes to new possibilities within himself. His art instructors consistently encouraged him to relax into his process and not worry about perfection and precision as one does when solving problems in science and math. Feynman never got serious about his art and perhaps that was a good thing—it let him keep his artistic endeavors safely in the realm of “play.” Even so, he continued to practice, and over time he learned that he could distinguish the quality of other people’s artistic work without being able to put a finger on why. He was also struck by the idea that art he created could have an emotional effect on someone else, all because he had the persistence to practice a skill for which he had no inborn talent.

(Shortform note: Feynman cites concepts of play and having fun as essential to both his artistic pursuits and his scientific endeavors. In A Theory of Fun for Game Design, Ralph Koster draws a link between learning and enjoyment, saying that play creates a positive environment in which you can learn without pressure from consequence. Koster says that games, puzzles, and purely creative activities teach about patterns and relationships, improve memory recall, and strengthen teamwork and social skills by providing live feedback in low-stakes situations.)

The Importance of Teaching

While Feynman injected his lifelong learning with a casual sense of fun and exploration, one thing he took very seriously was his role as a teacher. Feynman explains that teaching serves two vital functions in his life: It keeps him engaged with the underlying principles of his field, and it allows him to make a positive contribution to the world. In his memoir, he describes the personal benefits he derives from teaching and highlights two specific examples where his beliefs on the subject clashed with those of others, once in Brazil and once in California.

Feynman is insistent that he’d never consider working in a nonteaching position. From a purely personal perspective, it forces him to review and reassess everything he assumes that he knows about the field of physics. He finds that the process of teaching those ideas will occasionally lead to questioning them and finding new approaches to problems and theories that wouldn’t have occurred to him otherwise. Teaching also keeps his mind active on those occasions when he doesn’t have a pressing theoretical problem to solve. In other words, teaching is good for the mind, as much for the instructor as it is for the students.

(Shortform note: Feynman wasn’t the first to notice teaching’s cognitive benefits for the teacher. The Roman philosopher Seneca noted that “when we teach, we learn,” a process referred to today as the protégé effect. When you expect to teach an idea to others, it makes you more aware of how you learn and leads you to seek out the most effective ways to understand and communicate what you’re teaching. Because teaching others is such an effective learning tool, many teachers are starting to employ it as an educational strategy, assigning students to teach important concepts to other students, family members, or even artificial intelligence programs designed to act as “teachable agents.”)

During a sabbatical year in Brazil in which Feynman taught science to prospective science teachers, he came across a peculiar phenomenon. His students appeared to have learned many scientific facts without understanding anything about them. When he pushed them to apply their knowledge through practical exercises, they couldn’t. He discovered that previously, his students had learned by rote memorization in order to pass a standardized test. Feynman recalls being horrified that this was how future teachers were trained, and he said so during a lecture he gave to the Brazilian teaching establishment. He explained that passing tests isn’t the point of education. Without practical application, there can be no learning.

(Shortform note: Feynman’s disdain for memorization isn’t shared by all educators. In Better Grades, Less Effort, neuroscientist William R. Klemm argues that memorization is essential for many fields of knowledge and that students should be taught efficient and effective memory techniques. However, many educators differentiate between memorizing information and understanding it in a way that incorporates meaning and significance. In Moonwalking With Einstein, Joshua Foer says that despite the backlash against rote memorization in education, having a wealth of memorized knowledge is important because it provides a pattern of associations with which you can interpret new information.)

This truth came home for Feynman years later, when he served on a California state committee responsible for selecting math and science textbooks. This was during a time when the US was trying to catch up with the Russians post-Sputnik by emphasizing science and math. When Feynman actually read the texts under review, he was shocked to find that the books’ authors apparently didn’t understand their own subjects. The books also tended to be full of abstract concepts without applications that students could try on their own. Feynman insisted the textbooks he reviewed would do students a disservice and discourage learning instead of providing a real-world foundation for knowledge that would serve students later in life.

It was all for naught. Budget cuts to California’s Board of Education put the program on a back burner and severely restricted the number and quality of textbooks Feynman’s committee could recommend. When asked to do the same for science textbooks the following year, Feynman declined to participate any further.

The Trouble With Textbooks

The problems Feynman found with math textbooks in the 1950s continue to this day and aren’t confined to the US. A 2022 study by Michigan State University discovered that in math textbooks from around the world, fewer than 1% of the exercises for students cover any practical use of mathematics. According to the nonprofit Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, math textbooks in the US aren’t vetted for their efficacy at developing math skills, nor are they modeled after those in other countries that significantly outperform the US in mathematics education, such as Singapore and Japan.

Since teachers use textbooks as their primary resource for problems and activities, educators can feel limited by the options their textbooks offer. In Limitless Mind, Jo Boaler urges teachers to break free of textbook examples and challenge students to tackle more difficult problems while leaning into the idea that every problem can be solved by a multitude of creative approaches. In a sense, Boaler wants teachers and students to approach math topics with a creative sense of play similar to Feynman’s approach to problem-solving.

Scientific Rigor

Feynman believes that teaching math and science is especially important in the modern age, and not just because of technological advances. He argues that understanding math and science requires a level of intellectual honesty that other fields lack. Feynman’s experience in the scientific world shines a light on the value of questioning others, questioning yourself, and having the integrity to admit when you’re wrong.

The first of these principles can best be summed up as “Don’t take anyone’s word for granted, not even the so-called experts.” Feynman gives the example of a physics paper that was published on a topic that he didn’t fully understand. After Feynman wracked his brain at the topic for a while, his sister suggested that he approach it like a student doing a homework assignment and recheck all of the paper’s math. Doing so—starting from first principles and working through the paper’s argument for himself—unlocked the puzzle in his mind and even provided him with insights that he was able to apply in his own work.

(Shortform note: Feynman’s dedication to verifying, and thereby understanding, another scientist’s work isn’t unusual. In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn explains that confirming already established conclusions is one of science’s chief intellectual functions. After all, the process by which knowledge is achieved, whether experimental or theoretical (as in the paper Feynman studied), is just as important as the end result. The fact that there may be multiple routes to achieve specific scientific “answers” is one reason it’s so important for scientists to understand each other’s process, since seeing a problem from another perspective may yield further “aha” moments, as Feynman says it did for him.)

The research that came from that stroke of insight led Feynman and his colleague Murray Gell-Mann to solve the theoretical problem of beta decay—the process by which subatomic particles emit a particular kind of radiation. Feynman and Gell-Mann’s solution also showed that the results of many beta decay experiments were flawed, which highlights another aspect of Feynman’s thoughts on intellectual honesty: Good scientists must call attention to any possible doubt about their work. When reporting the results of any experiment or study, it’s crucial to acknowledge any variables, theories, or conditions that might call your conclusions into question. Questioning yourself is an essential part of overcoming your own bias.

(Shortform note: The way that science embraces self-doubt goes against the grain of how science is taught in schools—namely, as a collection of facts instead of a process to zero in on objective reality while systematically eliminating preconceptions. This disconnect between the process of scientific inquiry and its results can undermine public trust in science when previously known “scientific facts” turn out to be untrue. In order to maintain public engagement, the scientific community must be open about its self-questioning nature, one that Feynman insists is a fundamental virtue. Otherwise, scientific doubt can be unethically exploited to shape public opinion on matters such as health, pollution, and climate change.)

Science, after all, is the process by which you can short-circuit bias to arrive at the truth, but Feynman says it’s every scientist’s job to make sure the system works as advertised. There are two ways to do this: by repeating other scientists’ work to make sure that the same results can be achieved, and by reporting the results of any study you conduct, whether or not they agree with your theories. If any field of knowledge doesn’t encourage both of these practices—either by discouraging repeat experiments or hiding contradictory data—then that field is pseudoscience and will remain so until more rigorous standards are established.

(Shortform note: Feynman’s litmus test of “repeatability” is often used by those in the physical sciences to cast doubt on fields such as psychology and sociology, in which findings are difficult to quantify or duplicate. A 2017 survey of psychology journals found that studies trying to replicate others’ results are actively discouraged, making it hard to weed out psychology reports with errors or systemic flaws. These problems are not limited to the so-called “soft sciences,” as reproducing experiments has become a growing challenge in fields such as medicine and biology that deal with complex, multifaceted systems in which individual variables are almost impossible to single out experimentally.)

Having Fun

While Feynman took his stance on scientific integrity and the importance of education seriously, he was never very serious about himself or his importance to the world. In fact, Feynman states that not feeling responsible for the world is his secret to happiness. Instead, Feynman talks about being open to new experiences, grabbing opportunities as they appear, and having the confidence to fake his way through.

He learned his first lessons about loosening up in college, where his fraternity brothers taught him how to socialize and dance. Thanks to this, one time Feynman accidentally found himself at a dance party for deaf students. Instead of leaving, Feynman relaxed into the occasion, despite feeling like a traveler in a foreign country. Over time, Feynman says that he learned there are many interesting experiences in life if you’re patient enough to wait for them and go along when they present themselves.

(Shortform note: Though Feynman may come across in his memoir as an adventurous person, he’s clear that for the most part, he allowed adventure to come to him. In The Power of Moments, Chip and Dan Heath assert that meaningful experiences are occurring all around you, and that you simply have to train yourself to spot them. Such experiences can be defined by the ways they stand out from your everyday background, give insight into the world around you, and help create connections with other people. Such moments, when recognized, can increase happiness at work, improve relationships, and help you live a more fulfilling life.)

One occasion when Feynman grabbed his chance at adventure was when he was invited to attend a scientific conference in Japan. He and his colleagues were put up in a western-style hotel, but Feynman felt like he was missing out on the authentic Japanese experience. To his hosts’ consternation, he pleaded to be housed at a traditional Japanese hotel, despite the hassle he’d create for himself getting to and from the conference. Feynman won out, changed hotels, and enjoyed his more genuine experience of Japanese culture so well that he returned to the country many times. He explains that in many ways he found the culture and customs of Japan far more civilized than those of the United States in terms of courtesy and hospitality.

(Shortform note: It may seem like a cliché to say that “travel broadens the mind,” but there is scientific backing for the claim that travel abroad increases cognitive function. Due to the plasticity of the brain, new experiences create new neural connections, but to get the full mental benefit from world travel, you have to immerse yourself as much as you can in another culture, as Feynman did in his travels. Research on students who’ve studied abroad shows that cultural immersion can be intellectually and emotionally transformative, especially if the students engaged deeply with their new environments and reflected on their experiences afterward.)

Another country Feynman grew to love was Brazil, where his enjoyment of travel merged with another hobby of his—playing drums. He’d started drumming in Los Alamos as a way to relax, though he never grew to be as good as a professional musician. Nevertheless, he grabbed at the chance to play drums for an amateur samba band in Rio—the “Fakers from Copacabana.” There, he learned to pretend to be a pro and let his show of confidence carry him along. As part of that group, he got to perform at the annual Carnaval celebrations. Feynman says that the fact that his playing wasn’t perfect didn’t matter. What matters is snapping up every chance at joy that life provides.

(Shortform note: “Fake it till you make it” is another cliché that Feynman seems to prove true with his artistic and musical endeavors, but he’s clear that he was never aiming for perfection, only happiness. In The Book of Joy, the Dalai Lama and Archbishop Desmond Tutu identify several core values that Feynman embodied as those that lead to happiness and contentment—humility, humor, a willingness to see from others’ perspectives, and accepting the world as it is.)