>On another occasion Yang said, "That taste and style have so much to do with one's contribution in physics may sound strange at first, since physics is supposed to deal objectively with the physical universe. But the physical universe has structure, and one's perceptions of this structure, one's partiality to some of its characteristics and aversion to others, are precisely the elements that make up one's taste. Thus it is not surprising that taste and style are so important in scientific research, as they are in literature, art and music."<
-----
Chen Ning Yang, Selected Papers (1945-1980) - With Commentary:
Chen Ning Yang, Selected Papers (1945-1980) - With Commentary:
"In every field of creative activity, it is one’s taste, together with ability, temperament, and opportunity, that determines one’s style and through it one’s contribution. That taste and style have so much to do with one’s contribution in physics may sound strange at first, since physics is supposed to deal objectively with the physical universe. But the physical universe has structure, and one’s perceptions of this structure, one’s partiality to some of its characteristics and aversion to others, are precisely the elements that make up one’s taste. Thus it is not surprising that taste and style are so important in scientific research, as they are in literature, arc, and music.
I have said that my taste in physics was largely formed during the six years from 1938 to 1944 when I was a student in Kunming. It was in those years that I learned to admire the work of Einstein, Dirac, and Fermi. They have, of course, very different styles. Nonetheless, they share the ability to extract the fundamentals of a physical concept, a theoretical structure, or a physical phenomenon and to zero in on the essentials. Later, when I came to know Fermi and Dirac, I realized that they spoke and thought about physics very much in the way that I had imagined them to do from studying their papers.
In contrast, I did not resonate with the style of Heisenberg. That is not to say that I did not appreciate that he was a great physicist. I did. In fact, I felt thrilled and transformed upon understanding the uncertainty principle in late 1942. But I could not appreciate his approach. My later brief encounters with him at meetings and lectures in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s only strengthened my earlier impression.
I did appreciate Schrödinger’s approach to wave mechanics, perhaps because it was more in the tradition of classical mechanics and optics, perhaps because Schrödinger’s purpose was more clearly defined. In any case, I found wave mechanics to be geometrical and appealing, to be, a priori, more easily appreciated."
-----
Was charakterisiert einen Menschen am meisten?
Vermutlich ist es ja die spezifisch eigene Weise des Wählens.
I have said that my taste in physics was largely formed during the six years from 1938 to 1944 when I was a student in Kunming. It was in those years that I learned to admire the work of Einstein, Dirac, and Fermi. They have, of course, very different styles. Nonetheless, they share the ability to extract the fundamentals of a physical concept, a theoretical structure, or a physical phenomenon and to zero in on the essentials. Later, when I came to know Fermi and Dirac, I realized that they spoke and thought about physics very much in the way that I had imagined them to do from studying their papers.
In contrast, I did not resonate with the style of Heisenberg. That is not to say that I did not appreciate that he was a great physicist. I did. In fact, I felt thrilled and transformed upon understanding the uncertainty principle in late 1942. But I could not appreciate his approach. My later brief encounters with him at meetings and lectures in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s only strengthened my earlier impression.
I did appreciate Schrödinger’s approach to wave mechanics, perhaps because it was more in the tradition of classical mechanics and optics, perhaps because Schrödinger’s purpose was more clearly defined. In any case, I found wave mechanics to be geometrical and appealing, to be, a priori, more easily appreciated."
-----
Was charakterisiert einen Menschen am meisten?
Vermutlich ist es ja die spezifisch eigene Weise des Wählens.
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen