|
About This Author
Come closer.
|
Complex Numbers #959930 added May 31, 2019 at 12:20am
Restrictions: None
The Magic that Actually Works
http://nautil.us/issue/69/patterns/the-math-that-takes-newton-into-the-quantum-w...
The mysterious symbols seemed like magic spells. And in a way, they are. Science is the magic that actually works.
Why, you may ask, the hell am I linking this here, on a site about writing (not math)?
Or you might note that the whole theme of this blog is centered around a math thing. It's not, really; but I'll get into that some other time.
It doesn't matter if you don't understand what this author is on about. Hell, it's right on the edge of my own understanding, and I think I have something of a background in this sort of thing, having gotten a degree in a math-adjacent field.
No, the reason I'm sharing this is this excerpt:
I have to think that I have some kind of inside track on this problem. That is, I have some sort of talent that the other guys aren’t using, or some way of looking, and they are being foolish not to notice this wonderful way to look at it. I have to think I have a little better chance than the other guys, for some reason. I know in my heart that it is likely that the reason is false, and likely the particular attitude I’m taking with it was thought of by others. I don’t care; I fool myself into thinking I have an extra chance.
-Richard Feynman
I noted in a recent entry my admiration for Feynman's towering intellect, asserting that I think he was even smarter than Einstein. Admittedly, that's arguable - once you get to that level of smart, IQ tests don't mean shit anymore (if they ever did) and it becomes a matter of opinion. Still, the point is, he was unarguably a genius, and this is a bit of a window into his thought process.
It has to do with making connections.
This isn't limited to math and physics, either. And it's not necessarily going to lead to world-shattering conclusions. I don't do physics or math (though I enjoy reading about those things); what I do is write, and the above quote can be applied to writing.
The best stories, I think, are the ones that look at things just a little bit differently - the way Feynman describes approaching physics problems. This is certainly true for nonfiction; a reporter is always trying to find an intriguing angle for a story, and a biographer seeks to make his or her subject relatable somehow, rather than simply listing facts about the person's life. But it's also true, in a different sense, for fiction.
When I write a story, it's never enough for me to have one idea. Oh, I've done it, but I've never been as satisfied with the results as I am when I'm combining two or more ideas, relating them. The article I linked reminded me of that. Sometimes an additional perspective is necessary, and when you can do that, magic happens: you gain a deeper understanding of your subject, and hopefully can pass that along to the reader.
And don't all of us writers like to think that we have that unique perspective, that we have that "inside track," that we can say something that, maybe, no one else has, at least not in that particular way?
Hell, I'm practicing this just by converting a quote about physics into something more general about what we create.
Anyway, it also struck me that the guy who wrote the article is Joan Baez's cousin, so even if you skipped all the sciencey and mathy stuff, here's a tune by Joan:
|
© Copyright 2019 Robert Waltz (UN: cathartes02 at Writing.Com). All rights reserved.
Robert Waltz has granted InkSpot.Com, its affiliates and its syndicates non-exclusive rights to display this work. |
