Feynman lectures in physics. "Symmetry in physical laws"

Chapter 1

ATOMS IN MOTION

§ 1. Introduction

§ 3. Atomic processes

§ 4. Chemical reactions

§ 1. Introduction

This two-year physics course is designed to ensure that you, the reader, are about to become a physicist. Suppose it is not so necessary, but what teacher does not hope for it! If you really want to be a physicist, you have to work hard. After all, two hundred years of rapid development of the most powerful field of knowledge mean something! Such an abundance of material, perhaps, cannot be mastered in four years; after this, you still need to attend special courses.

And yet, the whole result of the colossal work done over these centuries can be condensed - reduced into a small number of laws that summarize all our knowledge. However, these laws are also not easy to learn, and it would be simply dishonest for you to start studying such a difficult subject without having at hand some scheme, some outline of the relationship of some parts of science with others. The first three chapters constitute such an outline. We will get acquainted in these chapters with how physics is related to the rest of the sciences, how these other sciences relate to each other, and what science itself is. This will help us "feel" the subject of physics.

You ask: why not immediately, on the first page, not bring the basic laws, and then only show how they work in different conditions? After all, this is exactly what they do in geometry: they formulate axioms, and then all that remains is to draw conclusions. (Not a bad idea: to present in 4 minutes something that you cannot manage in 4 years.) This is impossible for two reasons. First, we do not know all the basic laws; on the contrary, the more we learn, the more the boundaries of what we have to know expand! Second, the precise formulation of the laws of physics is associated with many unusual ideas and concepts that require equally unusual mathematics to describe them. It takes a lot of practice just to get the hang of understanding the meaning of words. So your proposal will not go through. We'll have to move gradually, step by step.

Each step in the study of nature is always only an approximation to the truth, or rather, to what we consider to be true. All that we learn is some kind of approximation, for we know that we do not know all the laws. Everything is studied only in order to become incomprehensible again or, at best, to require correction.

The principle of science, almost its definition, is this: the touchstone of all our knowledge is experience. Experience, experiment is the only judge of scientific "truth." And what is the source of knowledge? Where do the laws we test come from? Yes from the same experience; it helps us to deduce laws, hints at them are hidden in it. And beyond that, imagination is also needed in order to see something big and important behind hints, in order to guess the unexpected, simple and beautiful picture that stands behind them, and then to stage an experiment that would convince us of the correctness of the guess. This process of imagination is so difficult that there is a division of labor: there are theoretical physicists, they imagine, think and guess new laws, but do not stage experiments, and there are experimental physicists whose occupation is to experiment, imagine, think and guess.

We said that the laws of nature are approximations; first the "wrong" laws are discovered, and then the "correct" ones. But how can experience be “wrong”? Well, firstly, for the simplest reason: when something is wrong in your devices, and you do not notice it. But such a mistake is easy to catch, you just need to check and verify everything. Well, if you do not find fault with trifles, can the results of the experiment still be erroneous? They can, due to lack of accuracy. For example, the mass of an object appears to be unchanged; a spinning top weighs as much as a spinning top. So the "law" is ready for you: the mass is constant and does not depend on the speed. But this "law", as it turns out, is wrong. It turned out that the mass grows with increasing speed, but only for a noticeable increase, speeds close to light are needed. The correct law is this: if the speed of an object is less than 100 km / sec, the mass is constant to within one millionth. In approximately this approximate form, this law is true. One might think that there is practically no significant difference between the old law and the new one. Yes and no. For ordinary speeds, you can forget about the reservations and, in a good approximation, consider the statement that the mass is constant as a law. But on high speeds we will start to make mistakes, and the more, the higher the speed.

But the most wonderful thing is that with common point view, any approximate law is absolutely wrong. Our view of the world will require a revision even when the mass changes even a drop. This is a characteristic property of the general picture of the world, which is behind the laws. Even a minor effect sometimes requires a profound change in our views.

So what do we need to learn first? Should we teach the correct, but unusual laws with their strange and difficult concepts, for example, the theory of relativity, four-dimensional space-time, etc.? Or start with a simple "constant mass" law? Although he is approximate, he does without difficult ideas. The first, undoubtedly, is more pleasant, more attractive; the first is very tempting, but the second is easier to start, and then it’s the first step towards a deeper understanding of the right idea. This question comes up all the time when you teach physics. At different stages of the course, we will solve it in different ways, but at each stage we will try to outline what is now known and with what precision, how it fits with the rest and what may change when we learn more about it.

Let's move on to our scheme, to an outline of our understanding of modern science (primarily physics, but also other sciences close to it), so that when later we have to delve into various issues, we will be able to see what lies at their basis, why are they interesting and how do they fit into general structure.

So what does the picture of the world look like?

§ 2. Substance consists of atoms

If, as a result of some world catastrophe, all the accumulated scientific knowledge would be destroyed and only one phrase would pass to future generations of living beings, then which statement, composed of the smallest number of words, would bring the most information? I believe that this is an atomic hypothesis (you can call it not a hypothesis, but a fact, but this does not change anything): all bodies are made up of atoms - small bodies that are in continuous motion, attract at a short distance, but repel if one one of them is tighter to press against the other. This one phrase, as you will see, contains an incredible amount of information about the world, you just have to put a little imagination and a little thought into it.

To show the power of the idea of ​​the atom, imagine a water droplet 0.5 cm in size. If we look intently at it, then we will not see anything but water, calm, solid water. Even under the best optical microscope at 2000x magnification, when the drop takes the size of a large room, we will still see relatively calm water, unless some kind of "soccer balls" begin to swoop over it. This Paramecia is a very interesting thing. At this, you can linger and deal with the paramecium, its cilia, watch how it contracts and unclenches, and wave your hand to further increase (unless you want to look at it from the inside). Biology deals with paramecium, and we walk past them and, in order to better see the water, we will increase it again by 2000 times. Now the drop will grow up to 20 km, and we will see how something is teeming in it; now it is no longer so calm and solid, now it resembles a crowd in a stadium on the day of a football match from a bird's eye view. What is this teeming with? To get a better look, let's zoom in another 250 times. We will see something similar to fig. 1.1.

FIG. 1.1. A drop of water (magnified a billion times).

This is a drop of water, magnified a billion times, but, of course, this picture is conditional. First of all, the particles are shown here in a simplified way, with sharp edges - this is the first inaccuracy. For simplicity, they are located on a plane, but in fact they wander in all three dimensions - this is the second. The figure shows "blots" (or circles) of two varieties - black (oxygen) and white (hydrogen); it can be seen that two hydrogens are attached to each oxygen. (Such a group of oxygen and two hydrogen atoms is called a molecule.) Finally, the third simplification is that real particles in nature are constantly trembling and bouncing, spinning and revolving around one another. You have to imagine in the picture not rest, but movement. The figure also cannot show how particles "stick to each other", attract, stick one to one, etc. We can say that their entire groups are somehow "glued". However, none of the little bodies is able to squeeze through the other. If you try to forcefully push one against the other, they will push off.

The radius of the atoms is approximately equal to 1 or 2 by 10 -8 cm. A value of 10 -8 cm is angstroms, so the radius of an atom is 1 or 2 angstroms (A). Here's another way ...

To readers of the Russian edition

These are lectures on general physics given by a theoretical physicist. They are not at all like any other known course. This may sound strange: basic principles classical physics, and not only classical, but also quantum, have long been established, the course general physics read all over the world in thousands educational institutions for many years and it is time for him to turn into a standard sequence known facts and theories, like, for example, elementary geometry in school. However, even mathematicians believe that their science should be taught differently. And there is nothing to say about physics: it is developing so intensively that even the best teachers all the time face great difficulties when they need to tell students about modern science. They complain that they have to break what is commonly called old or familiar beliefs. But where do the familiar notions come from? Usually they fall into young heads at school from the same teachers, who will then talk about the inaccessibility of the ideas of modern science. Therefore, before getting to the heart of the matter, you have to spend a lot of time to convince the listeners of the falsity of what was previously taught to them as an obvious and immutable truth. It would be crazy to first tell schoolchildren "for simplicity" that the Earth is flat, and then, as a discovery, to report its sphericity. Is it so far from this absurd example that the path along which future specialists enter modern world ideas of the theory of relativity and quanta? The matter is also complicated by the fact that for the most part the lecturer and the audience are people of different generations, and it is very difficult for the lecturer to avoid the temptation to lead the audience along the familiar and reliable path along which he himself once reached the desired heights. However, the old road is not always the best. Physics is developing very quickly, and in order to keep up with it, it is necessary to change the ways of studying it. Everyone agrees that physics is one of the most interesting sciences... At the same time, many physics textbooks are by no means interesting. In such textbooks everything that follows the program is stated. It usually explains the benefits of physics and how important it is to study it, but from them it is very rare to understand why doing physics is interesting. But this side of the issue also deserves attention. How can you make a boring subject both interesting and modern? First of all, those physicists who themselves work with enthusiasm and are able to convey this passion to others should think about this. The time to experiment has already arrived. Their goal is to find the most effective ways teaching physics, which would make it possible to quickly pass on to the new generation the entire stock of knowledge that has been accumulated by science throughout its history. Finding new ways to teach has always been an important part of science. Teaching, following the development of science, must continuously change its forms, break traditions, look for new methods. An important role here is played by the fact that in science all the time there is an amazing process of a kind of simplification, which makes it possible to simply and briefly outline what once required many years of work.

An extremely interesting attempt in this direction was made in California Institute of Technology(USA), which is abbreviated as KALTECH, where a group of professors and teachers, after numerous discussions, developed a new program in general physics, and one of the members of this group, the prominent American physicist Richard Feynman, gave lectures.

Feynman's lectures are distinguished by the fact that they are addressed to the listener living in the second half of the 20th century, who already knows or heard a lot. Therefore, in lectures, no time is wasted on explaining in "learned language" what is already known. But they fascinatingly tell how a person studies the nature around him, about the boundaries reached today in the knowledge of the world, about what problems science solves today and will solve tomorrow.

Lectures were given in 1961-1962 and 1962-1963 academic years; they were recorded on a tape recorder, and then (and this turned out to be a difficult task in itself) "translated" into "written English" by Professors M. Sands and R. Leighton. This kind of "translation" retains many of the features of the lecturer's lively speech, its liveliness, jokes, digressions. However, this very valuable quality of lectures was by no means the main and self-sufficient quality. No less important were the original methods of presenting material created by the lecturer, which reflected the bright scientific individuality of the author, his point of view on the path of teaching physics to students. This, of course, is not accidental. It is known that in their scientific works Feynman always found new methods that became generally accepted very quickly. Feynman's works on quantum electrodynamics and statistics brought him wide recognition, and his method - the so-called "Feynman diagrams" - is now used in almost all areas of theoretical physics.

No matter what they say about these lectures - they admired the style of presentation or lamented over the breaking of the good old traditions - one thing remains indisputable: we must begin pedagogical experiences... Probably, not everyone will agree with the author's manner of presenting certain issues, not everyone will agree with the assessment of goals and prospects modern physics... But this will serve as an incentive for the emergence of new books, which will reflect other views. This is an experiment.

But the question is not only what to tell. No less important is another question - in what order it should be done. The location of the sections within the general physics course and the sequence of presentation is always a conditional question. All parts of science are so connected to each other that it is often difficult to decide what should be presented first and what later.

However, in most university programs and available textbooks, certain traditions are still preserved.

Rejection of the usual sequence of presentation is one of the distinctive features Feynman lectures. They tell not only about specific tasks, but also about the place that physics occupies in a number of other sciences, about the ways of describing and studying natural phenomena. Probably, representatives of other sciences - say, mathematicians - will disagree with the place that Feynman gives to these sciences. For him, as physics, "his own" science, of course, looks the most important. But this circumstance does not take up much space in his presentation. On the other hand, his story clearly reflects the reasons that induce a physicist to carry out the hard work of a researcher, as well as the doubts that arise when he is faced with difficulties that now seem insurmountable.

A young naturalist must not only understand why it is interesting to do science, but also feel at what cost victories are gained and how sometimes the roads leading to them are difficult.

It should also be borne in mind that if at first the author dispensed with the mathematical apparatus or used only the one that is presented in the lectures, then the reader, as he moves forward, will be required to increase his mathematical baggage. However, experience shows that mathematical analysis(at least its basics) is now easier to learn than physics.

Feynman's lectures were published in the USA in three large volumes. The first contains mainly lectures on mechanics and the theory of heat, the second - electrodynamics and physics continuous media and the third is quantum mechanics. To make the book available to a larger number of readers and to make it more convenient to use, the Russian edition will be published in small editions. The first four of them correspond to the first volume of the American edition.

Who will benefit from this book? First of all - to teachers who will read it in its entirety: it will make them think about changing the prevailing views on how to start teaching physics. Further, students will read it. They will find many new things in it, in addition to what they learn in the lectures. Of course, schoolchildren will also try to read it. Most of them will find it difficult to overcome everything, but what they can read and understand will help them get into modern science, the path to which is always difficult, but never boring. Anyone who does not believe that he can pass it should not take up the study of this book! Finally, everyone else can read it. Read just like that, for fun. This is also very helpful. In his introduction, Feynman does not rate the results of his experience very highly: too few students who attended his course have mastered all the lectures. But it should be so.

To readers of the Russian edition

These are lectures on general physics given by a theoretical physicist. They are not at all like any other known course. This may seem strange: the basic principles of classical physics, and not only classical, but also quantum, have long been established, the course of general physics has been read all over the world in thousands of educational institutions for many years, and it is time for it to turn into a standard sequence of known facts and theories, like , for example, elementary geometry in school. However, even mathematicians believe that their science should be taught differently. And there is nothing to say about physics: it is developing so intensively that even the best teachers all the time face great difficulties when they need to tell students about modern science. They complain that they have to break what is commonly called old or familiar beliefs. But where do the familiar notions come from? Usually they fall into young heads at school from the same teachers, who will then talk about the inaccessibility of the ideas of modern science. Therefore, before getting to the heart of the matter, you have to spend a lot of time to convince the listeners of the falsity of what was previously taught to them as an obvious and immutable truth. It would be crazy to first tell schoolchildren "for simplicity" that the Earth is flat, and then, as a discovery, to report its sphericity. And is the path along which future specialists enter the modern world of the ideas of the theory of relativity and quanta so far from this absurd example? The matter is also complicated by the fact that for the most part the lecturer and the audience are people of different generations, and it is very difficult for the lecturer to avoid the temptation to lead the audience along the familiar and reliable path along which he himself once reached the desired heights. However, the old road is not always the best. Physics is developing very quickly, and in order to keep up with it, it is necessary to change the ways of studying it. Everyone agrees that physics is one of the most interesting sciences. At the same time, many physics textbooks are by no means interesting. In such textbooks everything that follows the program is stated. It usually explains the benefits of physics and how important it is to study it, but from them it is very rare to understand why doing physics is interesting. But this side of the issue also deserves attention. How can you make a boring subject both interesting and modern? First of all, those physicists who themselves work with enthusiasm and are able to convey this passion to others should think about this. The time to experiment has already arrived. Their goal is to find the most effective ways of teaching physics, which would make it possible to quickly transfer to the new generation the entire stock of knowledge that has been accumulated by science throughout its history. Finding new ways to teach has always been an important part of science. Teaching, following the development of science, must continuously change its forms, break traditions, look for new methods. An important role here is played by the fact that in science all the time there is an amazing process of a kind of simplification, which makes it possible to simply and briefly outline what once required many years of work.

An extremely interesting attempt in this direction was made at the California Institute of Technology (USA), which is abbreviated as KALTECH, where a group of professors and teachers, after numerous discussions, developed a new program in general physics, and one of the members of this group, the prominent American physicist Richard Feynman, read lectures.

Feynman's lectures are distinguished by the fact that they are addressed to the listener living in the second half of the 20th century, who already knows or heard a lot. Therefore, in lectures, no time is wasted on explaining in "learned language" what is already known. But they fascinatingly tell how a person studies the nature around him, about the boundaries reached today in the knowledge of the world, about what problems science solves today and will solve tomorrow.

Lectures were given in the 1961-1962 and 1962-1963 academic years; they were recorded on a tape recorder, and then (and this turned out to be a difficult task in itself) "translated" into "written English" by Professors M. Sands and R. Leighton. This kind of "translation" retains many of the features of the lecturer's lively speech, its liveliness, jokes, digressions. However, this very valuable quality of lectures was by no means the main and self-sufficient quality. No less important were the original methods of presenting material created by the lecturer, which reflected the bright scientific individuality of the author, his point of view on the path of teaching physics to students. This, of course, is not accidental. It is known that in his scientific works, Feynman always found new methods that very quickly became generally accepted. Feynman's works on quantum electrodynamics and statistics brought him wide recognition, and his method - the so-called "Feynman diagrams" - is now used in almost all areas of theoretical physics.

Whatever they say about these lectures - they admired the style of presentation or lamented the breakdown of the good old traditions - one thing remains indisputable: it is necessary to start pedagogical experiments. Probably, not everyone will agree with the author's manner of presenting certain questions, not everyone will agree with the assessment of the goals and prospects of modern physics. But this will serve as an incentive for the emergence of new books, which will reflect other views. This is an experiment.

But the question is not only what to tell. No less important is another question - in what order it should be done. The location of the sections within the general physics course and the sequence of presentation is always a conditional question. All parts of science are so connected to each other that it is often difficult to decide what should be presented first and what later.

However, in most university programs and available textbooks, certain traditions are still preserved.

The rejection of the usual sequence of presentation is one of the distinguishing features of the Feynman lectures. They tell not only about specific problems, but also about the place that physics occupies in a number of other sciences, about the ways of describing and studying natural phenomena. Probably, representatives of other sciences - say, mathematicians - will disagree with the place that Feynman gives to these sciences. For him, as physics, "his own" science, of course, looks the most important. But this circumstance does not take up much space in his presentation. On the other hand, his story clearly reflects the reasons that induce a physicist to carry out the hard work of a researcher, as well as the doubts that arise when he is faced with difficulties that now seem insurmountable.

A young naturalist must not only understand why it is interesting to do science, but also feel at what cost victories are gained and how sometimes the roads leading to them are difficult.

From the preface to the readers of the Russian edition:
Everyone agrees that physics is one of the most interesting sciences. At the same time, many physics textbooks are by no means interesting. In such textbooks everything that follows the program is stated. It usually explains the benefits of physics and how important it is to study it, but from them it is very rare to understand why doing physics is interesting. But this side of the issue also deserves attention. How can you make a boring subject both interesting and modern? First of all, those physicists who themselves work with enthusiasm and are able to convey this passion to others should think about this. The time to experiment has already arrived. Their goal is to find the most effective ways of teaching physics, which would make it possible to quickly transfer to the new generation the entire stock of knowledge that has been accumulated by science throughout its history. Finding new ways to teach has always been an important part of science. Teaching, following the development of science, must continuously change its forms, break traditions, look for new methods. An important role here is played by the fact that in science all the time there is an amazing process of a kind of simplification, which makes it possible to simply and briefly outline what once required many years of work.

An extremely interesting attempt in this direction was made at the California Institute of Technology (USA), which is abbreviated as KALTECH, where a group of professors and teachers, after numerous discussions, developed a new program in general physics, and one of the members of this group, the prominent American physicist Richard Feynman, read lectures.

Feynman's lectures are distinguished by the fact that they are addressed to the listener living in the second half of the 20th century, who already knows or heard a lot. Therefore, in lectures, no time is wasted on explaining in "learned language" what is already known. But they fascinatingly tell how a person studies the nature around him, about the boundaries reached today in the knowledge of the world, about what problems science solves today and will solve tomorrow.

Lectures were given in the 1961-1962 and 1962-1963 academic years; they were recorded on a tape recorder, and then (and this turned out to be a difficult task in itself) "translated" into "written English" by Professors M. Sands and R. Leighton. This kind of "translation" retains many of the features of the lecturer's lively speech, its liveliness, jokes, digressions. However, this very valuable quality of lectures was by no means the main and self-sufficient quality. No less important were the original methods of presenting material created by the lecturer, which reflected the bright scientific individuality of the author, his point of view on the path of teaching physics to students. This, of course, is not accidental. It is known that in his scientific works, Feynman always found new methods that very quickly became generally accepted. Feynman's works on quantum electrodynamics and statistics brought him wide recognition, and his method - the so-called "Feynman diagrams" - is now used in almost all areas of theoretical physics.

Whatever they say about these lectures - they admired the style of presentation or lamented the breakdown of the good old traditions - one thing remains indisputable: it is necessary to start pedagogical experiments. Probably, not everyone will agree with the author's manner of presenting certain questions, not everyone will agree with the assessment of the goals and prospects of modern physics. But this will serve as an incentive for the emergence of new books, which will reflect other views. This is an experiment. But the question is not only what to tell. No less important is another question - in what order it should be done.

The location of the sections within the general physics course and the sequence of presentation is always a conditional question. All parts of science are so connected to each other that it is often difficult to decide what should be presented first and what later. However, in most university programs and available textbooks, certain traditions are still preserved.

The rejection of the usual sequence of presentation is one of the distinguishing features of the Feynman lectures. They tell not only about specific problems, but also about the place that physics occupies in a number of other sciences, about the ways of describing and studying natural phenomena. Probably, representatives of other sciences - say, mathematicians - will disagree with the place that Feynman gives to these sciences. For him, as physics, "his own" science, of course, looks the most important. But this circumstance does not take up much space in his presentation. On the other hand, his story clearly reflects the reasons that induce a physicist to carry out the hard work of a researcher, as well as the doubts that arise when he is faced with difficulties that now seem insurmountable.

A young naturalist must not only understand why it is interesting to do science, but also feel at what cost victories are gained and how sometimes the roads leading to them are difficult.

It should also be borne in mind that if at first the author dispensed with the mathematical apparatus or used only the one that is presented in the lectures, then the reader, as he moves forward, will be required to increase his mathematical baggage. However, experience shows that mathematical analysis (at least its foundations) is now easier to learn than physics.

Who will benefit from this book? First of all - to teachers who will read it in its entirety: it will make them think about changing the prevailing views on how to start teaching physics. Further, students will read it. They will find many new things in it, in addition to what they learn in the lectures. Of course, schoolchildren will also try to read it. Most of them will find it difficult to overcome everything, but what they can read and understand will help them enter modern science, the path to which is always difficult, but never boring. Anyone who does not believe that he can pass it should not take up the study of this book! Finally, everyone else can read it. Read just like that, for fun. This is also very helpful. In his introduction, Feynman does not rate the results of his experience very highly: too few students who attended his course have mastered all the lectures. But it should be so. The first experience is rarely complete success. New ideas always find at first only a few supporters and only gradually become familiar.

"Physics is like sex: it may not give practical results, but this is not a reason not to do it"- the slogan with which Richard Feynman went through life, captivating thousands of people with his unbridled passion. An ingenious scientist, an inquisitive microbiologist, a thoughtful Mayan writing expert, artist, musician and also a keen safe cracker, Feynman left behind a vast scientific legacy in the field of theoretical physics and a considerable number of speeches in which the professor tried to convey to us his admiration for the genius and simplicity of nature , many laws that we are still unable to comprehend.

In this sense, Feynman's Messenger lectures on the topic "The nature of physical laws", read by him in 1964 at Cornell University, is a universal mini-textbook on physics, in which the achievements of this science and the problems facing researchers are briefly, sharply, accessible and emotionally presented. Yes, 50 years have passed, a lot has changed (string theory was put forward, the Higgs boson was discovered, the existence of dark energy, the expansion of the Universe), but the fundamentals, those physical laws that Feynman talks about, are a universal key with which you can confidently approach acquaintance with state-of-the-art discoveries scientists in this field. However, you can do without this pragmatic pathos: Feynman's lectures are amazing, and will appeal to everyone who stands numb before the greatness of Nature and the harmony that permeates everything in our world - from the arrangement of the cell to the arrangement of the Universe. In the end, as Feynman himself said,. So enjoy it.

Lecture number 1

"The law of universal gravitation"

In this lecture, Richard Feynman introduces the audience to the law of universal gravitation as an example of a physical law, tells about the history of its discovery, characteristic features, distinguishing it from other laws, and the extraordinary consequences that entailed the discovery of gravity. Another scientist here reflects on inertia and how amazing everything is arranged:

This law was called "The greatest generalization achieved by the human mind." But already from the introductory words, you probably understood that I am interested not so much in the human mind as in the wonders of nature, which can obey such elegant and simple laws as the law of gravity. Therefore, we will not talk about how smart we are that we discovered this law, but about how wise nature is that observes it.

Lecture number 2

"The connection between physics and mathematics"

Mathematics is the language spoken by nature, according to Richard Feynman. All the arguments in favor of this conclusion - see the video.

No amount of intellectual arguments can convey the deaf feeling of music. In the same way, no intellectual arguments can convey the understanding of nature to man. "Another culture". Philosophers try to talk about nature without mathematics. I am trying to describe nature mathematically. But if they don’t understand me, it’s not because it’s impossible. Maybe my failure is due to the fact that the horizons of these people are too limited and they consider man to be the center of the Universe.

Lecture number 3

"Great laws of conservation"

Here Richard Feynman begins to talk about the general principles that permeate the entire variety of physical laws, paying special attention to the principle of the law of conservation of energy: the history of its discovery, application in various fields and the mysteries that energy poses to scientists.

The search for the laws of physics is like a child's game of blocks, from which you need to assemble a whole picture. We have a huge variety of cubes, and every day there are more and more of them. Many are lying on the sidelines and do not seem to fit the rest. How do we know that they are all from the same set? How do we know that together they have to make a complete picture? There is no complete certainty, and this worries us somewhat. But the fact that many of the cubes have something in common is encouraging. All are drawn blue sky, all are made of the same kind of wood. All physical laws are subject to the same conservation laws.

Video source: Evgeny Kruychkov / Youtube

Lecture number 4

"Symmetry in physical laws"

Lecture on the peculiarities of the symmetry of physical laws, its properties and contradictions.

Since I am talking about the laws of symmetry, I would like to tell you that in connection with them several new problems have arisen. For example, each elementary particle there is an antiparticle corresponding to it: for an electron it is a positron, for a proton it is an antiproton. In principle, we could create so-called antimatter, in which each atom would be composed of the corresponding antiparticles. So, an ordinary hydrogen atom consists of one proton and one electron. If we take one antiproton, the electric charge of which is negative, and one positron and combine them, then we get a hydrogen atom special type, so to speak, an atom of antihydrogen. Moreover, it was found that, in principle, such an atom would be no worse than an ordinary one and that in this way it would be possible to create antimatter itself different kind... Now it is permissible to ask, will such antimatter behave in exactly the same way as our matter? And, as far as we know, the answer to this question must be yes. One of the laws of symmetry is that if we make a device out of antimatter, then it will behave exactly like a device out of our ordinary matter. True, it is worth bringing these installations in one place, as annihilation will take place and only sparks will fly.

Lecture number 5

"The difference between the past and the future"

One of the most interesting lectures Feynman, which, ironically, remains the only one untranslated. Do not be discouraged - for those who do not try to understand the subtleties of scientific English, you can read the chapter of the same name from the scientist's book, for everyone else - we post the English version of the physicist's speech.

We remember the past, but we do not remember the future. Our awareness of what might happen is of a very different kind than that of what has probably already happened. The past and the present are perceived psychologically in completely different ways: for the past we have such a real concept as memory, and for the future - the concept of apparent free will. We are sure that in some way we can influence the future, but none of us, with the possible exception of loners, thinks that it is possible to change the past. Repentance, regret, and hope are all words that clearly draw the line between past and future.<…>... But if everything in this world is made of atoms and we also consist of atoms and obey physical laws, then the most natural is the obvious difference between the past and the future, this irreversibility of all phenomena would be explained by the fact that some laws of motion of atoms have only one direction - that atomic laws are not the same in relation to the past and the future. Somewhere there must be a principle like: "You can make a stick out of a tree, but you can't make a tree out of a stick," in connection with which our world is constantly changing its character from a Christmas tree to a stick one - and this irreversibility of interactions should be the reason for the irreversibility of all phenomena in our life.

Lecture number 6

"Probability and Uncertainty - A Look at the Nature of Quantum Mechanics"

This is how Feynman himself poses the problem of probability and uncertainty:

The theory of relativity states that if you think that two events happened at the same time, then this is just your personal point of view, and someone else with the same reason can argue that one of these phenomena happened before the other, so the concept of simultaneity turns out to be purely subjective<…>... Of course, it cannot be otherwise, since in our Everyday life we are dealing with huge clusters of particles, very slow processes and other very specific conditions, so that our experience gives us only a very limited idea of ​​nature. Only a very small proportion of natural phenomena can be gleaned from direct experience. And only with the help of very subtle measurements and carefully prepared experiments can a broader view of things be achieved. And then we start to face surprises. What we observe is not at all what we might suppose, at all not what we imagined. We do not have to strain our imaginations more in order, as in fiction, to imagine what is not in reality, but in order to comprehend what is really happening. This is what I want to talk about today.

Lecture number 7

"In Search of New Laws"

Strictly speaking, what I am going to talk about in this lecture cannot be called a characteristic of the laws of physics. When we talk about the nature of physical laws, we can at least assume that we are talking about nature itself. But now I want to talk not so much about nature as about our relationship to it. I would like to tell you about what we consider to be known today, what remains to be guessed, and how the laws in physics are guessed. Someone even suggested that it would be best if, as I told you, little by little I explain to you how to guess the law, and in conclusion I will open for you new law... I don’t know if I can do it.

Richard Feynman about the material that drives all physical laws (about matter), about the problem of incompatibility of physical principles, about the place of tacit assumptions in science and, of course, about how new laws are discovered.