Sean Carroll

And I think that for Schrodinger, that's a perfectly plausible answer. conclusion to draw from his actions. I don't think we should rename the Schrodinger equation. You know, I think of these labels, I think of names of equations and things like that as labels, not as honors.

Sure, Schrodinger is someone we remember in part because his name is on an equation, but it's also just the Schrodinger equation. That label, the Schrodinger equation, has transcended Schrodinger the person a long time ago. But in terms of like honoring them by statues and things like that, that's a more difficult question. I think that –

Sure, Schrodinger is someone we remember in part because his name is on an equation, but it's also just the Schrodinger equation. That label, the Schrodinger equation, has transcended Schrodinger the person a long time ago. But in terms of like honoring them by statues and things like that, that's a more difficult question. I think that –

On the one hand, the argument would be we're honoring them for the good work they did. The other argument would be like shouldn't we be honoring good people rather than bad people, not just people who achieve things no matter how bad they are? I think – I don't know the answer to those questions. I do think we should be upfront about it. I think there is a certain –

On the one hand, the argument would be we're honoring them for the good work they did. The other argument would be like shouldn't we be honoring good people rather than bad people, not just people who achieve things no matter how bad they are? I think – I don't know the answer to those questions. I do think we should be upfront about it. I think there is a certain –

temptation to think that because somebody did a great thing in science or, for that matter, in art or politics or sports or literature or whatever, that there are heroes and we should honor them, right? And that I'm much more skeptical about. I think that that's always a dangerous thing because you're honoring someone who you don't know. Personally, right?

temptation to think that because somebody did a great thing in science or, for that matter, in art or politics or sports or literature or whatever, that there are heroes and we should honor them, right? And that I'm much more skeptical about. I think that that's always a dangerous thing because you're honoring someone who you don't know. Personally, right?

If you want to honor the thing they did, that's fine. But then to just transfer that into honoring the person as a whole when you really don't know that person as a whole is a very dangerous move. So I'm in favor of teaching the history accurately and letting people go where they will from that. Natalie Standing asks a priority question. I'm a 52 year old with a passion for reading about physics.

If you want to honor the thing they did, that's fine. But then to just transfer that into honoring the person as a whole when you really don't know that person as a whole is a very dangerous move. So I'm in favor of teaching the history accurately and letting people go where they will from that. Natalie Standing asks a priority question. I'm a 52 year old with a passion for reading about physics.

I've been captivated by your books and those by Brian Green. They never fail to blow my mind. Though I didn't excel in school, particularly in mathematics, I find myself fascinated by the discipline. I would love to deepen my knowledge of this beautiful language. Could you recommend some starting points or resources to help me on this journey?

I've been captivated by your books and those by Brian Green. They never fail to blow my mind. Though I didn't excel in school, particularly in mathematics, I find myself fascinated by the discipline. I would love to deepen my knowledge of this beautiful language. Could you recommend some starting points or resources to help me on this journey?

well, you know I'm going to recommend my own books, right? That's where I'm going to start. But let me say, books are for some people. Videos are for other people. Classroom discussions are for other people. Different people are going to learn different ways. You've got to find the way that works for you. Some people are mostly happy just reading the texts.

well, you know I'm going to recommend my own books, right? That's where I'm going to start. But let me say, books are for some people. Videos are for other people. Classroom discussions are for other people. Different people are going to learn different ways. You've got to find the way that works for you. Some people are mostly happy just reading the texts.

Other people need to work out problems and things like that. Again, find what works for you. Part of the goal of my... hopefully eventually completed trilogy on the biggest ideas in the universe is to provide some insight into those more quantitative aspects of modern physics that popular level books don't cover, whether it's classical mechanics, quantum mechanics, or complexity and emergence.

Other people need to work out problems and things like that. Again, find what works for you. Part of the goal of my... hopefully eventually completed trilogy on the biggest ideas in the universe is to provide some insight into those more quantitative aspects of modern physics that popular level books don't cover, whether it's classical mechanics, quantum mechanics, or complexity and emergence.

So to me, that's like hopefully a very good starting point for exactly what you're thinking about, the biggest ideas in the universe. Leonard Susskind also has a series of books, The Theoretical Minimum. It's a little more straightforwardly course-like laid out. In the biggest ideas, I try to sort of mix and match things.

So to me, that's like hopefully a very good starting point for exactly what you're thinking about, the biggest ideas in the universe. Leonard Susskind also has a series of books, The Theoretical Minimum. It's a little more straightforwardly course-like laid out. In the biggest ideas, I try to sort of mix and match things.

I don't go in the traditional order because I'm very, very explicitly not teaching a course, right? It's about— people picking up the books and reading them. So it's a slightly different angle, but a very similar spirit of showing you the equations and helping you learn about them. None of those books are quite at the level of a textbook. So ultimately, if you really want to learn this stuff,

I don't go in the traditional order because I'm very, very explicitly not teaching a course, right? It's about— people picking up the books and reading them. So it's a slightly different angle, but a very similar spirit of showing you the equations and helping you learn about them. None of those books are quite at the level of a textbook. So ultimately, if you really want to learn this stuff,

Well, what do you mean by really want to learn this stuff, right? If you want to learn it at the level of a professional physicist, you have to start at the beginning. You have to learn classical mechanics and calculus and differential equations and waves and E&M and basic quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics and then on your way up.