Feynman's Hughes Lectures: 950 Pages of Notes
Key topics
The mystique surrounding Richard Feynman's lectures has sparked a lively debate, with some questioning why his Hughes Lectures have garnered so much attention while other great resources, like Purcell's Electricity and Magnetism book, fly under the radar. Commenters argue that Feynman's charisma and ability to simplify complex concepts make his lectures uniquely accessible, whereas textbooks require a much deeper investment of time and effort. As one commenter notes, Feynman's gift for making things intuitive is rare, and explainers like Neil deGrasse Tyson face a tough task in making complex subjects palatable to a broad audience. The discussion highlights the tension between popularizers and gatekeepers, with some criticizing the latter for being dismissive of efforts to make complex ideas more widely understood.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Active discussionFirst comment
2h
Peak period
20
0-6h
Avg / period
8
Based on 48 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Dec 29, 2025 at 5:43 AM EST
10 days ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Dec 29, 2025 at 8:01 AM EST
2h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
20 comments in 0-6h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Jan 1, 2026 at 1:40 PM EST
6d ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
For example, the Electricity and Magnetism book by Purcell is phenomenal but it is hardly ever mentioned. To quote wikipedia,
Electricity and Magnetism is a standard textbook in electromagnetism originally written by Nobel laureate Edward Mills Purcell in 1963. Along with David Griffiths' Introduction to Electrodynamics, this book is one of the most widely adopted undergraduate textbooks in electromagnetism. A Sputnik-era project funded by the National Science Foundation grant, the book is influential for its use of relativity in the presentation of the subject at the undergraduate level. In 1999, it was noted by Norman Foster Ramsey Jr. that the book was widely adopted and has many foreign translations.
Something mysterious is going on here.
Digestible lectures from a charismatic man (who made the television circuit pretty often) have a different audience than comprehensive textbooks I would think.
If one would really be interested in classical music or philosophy one would sure not miss the (other) giants in the field instead of concentrating on just one or two.
There's the mistery.
I think explainers like Neil deGrasse Tyson have a job harder than people imagine. Historically the problem with science education has been, that, as the conceptual universe gets bigger and complicated there's a tendency to assume the common person is too stupid and beneath the subject to understand it.
To simplify and demystify science to a point to get people interested in it as a intuitive iterative process helps a lot in increasing participation of the general crowd.
Those are two different things. If you are a layman you will probably appear "stupid" to someone with a grounding in a more complex subject. All of us, regardless of intelligence (by whatever definition), and not restricted to science.
Your point stands though – making a subject accessible to the rest of us is the art behind the science.
A textbook that just plainly presents the facts about a specific phenomenon isn't necessarily training you to think like a theorist, in the way Feynman is.
there are books from the 19 century written by people with much better values
> The word "prig" isn't very common now, but if you look up the definition, it will sound familiar.
Her criticism is purely about the man, not Feynman as a physicist, a thinker, or a teacher. Feynman was probably on the spectrum and he had a lot of problematic behaviors. That doesn't meaningfully alter the core of his legacy.
It's also not terribly insightful to point out that a great figure from history was deeply flawed. If anything, that's so common as to be nearly guaranteed.
With that in mind, I think we'll agree it's not relevant here, as these seem to be handwritten notes by Feynman himself.
It's been a while since I read "Surely, you must be joking" but I seem to recall Feynman himself makes the same point. He basically says something to the effect that some of his stories and bon mots are things he wished he said or did rather than stuff that actually happened.
I never found anybody taking about Greiner, and at this point, I'm way too afraid to ask why.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Greiner
Richard Feynman is a person well worth remembering, but I'm sure many of his contemporaries that get talked about less were as well.
So it goes.
2) He got his Nobel price in peak boomer years 1965 and then didn't die until the end of the 80s. For boomers he is "their" generation's physicist just like the WWII gen had Einstein as "their" physicist. Who is "the" popular science fad physicist for the X-ers and younger? Hawking, maybe Susskind, possibly even Sabine, I guess?
3) IMHO he was an autodidact who wrote for fellow autodidacts. That is my learning style. His style REALLY STRONGLY resonates with me and my learning style. If you're capable of self-teaching you get a feel for who's your type of author and who is not. Feynman definitely writes books for people like me. His books and notes are all old, of course, which is sad. As for "moderns" who emit similar intense autodidact vibes, I'd suggest Schroeder and his famous "Introduction to Thermal Physics" from the turn of the century. I subjectively like that book. I don't care if there's a better way to learn bachelors thermodynamics by taking a course in a classroom or watching video lecture, I just like the book's style. Not the superficial style like typography but the organization and connectivity of the topics is very autodidactical, just like Feynman's books. To some extent, he's post-education in that once you are done officially learning, the rest of your life you're an autodidact, like it or not, and Feynman's style leans into that. I still remember as a kid in high school, where I took two years of public high school physics, paging thru a copy of Feynman's lectures in the library and it was so clear and so fascinating compared to my experience in "official classes with new textbooks".
I bought the audio book version on CD about 25 years ago.
Now it is on various sites and youtube.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/flptapes.html
This is a video of him giving the lecture.
Feynman's Lectures on Physics - The Law of Gravitation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNO11GLabOc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dW4mctBMI0
The normal Feynman lectures are here: https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/