Asking the Right Questions

Richard Feynman was a major icon in physics for over 6 decades. This is almost an unheard of feat primarily because the careers of most physicists, even the great ones, are winding down when they are in their 40’s.

Feynman told stories – making a lot of them up - about many things and one, about his father, concerned the name of a particular bird, the Spencer’s Warbler. When he and his father saw this bird, his father named the bird in a variety of languages, then said:

“You can know the name of that bird in all the languages of the world, but when you’re finished, you’ll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird. You’ll only know about humans in different places , and what they call the bird. So let’s stop looking at the bird and see what it’s doing – that’s what counts.”

Feynman learned to ask questions about everything; he deconstructed physics; he re-worked all propositions from their beginnings and took nothing for granted. This took time and effort but was well worth it.

In 1956, experimental physics had shown there was a serious discrepancy with theoretical physics. Theoretical physicists cherished the idea of parity conservation, in simple terms that the universe was neither right or left handed. Experimental results on a particular sub-atomic particle (Tau Lepton) could not be explained. Feynman had the imagination and courage to ask “What would be the consequences if the parity rule was wrong.” He simply asked the right question. Perhaps you had to be there, but this was a turning point in science.

In a perfect world, every assumption should be examined no matter how much time and effort it takes. In computer jargon with wrong assumptions you get “garbage in – garbage out”. Let’s look at a few examples:

Ø does electronic messaging really have value rather than just making it simpler or faster

Ø tenure in education (what purpose does it serve now)

Ø assumed probability of unusual or rare events (calculated without sufficient information)

Ø economic theories based on people acting logically (they do not)

There are an infinite number of these. Great historical figures are no longer relevant today because they made wrong assumptions. Marx and and to a lesser extent Freud are good examples.

The problem is that most of us do not have the desire, the ability or the time to research every subject, figure out if there are assumptions and then determine the validity of the assumptions. Nor to affect outcomes if we discover the assumptions don’t make sense.

Look at this example for digital cameras – there has been a continual and inexorable increase in megapixiels. Megapixels sell cameras. But if you increase in number of megapixels without increasing in the size of the card capturing the image, you get a noise problem which is detrimental to picture quality ie you have not improved anything. Instead, why not look at how to make better use of the light which enters the lens but is lost due to inefficiency. The same applies to solar panels where approximately 80% of the energy is wasted. Scientists and engineers are looking at both of these problems. They are related but I’m not sure the engineers have realized this just yet.

Looking at assumptions is fertile ground for litigation lawyers and expert witnesses. Expert reports, appraisals, business plans, and many other documents we rely on are based on assumptions. Being a critical reader and open to changes and alternatives and always questioning is the hallmark for intelligent examination of issues and will facilitate a better outcome. Like democracy, questioning and deconstructing is messy and time consuming, but there is no better system.

I confess that I have not always questioned nearly enough. Often it is only in hindsight that I realize this failure. I suppose I will have to try harder.