English Subtitles for Hamming, Intro to The Art of Doing Science and Engineering: Learning to Learn (March 28, 1995)



Subtitles / Closed Captions - English

well welcome to ec four thousand and i believe it's on tuesday thursday and

friday is at three o'clock three o'clock on friday right three right three o'clock there's been some confusion locally i miss panicle 518 2655 i'm typically in the mornings because I'm only teaching halftime so I go on working afternoons there are some notes here and for those not here don't come i can't give you $MONEY off sets of notes by mail because the book is being published by a publisher and he has a right to profit by it will be out

within a year but being while students in this class can get us some notes if there are enough at the end of the day I'll bring some more tomorrow the first lecture is an orientation what am I trying to do the purpose of this course is repair you for your technical future there really is this course no technical content although i'm going to talk about

digital filters and all kinds of things there are things you presumably no I am concerned about style i have study great scientist ever since I was a lost almost during the war what is differing those who do and those who do not do significant things mainly it's a matter of style many person i have no work just as hard as others but didn't have much to show for it

so my problem is to instill in you something called style so you will amount to something after all the Navy is paying a large sum of money to have you here and it wants his money back by your lair performance now I will examine criticized and talk about various people style mainly my own but other people's why to use it now the many of things i'm going to tell you i wish somebody had told me I had to find

out for myself this course is not a normal technical course it's all about the topics they never told you in class that they should because each course to talk this way and a large about falls in between that's what I'm trying to pick up now style cannot be put into words I can only approach by particular examples and let you and fur what is now there is a belief that you probably have that

anything we talked about this goes back to Socrates Plato Aristotle the early Greek times they thought they could talk about the gods tru beautii justice love all those things at the time they were saying these things there were the mystery cults in Greece who said you must experience you cannot talk and if you remember the Middle Ages various Saints said you can't talk about God you've got to experiencing the same way the

Mohammedans about Allah you can't portray him you can't put pictures you must sense so there is a long business school says you cannot put everything into words and one of them is style i really cannot say what i mean i can only give you these examples of struggle hoping that you will get the idea now to be effective course like this i have found that i have to talk about myself if i make

abstract remarks it just sounds like so many pious words if I talk about me and what I've done maybe it will penetrate you now it gives the course and attitude of bragging i'm always talking about myself but i will tell you several mistakes that I made lose so you won't do the same sort of thing

similarly I have to get you to quit your model steam i have to get you individually to respond to my challenge that you gonna be great but you have to say to yourself yes if that guy having to go out become a great scientist I can when I can become a great person I have to get you to say to yourself that you want to that is worth the effort and you're going to try to be something more than just the

average person now all we speak of teachers we are really coaches I cannot run a mile the four-minute mile for you i can comment upon your style but you know you must do the work the same way I cannot make you a great scientist I can criticize style and other things but i cannot by mere words make you a great stylist you just and running four-minute mile must do the work which means you

have to take what you hear and read think it over carefully discuss with your friends and see what you can adapt yourself there is no one style which is successful painters paint many different styles you have to find a style if it's you which means you have to take what fragment you can from other people use them and adapt them and be

come yours you can't copy me directly you won't get away with it and i will use the analogy of painting as an example in painting once you've learned color mixing and form and sketching and so on you study under a master who you temporarily except as knowing what he's talking about

well there are limits what can be done ok you know that you copy the master style exactly you will not be a great painter you know also if you paint in the style he did or she did it's too late the future wants a different style thus I can tell you about the style I use in the past but that won't be the style you'll have to have to cope with the future you must manufacture the style which will make

you a significant person to the future so it's not easy why going to talk about past ones and make references to possible future ones it's a problem you face what I did would not make me successful if I were starting now just as my predecessors got successful other things that I couldn't do it because success one now is another part is very difficult for you when I want to bell telephone laboratories in 1946 I looked around since I was already

somewhat made great scientist and I looked at what they did and when I looked at what they did to become famous it didn't look that difficult they tend to do the easy problems now I found in the course of my time there a couple holes they left but fundamentally they did the easy problems my generation did that somewhat harder ones and we left to the others the harder fill every generation has more difficult

but you stand on our shoulders to some extent yet the task is harder having got man to the moon the next Real Good Feet in space is gonna be a lot harder therefore you have difficulty it's very definite now why can't about labs or four was the same time about we came in about the same time and we're about the same age within a year we privately call ourselves of four young turks and many

many years later I discovered top management called us the same we were troublemakers we didn't do things the way the previous generation did we did new things the previous generation didn't like it we didn't do things right for example my boss hundred voted network theory had made replication doing never clear with complex variable knew that's how you do things after all that is what made him

famous this guy having comes all and keeps using computing machines which is not the way to do it in his eyes but it was the thing that need to be done this is a lesson which I want to get across to you regularly supposing I am successful you do rise to the top will you please remember that what made you great is not appropriate for the next generation you know how to get great because after all you were great

but the things that you did they not be appropriate for next-generation all to off we have a troubled bosses they know by god this is why didn't I got the top must be right there very often wrong and I want you to think seriously when you rise the top that your method success is not appropriate now the world has changed I want to talk education education is what when and why do things

training is how to do it most your courses have been training i'm trying to talk about the education part it's not easy but the school has allowed me a great deal of latitude . this course together which is concentrating on education now if you have one without the other it's not much good I've had very gable technical people reporting me who apply their technology

and the methods to the wrong problem and it had to be undone and other people were all quite a theory but couldn't do anything they're not use either you need both theory to guide you and skill and technique to do one without the other isn't too good now in a certain sense i'm engaged in business education i'm talking about education constantly because that's what you're going to have to do you're gonna have to educate

yourself constantly that's what the future says now I'm going to constantly try and project forward what the world's gonna be like let's look back first history the modern era in science and hearing began with Sir Isaac Newton roughly sixteen forty cute he was born Christmas Day the same year that Gallio died and he lived to be about 85 so we can say is around 1700 from gap from Newton's time two hours we have about double the knowledge every 17 years the

dumpling . of science from then do now is roughly 17 why can't I bell laboratories and 46 they were trying to shrink down for war size down to 5,500 people i watched through 30 years of management putting the hiring freeze doing everything else like that double every 17 years with small Wiggles they had to hire people to keep up with expanding knowledge publication of books journals and so on

for example they have numbers here no I guess I don't now i'm going to make a digression Oh another thing about the situation is that ninety percent of the scientists who ever lived are now alive it's a common statement i'm going to now turn to a back-of-the-envelope calculation which I learned by watching for me and other people and shockingly why you get lunch with them i'm going to suppose first we have an exponential

growth of number scientist that comes from a differential equation the rate of change is proportional how much you have and the solutions you know the exponential growth now if I assume that the amount of knowledge being generated is proportional to the number of scientists this is about a rate and it up up to 17 years ago this is how much we generate this amount up to now now I put minus infinity on because it doesn't matter what the lower limit i

put is so small there's many exponential is very small they're so who cares well i will be working out i do the integration I come up that and the statement was half the stuff has been done the doubling every 17 years from 17 years ago now we've doubled that says the racial half I've got a farmer 4b now take the other statement ninety percent of sinus who ever lived at our live from now back 55 years that's why I'm going to take for lifetime of a scientist you

probably don't mean living sign is what he's two years old you probably mean its eyes alive when he's become are beginning to be a scientist and until the decay somewhere the eighties you consider besides so 55 years is a reasonable number if i put that in over the whole of all sides ever lived I come up with this using that what this is a bee

I will call using out substitution here I come up with . 9 which is close to ninety percent now let's see what happens I got a clearer idea what I was talking about and I had to answer the question which I hadn't thought about what did I mean by a lifetime of a scientist but you see those two statements are compatible we double every 17 years and ninety percent signs never lived in our live you have seen enormous growth of

science from Newton's time to now well let me protect well let me say now a good estimate of the number of various branches of science which we have developed in Newton's time we had only one thing called natural philosophy now we have lots of specialties there are something like 10,000 specialties it certainly is more than a thousand and almost certainly less than two hundred

dollars and so 10,000 good number now if i can check forward doubling every 17 years for 30 and 40 years that's a million fold to the 20th that would make 10 million fields especially what you don't believe it you don't believe in there in 20 40 years they'll be 10 billion feels especially consequently science cannot go the way it has been for the next we're in 40 40 years the doubling and the growth cannot

go on one of the things we've done is we've got an exponential number of people in the field we can't go on that either ever well every would have to be a scientist so you know the past is not too good a guide to the future now the reason why I want those back to have walk-in is its wide to use i observe the fair me but our chocolate and those are you see touch them they did back the envelope and you saw what I had to do not only that but it also does

two things it puts the thing from your mind having shown you the calculation you may retain a little longer plus it gives you practice in quick modeling nobody pretends this is really accurate Oprah 1017 is exactly number it's somewhere around there but back the envelope calculations are useful i found it very useful when I hear things over TV or something else radio read newspapers and so on

do a quick bottom i ask myself are these numbers possible and very frequently two things emerge either they're not possible be you didn't even know what they were talking about to make a model you found that they failed to tell you what they were talking about just gave you a spectacular answer so doing backend of modeling is a very very big help now this doubling business is a very serious one

I've had lived through my life with that fact so i put in here a table w 17 years triple that four five six seven eight nine ten times about 56 years something like that hey how you read that one way is ask the time from now to retirement look at this column that's how much knowledge will be that much kinds of what you now have if we go on the same way you face a rather horrendous future another way to look at

is this suppose you were 34 when your child was born now your child goes to college there's four times as much knowledge not just mathematical theorems recording the Patos ninth where to go skiing what channels to read listen to on TV there's going to be four times as much knowledge for your poor child's face now you remember when you hit college how much you seem to be don't be surprised

if your children someone more disoriented and you were and God those who were sometimes disoriented this is what that means for the more the doubling all the doubling occurs worst in the last . almost half the half the episodes occurred last public . and that's what caused the saturation saturation of time quite rapidly so another way of looking at doubling is simply this table here which is

disconcerting if you think you'll be chief of staff in say 44 years now say 39 years maybe five times as much knowledge needed to run the Navy as is needed now that is what you face well what's my answer my answer to that is learning to learn was the only thing i could do things become obsolete something like half of what we have taught you loving the other courses will be obsolete in 15 years either we're no

longer doing it or it's been replaced by something else consider what i had to live through i came to bell laboratories of 46 and they were running back dude and so on with a very bored part so i started having a mathematical background studying like wondering what vacuum tubes were a song but in some years I began eating with the physics department and I with the guys while they were perfecting that when they started but when they were

developing engineering side of transistors i did a great deal calculation 4mon transistors I absolutely all the knowledge I knew I haven't seen back to do for a long while accepting right friends office where he keeps you around show students will vacuum tube is you don't see them very often now you say well the original transitional team cans and three legs

well now there's a million model ship that sides I've had to do that at Los Alamos we calculate alobam designs on relay calculators which probably averaged maybe an operation or a secular maybe a second-half round-the-clock six and a half days a week for a month sometimes three months but typically about a month to get one solution now you can punch in a modern

machine Boop and there's the answer I've had to live through a tremendous change for the more i was educated a mathematician I certainly had no course in numerical analysis i never knew about a computer I knew little physics stopped ourselves taught me some more but fundamentally when I went to Bell Labs because i believe that the computing I did I should understand the nature problem i

had to learn something of the breadth of physical sciences some chemistry is well a lot of physics some social science a little bit of biological science laboratories had such departments some social science i spent a lifetime getting background knowledge of something you have to have background knowledge enough to penetrate jargon which I'll talk about extensively later date

now one thing you could do is to try and claim the fundamentals which is very glib until you you ask what do I mean by fundamentals well I have two criteria which are not adequate one is from the fundamental you can derive the rest of the field secondly they've been around for some time but the fundamentals of application which will vacuum tubes doesn't count now

true Hartley of the formula for gain i have trouble names frequently i'll come to prison Nyquist necklace forms are still good the game form is used out of back in tubes are still useful although we have to apply to other things feedback is still the same a lot of things are not now i need to discuss science versus engineering science if you are doing it you should know what you're doing if you know what you're

doing you should be doing it . in science because science is supposed to be exploration what you don't know engineering you should be doing it unless you do know what you're doing well nothing is pure science involves a great deal of engineering and engineering involves a great deal of new material so it's a great blend but what is painful to you is gonna be worse is that they two fields are growing together because of a simple fact again

going back to my first candy Bell Labs when something discovered in physics the telephone company was not in that greater hurry to get it developed into the field after all had pretty much monopoly wiry now as you know we are not willing to wait or scientific principles to develop we want the field tomorrow so do you feel to come together like that and the leisure which we use long ago in which we are still using some except develop the ideas first and then apply

it is going to be less and less acceptable when ID is first around you want to apply i just read last night that when the presidents who were was at a museum out one of these worlds fair was shot and the ball is back right is back but the doctors refused operators didn't know what it was but they're at the abuse thing where x rays being demonstrated they didn't use the new technique was right credit available they can we live in there got a picture

no they were conserved we don't allow that much anymore we're pushing very hard you're going to be pushed very much to go from idea to develop the item and get it on the market rapidly i once read there was some seventy six different method of predicting the future which is why I'm engaged in doing to some extent one is to predict tomorrow will be like today whatever temperature is a predictive are the same

it's a pretty good prediction a somewhat better one is to note the linear trend and predict a linear trend that's good for a while but not too long and furthermore it depends on which variable you pick to be linear if you pick the coefficient front to be linear is one they will pick the exponent something else it doesn't work too well I made many predictions on how much competing I'll do pretty soon because I need to know how much we get past you would need

and so on I was regularly wrong on the low side so one time I got miffed and so I will pretty high so I got some formulas and break it real high couple years later the paper turn up my desk I look at it I was low again the growth of computing has been unbelievable on the other hand on the other side take artificial intelligence the predictions

made by almost all the experts 10 20 30 years ago have not been realized so you can't always go on things nevertheless there's a saying short-term predictions are optimistic long-term predictions are pessimistic and the reason is very simple the long-term are pessimistic as nobody can believe a geometric aggression i say again we got transistors going nobody in his right mind would have predicted a million

transistors on a chip that big nobody is beyond belief but that's what we get and you know so predicting future is a very very hard business but you have to do it history is important now some people believe that history repeats itself and some people believe exactly the opposite but one thing you can be sure up what we now regards the past was to some people

the future and what you think is a future will be the past there'll be a time when some of you will be in the history books yes you live long enough and do enough and you end up in history book so what you think the future will become the past now another thing against history is Henry Ford seniors remark history is bunk and I think he said for two reasons one is history is rarely reported correctly there are great

description what happened at Los Alamos during the war no to agree and they don't be what I think happened indeed one time am a station road his experience about the matter and publish it i came in Los Olmos our regular summer visit said to my friend i just read this book that is how I remember it you said that is how i remember to either i was just going to say how do

you remember and I suddenly realize no two people remember the same now you're familiar with this an accident several witnesses see it they report different things there is no reliable report of what happened the past it's what has come down to us and accepted secondly I think it affords mind was a fact that the past is being more rapidly disconnected from the future the invention of the computer tells you how

much the world is different than what it was before computers appear it's a change in the way we do things and hearing now is to a great extent getting the computer do job writing program and putting some terminal equipment around and affect the real world with the heart of much of engineering now is a computer now some instructions when you read them they will give you the impression that that it was inevitable this was going to happen was inevitable the room would

fall or this with that and on the other hand will tell you the future is very open-ended many things are possible can this be true that the past was very determined the future is very open it seems unlikely so you're left with saying maybe the past was not so determined for example consider individual lives of Alexander the Great dapoli in' and Hitler if they had died their childhood would not the world be

very different on the electrical side Pythagoras so Aristotle Newton Maxwell Einstein are examples of people who had they died their youth the world would be rather different so individuals do matter i suggest the past was less determined the historians like to make and the future is less open-ended then you would like to believe but there's a great many possibilities for you

futures got great possibilities now well nothing against history is unforeseen technological inventions can ruin anything like I told you transistors the development of vacuum tubes was practically cut off a technological invention you can change completely the history of something and one could hardly foresee technological inventions but they're also social conventions which are important you

people have been trained mainly in the physical side I've got to make you more sensitive to the fact that all of your life takes place in a social society which has restraints thus I will claim that the future of technology will be less determined by what technology can do then social legal and other restraints on what we can do thus if you stop to think about highway controlled computer-controlled Highway

Traffic it sounds good do you ask yourself who do I soon an accident and if you decide you know it's going to be a very very difficult thing to get going very difficult social conventions are going to stop great many things from happening now I want to talk another thing the story which i'll use several times the story of the drunken sailor he staggered a couple steps this way these Tigers

this when he's like this when he started swimming in n steps typically you'll get the square root of $OPERAND + $PERCENT distance and a hundred steps you'll get about 10 in 10,000 steps will be about a hundred times what he may be right where you started maybe for the way but that's typical on the other hand if there's a pretty girl over there he started like this back like this over like this he's gonna get just proportional to M if I

can create in you a vision of where you are headed you will make a progress proportional to n if you do not have a vision you will wander like a drunken sailor and get very little so one of my major purposes to get you to form a reasonable vision of what you are going to do your future what kind of person you're going to be now you're gonna save people behaving how do I know the future I'm gonna say it doesn't matter much from while I

examine in life what goal you set whether you want March that way that way or that way if you have a goal you'll get somewhere near if you don't have a goal your drunken sailor my problem is to make you form your goals and some extent try to achieve them to make you something important rather just drifting now it's comfortable drift to life a great many people when questioned closely will

assert that perfectly content to drift through life I don't think too good idea of the whole thing now it's none of my business what gold you take it is my business to force you one way or another to set up some reason be decent goals to try and achieve something in your life again . the society of paying a great deal of money for your education it's entitled to something those who do something generally have some what kind of goals and see whether

headed and their lives add up those who don't are just a bunch of isolated events they did this they did that they do think but nothing added up so I promise to get you to choose your goals even if you want Mary be a great guitar player i don't mind so long you set a goal is struggling that is the essential part that I'm really after

that's what this course is about to some extent forcing you somehow whether to do more you would have done otherwise now the standard method of teaching is to have the department's department break things up in something better like calculus linear program when you're programming song too much falls between and this course is an attempt one way to plug all those holes the engineering courses you had you had a lot of

engineering courses they taught you this at the ending their vast holes between them the optimizing of the compounds individual courses is not optimizing a total education that will come to in systems engineering now another goal i have is to show you that in spite of different departments there's essential unity of all knowledge when you face a difficult problem of unknown type it doesn't matter whether it comes from chemistry physics or anything else you

have to find the answer and knowledge is pretty homogeneous then it's no longer divided up into courses no longer divided up into partners although at Bell Labs I was in the math department almost all the time in fact i was doing great the other things i would do statistics i was doing computing i was doing physics i did a lot of them chemistry we did not observed by division but for purpose of organization you do have to have some structure but I

want to get in your mind's knowledge is sort of a homogeneous body which we have specialized certain names but it's already connected together now the course will center around computing not i like to think because I'm prejudiced out of my life in computing but rather in fact they are going to dominate science and engineering and there are reasons for this very powerful reasons economics for example computers

are far far cheaper human beings are cheaper and they're getting cheap by the year humans are getting more expensive by the year speed far faster your nervous system if you drop something on your toe signals up your head about a hundred meters per second like 300,000 kilometres per second you walk in a league you can't even touch like trying speeds there's no way you come near so speed is overwhelmingly on

the side of the Machine accuracy may be numbered itches arithmetic carry yes they can be quite precise they can do double precision necessary you would have trouble doing double precision arithmetic probably you try doing it you can work it out but you have trouble the reliability they're far far ahead of you God or nature how everyone to it didn't make you to be a reliable thing we've been walking for years and still every now and then you trip and stumble you

can't do anything really reliable that's why man ended up on top the heat he has the flexibility built in but don't ever try to get humans do something reliable take four getable bowling want to throw the ball down the alley exactly the same way every time I have a perfect game perfect games are rare even among the most skilled experts precision flying and other things are very hard to do we recognize that being very precise drill teams and so on or something remarkable

human animal was redesigned to do that he was designed for something else repetitive control because the machines got wrapping control we are now building airplanes which are basically unstable and we have a computer every millisecond is correct instability so we get better performance over but the pilot could do it if that computer goes out the pilots through the pattern is left with a large-scale abroad planning but the millisecond millisecond is left her

computer because of human just can't act act that fast another one who tried well on very much freedom from boredom it sounds trivial you cannot put a human being on a job to look for something for three years and what happens respond promptly you can put a computer on the jump you can put the computer and job to watch for the rare event if such ships happens in the atomic pile do this but hasn't happened for four years now the

goggles are like a human being isn't going to very well you guys were looking for last two-and-a-half years even you can't get humans to be freed from boredom machines don't know what the word is bandwidth in and out in any rapidly changing situation the person-in-charge can only get so much information in and out and there's a general belief that really you can process only about 50 bits per second maybe six years i get but you can't

process ten thousands per second machines got enormous more bandwidth now a visual auditory or put all your in inputs together they won't match a modern machine for bandwidth not only coming in but giving orders out for central control humans simply cannot in a complicated situation compete with a machine if it is merely been within and without it was making judgments of the story but the machine simply cannot cope with us we no longer have a crew aiming

a gun at airplane we have a self-contained human is too slow he just isn't much good we need much more rapid things and humans can cope with the bandwidth in and out which is we speed of getting information is fundamental computers got all over you ease of retraining training the great says you learn to do something and now we are change the equipment you've got to unlearn the old habits and learn some

new ones and you've got to repeat the many many times to learn them with the computer i change the program is done no elaborate training no endless hours of constant practice being just put a new program and machine behaves in a way very easy hostile environments outer space underwater high radiation fields warfare manufacturing situations are unhealthy and song i can put machines those situations where humans are very very difficult in space i got to keep

this but human being in atmosphere someone is used to oxygen so on has to be employed high radiation will kill them and so on how we're going to manage to get people to Mars and back in the radiation field this coming from the Sun I don't know whether we'll sort of radium thoroughly or maybe decided not to send human beings that far it's a problem now personal problems another that's why I'm but sensitive to personal problems dominate management there are

all kinds of troubles with people with machines that are no pensions there no personal squabbles two machines don't get squabbling with other but I've had two girls probably wouldn't even share the same room together unions no personal leave now Eagles no death of relatives mother died machines don't have that recreation i turn the machine off that's the end of

five it will be i have to provide reasonable recreation machines got all over humans now all of you probably already been saying oh yeah but what about the van humans have I will have to list those you're trying to do it already but I gave you a bunch of details which you could find very hard to get around the machines got great advantage many places and because economically sound you are going to see more and more machines running

organizations some computer but let's say computers the design of chips is under computer control great extent some computers are actually being assembled heavily by machines I was on the board of directors of a computer company for a while and at one point more than half the computers coming down the production line we were grabbing to mechanize the production line we are mechanizing the building of

computers more than half the computers we sold less than half of them because we are mechanizing line and getting attracted much cheaper show you how rapidly accompany computing business was really mechanizing itself and one of my friends said he ordered a bunch of machines exclude your message came in overnight a bunch of machines assemble those particular computers they wanted and the next day those computers were on the loading dock design just what they

wanted with the parts they wanted now lastly this is a certain sense of religious course I am preaching a message that with one life to lead you want to do more than just get by now there are great many religions and I don't get involved in 13 other too much it is however an emotional matter i'm really appealing to now is really think we said that a happy life is one who has some goals they achieve well studying

the matter over and read about and talk to people everybody pretty much of me agrees that it's not the achievement of the goal that really is the best part it's the struggle the struggle to success is what makes you what you will be remember your old age you'll have to live with yourself there's no escaping live with yourself in your old age you're stuck with yourself and always you can't change much as you can when you're younger

consider the kind of person you wish to be in your old age and start now being that kind of a person this is what the course is all about really in one sense now its opinion it's not a fact this opinion that most people believe that the struggle to do active excellence is worth the struggle also when you look at people's lives I can tell you the story which I may repeat couple of times as a child I went

to a movie they were called Nickelodeon's my day but we actually spent a dime to go to movie one Saturday one of the friend of mine and one these you laughed laughed left all ridiculous situations we walked out and he said to me you know that wasn't a very funny movie I thought for a while said you're right all the laughter did not make movie funny at all the same way with life the pleasant life is not the once the sum

total of the pleasant moments somehow others added up very very differently the good life is not the life of pleasure from moment to moment and you know it in fact you are well aware that you can I get up in the morning and say I shall be happy today and make it work the good life has to be snuck up on and i was saying the opinion of myself and

many other books the way to do that is to take yourself in hand and manage yourself to be the person you wish to be to achieve the goals you wish and be more tickets than just idle drifting like a drunken sailor now in ancient greece our boy Socrates said the unexamined life is not worth living so what I'm saying goes back that far I was crossing Yale campus one time as a consultant for the present a job hope

that you put put together i walk cross I heard a professor walking across the campus right ahead to be single student the unexamined life is not worth living and in the course across one quadrangle he managed to say it three times so i'll repeat third time the unexamined life is not worth living see you thursday right there are notes here on the course and there aren't enough brings more tomorrow out to sea

ok



Video Description

Intro: The purpose of this course is to prepare you for your technical future. There is really no technical content in the course, though I will, of course, refer to a great deal of it, and hopefully it will be a good review of the fundamentals that you have learned. Do not think the technical content is the course - it is only illustrative material. Style of thinking is the center of the course. I am concerned with educating and not training you.



The Art of Doing Science and Engineering: Learning to Learn" was the capstone course by Dr. Richard W. Hamming (1915-1998) for graduate students at the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS) in Monterey California.

This course is intended to instill a "style of thinking" that will enhance one's ability to function as a problem solver of complex technical issues. With respect, students sometimes called the course "Hamming on Hamming" because he relates many research collaborations, discoveries, inventions and achievements of his own. This collection of stories and carefully distilled insights relates how those discoveries came about. Most importantly, these presentations provide objective analysis about the thought processes and reasoning that took place as Dr. Hamming, his associates and other major thinkers, in computer science and electronics, progressed through the grand challenges of science and engineering in the twentieth century.