Thinking Pink

M

MLipton

Mark Lipton
What is the appropriate parental response to their 16 year old qualifying for the International Science and Engineering Fair and the National Stockholm Junior Water Prize? To head downtown, of course, to celebrate at a local wine bar with a bottle of NV Gosset Brut Rosé. A finely drawn mousse with a strong sense of fruit to accompany the minerality and very subtle autolytic toastiness made this a fine way to celebrate as well as a good foil to the food we ordered. In an ideal world, I’d like to place this against a bottle of Vilmart Cuvée Rubis, but that comparison will have to wait for another day.

Mark Lipton
 
It sounds as though congratulations are in order: those are impressive achievements. Working from that baseline, another trip to Stockholm could be on the agenda at a future date.

I tried the Rubis last year and wasn't smitten, although I really wanted to join the Vilmart club. In fact, after probing Champagnes in general over the last two or three years, I think, in the fizz department, I feel more at home with a decent cremant from the Loire or Jura. Go figure. I've trafficked exclusively in NV Champagne, however; maybe the real pay dirt is in the fancier crus.

I have another bottle of the Rubis I'll let sit for a while, plus two Grand Reserves, some vintage Veuve, and a few other artifacts - the scales may yet fall from my eyes.
 
originally posted by Pavel Tchichikov:
to geek out, that's the oldest house in Champagne. It's just not the oldest sparkling wine house.
Click to expand...

Wow! I had no idea. It was the occasional mention here that got me to try a Gosset. Good to know.

Mark Lipton
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
It sounds as though congratulations are in order: those are impressive achievements. Working from that baseline, another trip to Stockholm could be on the agenda at a future date.

I tried the Rubis last year and wasn't smitten, although I really wanted to join the Vilmart club. In fact, after probing Champagnes in general over the last two or three years, I think, in the fizz department, I feel more at home with a decent cremant from the Loire or Jura. Go figure. I've trafficked exclusively in NV Champagne, however; maybe the real pay dirt is in the fancier crus.

I have another bottle of the Rubis I'll let sit for a while, plus two Grand Reserves, some vintage Veuve, and a few other artifacts - the scales may yet fall from my eyes.
Click to expand...

If you continue to be unimpressed, we’ll happily take any excess Vilmart off your hands, Ian. And thanks for the congrats. The boy is fairly committed at this point to pursuing CS in college, but this recent experience had him talking about a minor in chemistry, so we aren’t complete failures as parents.

Mark Lipton
 
That is really great stuff, MLipton! The young man, not the pink stuff... congratulations to him and to your family!

Traveling to those locales with him?
 
Full rebellion would be a major in philosophy, like Feynman's son; the evidence here suggests that your parenting wants for nothing.

If you're planning a Washington trip soon, and have bottles you'd like to trade, game on!
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
Full rebellion would be a major in philosophy, like Feynman's son; the evidence here suggests that your parenting wants for nothing.

If you're planning a Washington trip soon, and have bottles you'd like to trade, game on!
Click to expand...

With an undergraduate degree in Philosophy and a PhD in Statistics I have to say that in many ways, Philosophy (well, at least the tradition that I followed) was more difficult.
 
Feynman had a personal thing about philosophy (and religion) - as I understand it (which may not be that well), his objection was against elaborate ratiocination, untempered by empirical testing, propagated as top-line truth.

Anyway, there's video of him remarking on his son's intention to major in philosophy as the ultimate generational rebellion against him as a physicist. Probably too obscure a reference to make a good joke.
 
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
Feynman had a personal thing about philosophy (and religion) - as I understand it (which may not be that well), his objection was against elaborate ratiocination, untempered by empirical testing, propagated as top-line truth.

Anyway, there's video of him remarking on his son's intention to major in philosophy as the ultimate generational rebellion against him as a physicist. Probably too obscure a reference to make a good joke.
Click to expand...

Surely you’re joking
 
originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
Surely you’re joking
Click to expand...
On a quick look around, Ian is correct. Feynman disliked wordy constructions, particularly those that add concepts where none is needed. Example: Feynman didn't like his son's 1st-grade math textbook so got himself on the committee to review them. He complained that the book contained problem statements like, "Does the set of lollipops match the set of girls?" rather than "Are there enough lollipops for all the girls?". He also complained about an instruction to use a crayon to "color the picture of the ball in red", asserting that no child would mistake the instruction "color the ball red".

There are other well-regarded physicists who dismiss philosophy. They are wrong, of course, but if you get to pick and choose the examples....
 
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by Ian Fitzsimmons:
Full rebellion would be a major in philosophy, like Feynman's son; the evidence here suggests that your parenting wants for nothing.

If you're planning a Washington trip soon, and have bottles you'd like to trade, game on!
Click to expand...

With an undergraduate degree in Philosophy and a PhD in Statistics I have to say that in many ways, Philosophy (well, at least the tradition that I followed) was in many ways more difficult.
Click to expand...

Lots of parents object to their children majoring in philosophy (also in literature) for that matter. The objection has little to do with how difficult the major is. Neither is inherently an easy one. Usually, it has to do with how useful (read the likelihood of getting decent employment as a result of the major)the degree is. Many of my colleagues who got Ph.D.s in literature and did not get jobs teaching at a college or university, for instance, objected with some vociferousness to their children majoring in literature. I understand that Feynman's objections were more idiosyncratic.
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
originally posted by Jayson Cohen:
Surely you’re joking
Click to expand...
On a quick look around, Ian is correct. Feynman disliked wordy constructions, particularly those that add concepts where none is needed. Example: Feynman didn't like his son's 1st-grade math textbook so got himself on the committee to review them. He complained that the book contained problem statements like, "Does the set of lollipops match the set of girls?" rather than "Are there enough lollipops for all the girls?". He also complained about an instruction to use a crayon to "color the picture of the ball in red", asserting that no child would mistake the instruction "color the ball red".

There are other well-regarded physicists who dismiss philosophy. They are wrong, of course, but if you get to pick and choose the examples....
Click to expand...

Jokes are always better when explained

Mark Lipton
 
originally posted by Karen Goetz:
That is really great stuff, MLipton! The young man, not the pink stuff... congratulations to him and to your family!

Traveling to those locales with him?
Click to expand...

Thanks! Alas, in the year of the pandemic, it’s all virtual. Should he by some stroke of luck win the American SJWP competition, a trip to Stockholm would be in the offing.

Mark Lipton
 
'Surely You're Joking' is good fun, I'd nominate it for the Disorderly Book Club reading list. It's Feynman's first volume of memoirs, recorded and transcribed, I believe, by a graduate student while he (Feynman) was being treated for cancer - around the time of his participation in the Challenger investigation.

One section recounts his work on the Manhattan Project in Los Alamos, as a graduate student under Hans Bethe's tutelage, during which time his first wife died of tuberculosis in a health center near-ish to Los Alamos, which Oppenheimer had authorized on his behalf. Feynman would drive to visit her on weekends, borrowing a car owned by Klaus Fuchs, a member of the British team, who used it to deliver information about the bomb to Soviet spies. The story of Feynman's relationship with his wife, deftly sketched in the book, was adapted into the move 'Infinty' starring Matthew Broderick and Patricia Arquette.

There's a documentary biography - Maybe 'A Life in Science?' - which gives a fuller profile of Feynman, including some less-appealing character traits, and serves as a foil to the abundant celebrity science literature written by and about him, which leans rather towards the hagiographic.

Oh, and Jason, stop calling me Shirley.
 
It’s generally agreed now that Feynman did a good deal of self-mythologizing in his memoirs. The “ah shucks” plain ol’ guy persona that he promoted in his books isn’t supported by those who worked with him. Regardless, he’s a towering figure in his field and the books are highly entertaining.

Mark Lipton
 
"Entertaining" is le mot juste, none more than "Surely."

Some of the publications based on his work, aimed at student and non-professional audiences, remain useful and durable. I have my students read his 'lecture notes' on atomic theory at the outset of our intro atmospherics class, along with one or two of his lectures on science in society (plus - unrelated - Randall Munroe's "A Mole of Moles"). The classic line from his Challenger report - "nature is not fooled" - could serve as a motto for our times.

Segue to other reading matter, note the column this morning by Asimov on food and wine books. Lynch looms large, among others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top