Richard Feynman on looking at the world from another point of view (1973)
cassandradispatch.org
cassandradispatch.org
In those sorts of situations time truly does slow down. I replay those times endlessly in my dreams/nightmares but either way it seemed like both at the time and in my mental replaying of the events that time slowed down to a crawl.
During endless sessions with various mental health professionals it seems that people involved in car crashes have the same slowing down of time. Based on what I've learnt, the time differential boils down to muscle memory (much like a batter hits a fast ball) that can and does initiate a response before the brain processes the event and that the mind catches up afterwards and is able to replay the events in a somewhat coherent way.
Intellectually I know that it all went down in a few seconds but I have no access to a normal speed memory of the event. Only tapppppp delay taaaappp (and then flooring it and nimbly pivoting between accomplice one and two).
Maybe I'm just describing something obvious related to adrenaline or fight vs. flight. But I wonder if some people are just physiologically better wired for these situations. Would that make them better at sports or warfighting?
It also reminds me of birds and other animals that seem to effortlessly perform incredible feats at high speed. But to their frame of reference and perception of time, maybe the world is just very very slow moving.
Those that can - survived, those that couldn't/didn't - died.
In terms of natural selection (for want of a better term) it often leaves me puzzling that very same thought late at night sometimes before I'm brought back to reality by the shrinks that relate it back to those that made the major league vs. those that faded into obscurity.
[Edit]: Sorry, the above comment makes war and death seem like a game of baseball which it very much isn't and trivializes the needless suffering of entire populations on behalf of the vagrancies of politicians across the globe.
YMMV.
Can he perceive time better which is why he's so good at soccer.
At the absolute highest level, the game plays you as much as you play it. I have the most experience with basketball, but I am certain what I'm going to say applies to other sports, including but not limited to soccer.
With a rhythmic sport like basketball, you can gain a huge advantage over most amateur players by simply learning to play with rhythm. If you can dribble rhythmically, then you free your mind up to focus on the game situation rather than the mechanics of dribbling. It becomes like improvising music. At your rhythm, the game has a pulse. In between beats of the pulse, aka your dribbles, you can analyze the situation and adapt your approach depending on the position of your teammates and the opposition. If your opponents are not playing in rhythm, then they are stagnant and it should be easy to get by them. Even if they are playing in rhythm, if you can play at a faster pace than they are, time effectively slows down for you relative to them because you can make more changes of direction than they can in a given unit of time. When you are at your best, you are simultaneously aggressive and completely passive. You are dictating the terms of engagement, but accepting whatever the game gives you, knowing that you will always have a good option (provided you have developed sufficient skills, which does take practice). This is what I mean when I say the game plays you. There is a reason why we describe great athletes as unconscious and they report having out of body experiences.
Just because you have never experienced this doesn't mean that you never will. I played basketball for more than 20 years before I had the above time slowdown experience. It only came after I had been focusing on rhythm while learning a musical instrument.
I think it is typical effect of adrenaline.
One of the few things that resembles a thought during the entire episode is something like "you cannot think about this right now if you do you will collapse". A jumble of eternal instants. It dragged on. And on. And on. Eventually, very eventually, the paramedics arrived. I had another thing resembling a thought. I can collapse now. I can look away now. I have no basically no memory until the next day when I saw her, awake, in the hospital.
I know the day and time it happened. I checked the logs after. The paramedics took less than 5 minutes to arrive. But it was outside the normal linearity of my experience. It doesn't fit between the day before and the day after. For a while, the jumbled movie would play in my head, involuntarily. I think I was trying to make sense of it, fit it in, when it really doesn't fit. Experiences and memories I couldn't easily process because I didn't really experience them consciously when they occurred? Maybe something like that. It went away with time, and does not bother me these days, but descriptions of PTSD do make a lot more sense to me now.
I disagree. hear me out. I think you were just using a non-linguistic mode of consciousness.
We are far too accustomed to thinking and being (and imagining that we are) made out of words, or things that can be put into words. But I have chosen to believe that this is merely one amongst various others ways to think.
Language is a tool. A human being is not made out of words (from a language). Nonetheless, a lot of what we imagine ourselves to be is made out of words (from a language).
Let's not keep on making the mistake that what we are is something that can be *completely* put into words.
For example if you're thinking "I should go to the store and buy Christmas presents", it isn't really necessary to verbalize this with your inner voice, if you're not about to say that to anyone.
Personally I find this hard to do for more than a few moments; the habit of verbalizing is too automatic. Maybe those of us who say they have no inner voice are really good at this.
I guess the AI version would be to operate in a latent state instead of always doing the forward pass all the way to words.
This is a known phenomenon called an amygdala hijack.
This emotional brain activity processes information milliseconds earlier than the rational brain, so in case of a match, the amygdala acts before any possible direction from the neocortex can be received.
Interestingly, in at least one measurable, quantitative sense, time does not slow down, not even subjectively:
> Using a hand-held device to measure speed of visual perception, participants experienced free fall for 31 m before landing safely in a net. We found no evidence of increased temporal resolution, in apparent conflict with the fact that participants retrospectively estimated their own fall to last 36% longer than others' falls.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
Since then people have told me that I only experience this slowed time in my memories and in reality there's no way I was reacting to the moment, but I'm not sure I completely believe them. It definitely felt like my brain was working in double-time, noticing and processing details that I'd never notice in normal situations.
I still clearly remember, 40 years ago(!), waiting to turn left across oncoming traffic, seeing in my rear view mirror the car behind me being rear-ended, and, looking forward, deciding I could just make a quick left turn. I particularly remember seeing what looked like plastic from the tail light flying away from that car.
Yay teenaged adrenal gland! I made the turn and immediately pulled over. I was shaking.
The only other times I knew my life was at risk it was slow and embarrassing. Nothing like NickRandom's experience.
I kept thinking I was getting texts at work, because I'd suddenly become aware of my lit-up phone screen out of the corner of my eye. But then I'd go to pick it up and it was off, with no text.
What I realized after a while of this is (assuming I didn't have a unique software bug) that the phone must have been lit up the entire time and was then turning off, but my real-time perception was actually a fraction of a second behind reality. So my brain would notice a state change on the screen and "play a memory" of the phone being suddenly lit up, which I experienced as real-time perception.
(Wasn't my first slide, being able to walk wasn't entirely luck. Being able to ride away was.)
https://slate.com/technology/2019/01/richard-feynman-physica...
https://thebaffler.com/outbursts/surely-youre-a-creep-mr-fey...
https://caltechletters.org/viewpoints/feynman-harassment-sci...
I'm going to assume that none of Richard Feynman's mistakes affected you personally, so you have no reason to take it personally and judge or be offended. Let's imagine that the women involved forgave him. Where does that leave you? Cancelling him in his future and missing out on his best ideas.
I also find that whenever I read Feynman or watch one of his lectures, it always seems as though the real subject is Feynman himself. In spite of his humble everyman from Brooklyn persona, he always seems intent on reminding you that he is smarter than you are. He always seems to know better than all the idiots out there. I find it very off-putting.
At the same time, I can respect his contributions to physics and his personal genius. He was also clever and quite charismatic. But I wouldn't give my children a copy of Surely you're joking...
You fault him for not knowing "there's no sex in the Champaign room"
> I expect better from someone with his intellectual prowess.
I recommend that you don't look into the sex lives of famous and admirable thinkers through out history.
> He always seems to know better than all the idiots out there.
He's a working class guy as am I. This is an essential conceit and source of humor for many of us. We take pleasure in out-smarting the our so-called superiors.
No, I fault him for being an entitled asshole.
> I recommend that you don't look into the sex lives of famous and admirable thinkers through out history.
The greater the man, the greater the shadow. That is why I am reluctant to admire _any_ great person. You are absolutely right that the more you dig, the more you learn how flawed everyone is. My problem is that there is an uncritical deification of Feynman that seeks to whitewash the aspects of his personality that were far less than admirable.
> We take pleasure in out-smarting the our so-called superiors.
And thus mirror exactly the behavior that you don't like about them.
To me, Feynman epitomizes smart but not wise. I cannot hold a candle to him when it comes to understanding the physical laws of nature, but almost nothing I have ever heard from him actually helps me a better human, which is not true of some other great thinkers. YMMV of course.
Also, I have direct experience with this having spent time in some of the most prestigious academic institutions in the US. I can assure you that the culture I'm describing exists. As a postdoc, my supervisor was so insecure that he would go out of his way to undermine me publicly and he was one of the leading scientists in his field and in his 70s at the time. There were also good, generous people, but as the old saying goes a rotten apple can spoil the lot.