While as yet unproven, a promising theorem in particle physics states that physicists are people, too. (If you prick them—the theorem goes—they are likely to bleed, etc.) So far, the strongest support for this idea is the anecdotal evidence of Richard Feynman, a Nobel-Prize-winning physicist who was almost certainly a person.
Feynman’s reputation for humanizing buffoonery included his ability to open supposedly secure safes—a skill he honed while working on the atom bomb at Los Alamos Lab during the Second World War.
First, Feynman noticed that safe dials were not as precise as they might be—while a combination might include the number 42, Feynman found the adjoining numbers 40, 41, 43 and 44 also worked. This narrowed the total possibilities from nearly 1,000,000 (100-cubed) to only 8,000 (20-cubed). With practice, Feynman found he could try 400 combinations in thirty minutes, so even in the unlikely case of opening the safe on the last possible permutation it could take a maximum of only ten hours.
Still, who has ten hours to spare when also racing Nazi Germany into the atomic age?
If Feynman could define one of a combination’s three numbers, then opening the lock could only take him a maximum of half an hour (20-squared combinations). To do this, when in a colleague’s office with the safe open, Feynman would pretend to idly play with the lock. In fact, he found that a lock only resets itself after spinning past the first number in its combination. So Feynman would turn the combination lock, going one number further each time until the lock clicked shut, at which point he would know he had found the combination’s first number.
Voila—half an hour, tops.
In fact, it usually took much less time, as Feynman first tried psychologically likely numbers—the factory preset, birthdays, phone numbers, or—most commonly at Los Alamos—a snippet of the number pi.
Join me every Monday morning for grandtastic goodies from The Geeks' Guide to World Domination. Or if you like your geekery delivered fresh, consider subscribing to my rss feed or joining my Facebook Fan Page.
- PHYSICAL SCIENCES
- EARTH SCIENCES
- LIFE SCIENCES
- SOCIAL SCIENCES
Subscribe to the newsletter
Stay in touch with the scientific world!
Know Science And Want To Write?
- How Wild Rabbits Genetically Became Tame Ones
- Is That A Real Patient Or A Junkie? Now There's An App For That
- China's R&D Budget Surpasses The Entire EU - But Applied Research Has Plummeted
- All Living Creatures Need Vitamin Thiamine To Live - Except This One
- Junk Food Rats Ditch Balanced Diet To Eat Just Like Obese People
- Proton-Proton Fusion: Looking Into The Heart Of The Sun
- Telling Right From Wrong: Why Is Utilitarianism Under Attack?
- "It is a pity that, although a French group is signing the article with a reference to several institutions..."
- "I thought that some humor is necessary here: ..."
- "You either don't understand what co-evolution is or did not read the comment. The commenter wrote..."
- "How does co-evolution equivalent to the naturalistic fallacy? It seems that you are quite prone..."
- "You misunderstand me again, (maybe willingly) and exaggerate again: 1. Misunderstanding: (what..."