with a high speed camera any vibrating reflective object like a potato chips bag can become a weak microphone if you have line of sight even behind a soundproof window:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKXOucXB4a8
I would say read up a little so that you are in a position to make up your own mind. Also compare the video recordings and published book to figure out whose material it was.
It's easy to throw muck at someone who is not around to defend.
And you seem to be saying that it is a reasonable thing to do in this particular case.
The stuff that the material in Feynman's book is not his is just made up nonsense. They follow his course lectures very very closely. The minutiae of writing may not be his, but the material certainly was his.
Regarding domestic abuse charges, this was before we had no fault divorce. It was common at that time to make up charges of abuse, often in concert with the lawyers of both parties just to ensure that divorce is granted.
I don't think people really make up domestic abuse charges with this much detail. His wife explains in the post specifically what causes him to get so angry that he hurts her.
I don't see her having much incentive to lie and make up these statements, and see no evidence that she did lie. Some women lie about domestic abuse, most don't.
If the wild allegations in the smearjob was hers, she does not rank very high on credibility.
Going by what people say, it was not unusual at all to use false allegations of abuse (or adultery) in divorce proceedings at that time. Sometimes it was the only way.
Both those statements need to be prove for her, and I don't see any strong evidence for either.
And if someone was going to to make false allegations of abuse, why include specifics about how interrupting his calculus and drums caused his anger? Why not just say he was abusive, or state a more common reason for abuse? To me, the specifics make her statement more credible. Combined with his predatory history regarding women[1], I view Feynman as a distrubed individual (but a genius nonetheless)
I find the allegation credible, as I don't see why someone in her position would lie, and especially give specific details on what sets Feynman off.
Also, unless I see some concrete data about the amount/percentage of women who lie in order to get a divorce, the comment you linked is pure conjecture. Nothing really to argue about since it's just the vague idea of what people think about that time.
> Both those statements need to be prove for her, and I don't see any strong evidence for either.
You can query the search engines yourself, it's a pretty standard and accepted thing now based on analysis of the letter and that the interview with the FBI officer happened in her home town, Boise, Idaho. Only personal connect that Feynman had with Boise, Idaho is through his 2nd wife, Mary Louise Bell.
The redacted FBI files still contain references to the informant as "she" and "her" and accusations match the tone of her wife's divorce filings.
Regarding specificity of complaints, of course, she was not an idiot, these are filings in a divorce court, unless it's specific it would likely be thrown out. On top of that there were divorce lawyers overseeing the filing of these accusations, it would be their job to make it specific.
Yes, circumstantial, but as damning as you can get. A vindictive wife with a tendency to throw wild accusations ... not a particularly credible source, especially when compared with how Feynman's sister and other wives talk about him.
As for the baffler article the only concrete thing is his anecdote in surely you are joking, that's well addressed in
reply