How famous do you think Feynman would have been had he not written any popular science?

[Alfred001]

Physicsts known to the general public are rare. Newton, Einstein and Hawking would be known to everyone and then after that, at a lower level, you got Feynman, who would probably not be known to everyone, but a lot of people with some interest in intellectual topics would know his name.

I'm sure there are a lot of physicists with great achievements whom no one in the general public has heard of. You'd probably be hard pressed to find a person who's heard of Ed Witten and I'm sure there are great physicists yet more anonymous.

Now, supposing Feynman had never written any popular science, how well known do you think he would be?

He appeared in a lot of television programs, but would that have happened if not for his popular books?

Do you think he would be another anonymous physicist or would he be somewhere close to his current level of popularity?

[joigus]

I don't think Feynman ever wrote popular science books. Not for the greater readership anyway. The Character of Physical Law or Quantum Electrodynamics, the Strange Theory of Light and Matter are not your regular popular-science books. They are only deceptively popular. They're actually scientifically maverick attempts at showing you the nuts and bolts of physical theories, often getting involved in lateral thinking, and not at all easy reads.

It was James Gleick's Surely you're Joking, Mr Feynman that did it. Before that book Feynman was widely known among the physics community, but by no means known to the general public.

Edit: x-posted with @MigL

Edited July 19, 2021 by joigus

[MigL]

On this forum, one of the very first things we recommend to noobs and amateurs, who want a deeper understanding of Physics, are the Feynman lectures.
Those clear, concise and easy to understand lectures also did a lot for his popularity.

[Peterkin]

46 minutes ago, Alfred001 said:

Now, supposing Feynman had never written any popular science, how well known do you think he would be?

Less, but all the relevant people would still know him, all his students would still be grateful and all those who didn't get into his class would still be envious. All the less famous physicists, including Ed Witten also wrote and write books; it's not Feynman's fault if more people enjoy reading his books. Charm maybe partly accidental; clarity is deliberate. Incidentally, this video should be shown in every high-school in the world.  

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Alfred001 said:

Do you think he would be another anonymous physicist or would he be somewhere close to his current level of popularity?

This seems like a false dilemma, and I'm unsure why you feel the need to box him in like this. Do you dislike Feynman, or do you dislike popularity, or do you dislike intelligent people who become popular? Is it a requirement for you that physics be anonymous, or that studying science be free from a popular approach?

[TheVat]

If Feynman had never written a book,  his direct method of investigation on the Rogers commission,  like dunking a sample of O-ring in ice water,  would have still put him in the public spotlight.  And his eponymous diagrams,  QED, the path integral formulation, quantum computing,  nanotechnology...call into question the OP setting him at a "lower level" than the pantheon of physics.  Toss in bongo drumming,  innate charm, wit,  and the search for Tuvan throat singers and you have a personality that people would still have written books about,  even if he'd never penned one himself.  And, as MigL mentioned,  his incomparable lectures.   

Edited July 19, 2021 by TheVat

[CharonY]

2 hours ago, MigL said:

On this forum, one of the very first things we recommend to noobs and amateurs, who want a deeper understanding of Physics, are the Feynman lectures.
Those clear, concise and easy to understand lectures also did a lot for his popularity.

Indeed. He spent a ton of time to create those. His initial lectures were, by all accounts, horrible. Typical for someone with a deep understanding of the subject but without really understanding the knowledge gap between himself and his audience.

That being said it is true for most scientists that they tend to be better known if they do more outreach, book writing etc., as there are obviously more interactions with the public. Much research which is critical for a given field simply does not percolate through society. And perhaps conversely, folks who are stuck in the lab or entirely focused on research, rarely become famous except if there are some breakthroughs that somehow chimes with the public. It does help to have a Nobel prize, though.

[beecee]

3 hours ago, TheVat said:

If Feynman had never written a book,  his direct method of investigation on the Rogers commission,  like dunking a sample of O-ring in ice water,  would have still put him in the public spotlight.  And his eponymous diagrams,  QED, the path integral formulation, quantum computing,  nanotechnology...call into question the OP setting him at a "lower level" than the pantheon of physics.  Toss in bongo drumming,  innate charm, wit,  and the search for Tuvan throat singers and you have a personality that people would still have written books about,  even if he'd never penned one himself.  And, as MigL mentioned,  his incomparable lectures.   

My first in depth knowledge on Richard Feynman came from reading the best book I have ever read, "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" by Richard Rhodes. Everything you have mentioned, certainly would have [and did] put him in the spotlight to  anyone with a passing interest in science.  The book itself is probably more a history of late 19th century/20th century physics and science, from Bequeral, Rhotegen, Curie, through to Zsillard, Rhuterford, Fermi and Einstein, up to the likes of Feynman and Oppenheimer and company...fantastic read, giving a great rundown on the achievements and personalities of those great scientists among others.

Edited July 20, 2021 by beecee

[joigus]

One historical factoid:

Feynman never wrote a book. He only wrote papers. All his books are based on recordings or, in the case of Lectures on Gravitation, written notes by students, and translated from Feynman notation to standard notation.

5 hours ago, joigus said:

It was James Gleick's Surely you're Joking, Mr Feynman that did it.

That wasn't James Gleick's. Sorry. James Gleick's book is Genius, the Life and Science of Richard Feynman.

Surely you're joking... wasn't written by Feynman either. It's based on recordings again. It's Feynman's recordings typed by Ralph Leighton.