Feynman rules

Feynman actually did try to explain it, and could do the math and other work to show why magnets attract one another. Having watched the Todd in the Shadows video about Miracles, I kind of find the question wholesome - he's not asking out of willful ignorance, but rather that it's something he knows is beyond his grasp but amazes him (and wants to share that joy in the world with his kids and family).

Trump is just willfully ignorant and small-minded.

ICP is an ode to ignorance, fuck anyone trying to rehab that shit.
Fucking magnets, how do they work?
And I don't wanna talk to a scientist
Y'all motherfuckers lying, and getting me pissed
Those are not lyrics promoting wonder to children. They’re anti-intellectualism.
- It's a lot harder to make that argument in the context of the rest of the lyrics
  Music is a lot like love, it's all a feeling And it fills the room, from the floor to the ceiling I see miracles all around me Stop and look around, it's all astounding Water, fire, air and dirt Fucking magnets, how do they work? And I don't talk to a scientist Y'all motherfuckers lying, and getting me pissed Solar eclipse, and vicious weather Fifteen thousand Juggalos together And I love my mom for giving me this Time on this planet, taking nothing for granted
  It's not anti-science, it's frustration at the world for being the complicated, messy place it is, and a longing to go back to the simple innocence of childhood where even basic physical processes are magical. It's not a rant that nobody should do science, it's his own disillusionment, and a plea for people to allow a little bit more wonder into their world.
  It's a powerful lyric because even in a song about how magical the world is, it still slips in and ruins it, the pebble in your shoe that doesn't allow you to ever truly experience that pure feeling again, always gnawing at you in the background no matter what you do.
Feynman actually did try to explain
Not in that particular interview which was very annoying. Feynman knew magnetism better than most people on the planet and instead of explaining it, he went off on the reporter for a badly phrased question.
He could have explained that magnetism and the electric field are the exact same thing seen from different reference frames. Instead he spent 5 minutes on why the reporter's question was stupid.
Nice try sewer clown
- I'm sorry, what?

To everyone saying "Feynman did explain it" you're missing the point - his answer is that there isn't really an answer to why magnets attract; he never says in that interview that there is, other than that is how the universe works.

He can explain the precise way in which they attract each other, can explain what properties of materials give rise to magnetism, and so on, but this is all ultimately a description. The only way science can answer a "why" question is with a description of general behaviour that encompasses what is asked about, so: why do magnets attract, because of spins and magnetic fields and so on. But why do spins and magnetic fields cause the attraction? There is no known general behaviour that encompasses that behaviour, and if there were, it would be subject to the same questioning. Ultimately, all "why" questions reach an end.

Ultimately, all "why" questions reach an and.
I see you have not recently interacted with a toddler in the "why" phase.
- Never discourage that phase, imagine if our population never grew out of questioning the world. Just don't be afraid to say "I don't know, maybe you will figure out why and can teach me someday."
- The secret to this, which works on all children, mine included, is to turn it and ask them what they think. Leads to more fun answers as well. Not right, but fun.
- Are you able to answer all their why questions satisfactorily? No? Then that's where they reach an end...
- Taking it all the way back to OP's meme. Love it.
So he answered 'how do they work'. No one was asking why.
- The interviewer in the referenced clip did actually press Feynman to explain the "why", which led Feynman into an explanation about how "why" is impossible to completely answer, which is what OP is talking about.
ICP runs deep.
Why does gravity cause two things to attract? Why does the strong nuclear force hold protons together? Why is the speed of light 3 x 10^8 m/s and not half that, or 1000x as fast?
It's often possible to figure out how certain initial values of the universe cause it to behave in certain ways. But, as for why those initial values are the ones that they are, that's like asking about angels dancing on the head of a pin.
I think they actually don't reach an end. The only thing possibly ending is the scope and tolerances of our measurements and descriptions.
- This means, first of all, that there will always be a practical end to good answers to "why" questions.
  But if you think that there is truly no end, it also means that the workings of the universe are infinite in a very strange sense: if there's an infinite succession of explanation, what does that mean? An explanation is a description of something that implies the characteristics of what you're explaining, right? And it can't just describe all the details of the thing being explained, it must be simpler on some level.
  I don't really see how you get this infinite succession of simplifications. Maybe it makes sense if the universe is infinitely complex, so that for example, the behaviour of atoms is explained by the behaviour of protons, neutrons and electrons, which are explained by quarks and still smaller sub-electron particles, and this sequence of subdivision goes ever smaller. I don't see any good reason to believe that though.

To clarify: Feynman could explain it, but can't dumb it down enough for us mortals.

Magnetism is complex and difficult to reduce down succinctly, but the real issue is that at the very base level, "why does magnetism exist" is no more explainable than "why do particles have spin?"
They didn't know it, but ICP were asking an epistemological question.
I looked for a non-yt source, but the best explainer for how magnetism in everyday objects is built up from quantum mechanics that I could find easily was this by minute physics: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hFAOXdXZ5TM
I think it’s more fundamental than that. He could talk about relativity and electrostatics and particle spin, but at some level the electromagnetic force is called a “fundamental force” because it’s one of the postulates we just kinda accept about the universe, and any explanation he could give would depend on that assumption.
- Fair point
I want Feynman for president.
I don't care how, or why, or that he's no longer here. Anything is better than this bozo.

Except Feynman did answer in the end, or at least gave us an idea of what's going on without diving into the hard physics. The journey there was to teach us that asking questions doesn't always lead to a simple answer, and can lead to more questions.

Trump probably got two of those very strong neodymium magnets together and can't get them apart, so now he's confused and pissed at China because that's where they were bought.

Year 40,000 - Light some incense to beseech the magnets to attract.

The beast of metal endures longer than the flesh of men.
Those that tend the beasts of metal must labour long to learn its ways, for a single beast must suffer the mastership of many men until ready to shed its vorpal coils.
Those that seek apprenticeship must attended closely to the runes of mobilisation, the rites of maintenance, and the words-of-power that describe the parts of a beast.
Nor must they neglect the tutelage of the Adeptus Prefects, nor the casting of the proper roboscopes.
Confirmed magnets cause Chaos rifts to spread.
That’s some wishful thinking that humans will be around then.
- You missed a Warhammer 40k reference.

From what I've seen Feyman was more than a little pedantic and he liked to emphasize that science doesn't answer "why" it answers "how". So if ICP asked that question Feyman would say "take an undergrad physics course because its not easy to explain in a soundbite"

He was fully conscious that science models behaviour but doesn't - maybe never will - give the purpose behind it.

All I know on the fellow feynman - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwKpj2ISQAc

I knew which video that was going to be before even clicking. And same, lol.
Great video. I mentioned it in a discussion about the strangulation porn ban in the UK; specifically the “women strangled by a partner are 750% more likely to be murdered by said partner” statistic. Someone chimes in with “that sounds like a completely fabricated stat”. I have to assume due to the name that came after Dr. That magnet interview wasn’t particularly flattering either.
- Why do you assume the magnet interview wasn't flattering? His legacy is more complicated than he conveyed, and he definitely has some dark portions, but he actually was an extremely gifted mind, a renowned educator and acclaimed scientist.

Magnets aren't even real. Have you ever actually SEEN one? Of course not.

Birds are magnets

(Feynman does not, in fact, rule)

Magnets work by pulling all the God from our brains to create the God rays so that life can be sustained on earth.

Feynman. Invents modern plastic. Contributes to the atom bomb. Thanks Feynman

ICP Stock Prices going to the Moon with this presidency

I tried a game that came free with my GOG account years ago, MagRunner.

Overpopulation, huge zaibatsu that is into digitizing people and they develop an incredible new technology in space: MagTech! Magnetic technology!

I guess the devs were being tongue-in-cheek at the time, but now it's not funny anymore.

Terrible Portal wanna-be, by the way.

lol sad

I never really thought about it, but isn't the question actually "why do opposite charges attract?" Doesn't it come down to stability? The universe likes equilibrium and combining opposite charges is an attempt to equalize.