My big fight with my uncle was a matter of dates. I was telling him, I was very free with comment towards him, and conversely he was insulting me all the time, I was insulting him all the time - we were the best of friends!! I was telling him that I was horrified that his greatest pleasure was to add another layer to a question asked by Watson, who was answering a question asked by Hardy, who was reacting to this, and so on, and it went back to Euler -" Ah! - Euler," he said, "That's the great joy. If I could add something to an idea started by Euler!" That for him was the supreme pleasure. He forgot immediately the sources of the problems. For example, later on he was to criticise me for using spectral analysis in a manner he found a bit free, and I reminded him it's called spectral analysis because of a spectrum of light, or harmonic analysis because of harmonic properties of sound; it didn't come out of a Platonic idea: it came from light and sound, and it is a property of these hard things, or soft things, and that's what makes them understood, perhaps. But for me I found I could not stand the idea of working in this fashion. Of course I was punished for my belief because several of my papers later on did answer very old questions, but not questions which had been constantly being studied in which I'd be the last person.