As an informal observation, one of the best parts about older professors was that they avoid the extreme nuance that some of the younger professors and TAs get into. Although that can be interesting also, I feel as if it sometimes misses the bigger picture.
Older lecturers have had a lifetime to think about their problem domain and are often able to convey things very clearly and un-confrontationally. They aim to challenge you rather than defeat you. They are also less concerned with proving themselves and thus are generally more willing to lecture about things that are more in line with their true beliefs and aren't just designed to make them look smart. It's hard to put into words I suppose what makes talks like these so great.
On another note: this was basically a philosophy lecture which I think is great.
His book "Numerical Methods for Scientists and Engineers" is brilliant, his work included information theory, sampling, and running bell labs during its most productive time. He wasn't a professor, he was a giant.
I also very much recommend "The Art of Doing Science and Engineering", which is mostly philosophical but has quite a few partial differential equations in it.
Older lecturers have had a lifetime to think about their problem domain and are often able to convey things very clearly and un-confrontationally. They aim to challenge you rather than defeat you. They are also less concerned with proving themselves and thus are generally more willing to lecture about things that are more in line with their true beliefs and aren't just designed to make them look smart. It's hard to put into words I suppose what makes talks like these so great.
On another note: this was basically a philosophy lecture which I think is great.