Re: moon's synchronism

[LUDWIK KOWALSKI <KOWALSKIL@alpha.montclair.edu>]

Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 05:20:59 -0800 (PST)
From: John Mallinckrodt <ajmallinckro@CSUPomona.Edu>
Subject: Re: moon's synchronism

> >  ... So I turned to Interactive Physics. It clearly tells me that 
> > synchronization without tidal forces is possible. It is a spectacular 
> > show; try it if you have this software tool. Here is what I did. [...]
>
> Ludwik,
>
> I don't understand your interpretation. The effect you see is precisely
> the result of the tidal forces that we are talking about here. I did the
> same type of thing with IP myself last night but I hooked the two ...

Let me use this example as an illustration how words can interfere with
undersanding. An expert uses a word, such as "tidal torque" knowing very
well that it is not restricted to traditional tides. But a naive learner
immediately starts thinking about frictional effects of bulges on the
solid ground below. The IP simulation made me aware that friction is not 
necessary to explain synchronisation. I was often confused by the term 
"tidal effect". But I learned a lot about it since yesterday. Thanks to 
those who contributed.

Let me give you another illustration; it surfaced yesterday during a
pedagogical discussion in my department.tial orientation" An expert refers 
to resistors connected "in parallel" knowing well that it means "the same 
d.o.p." But a naive learner thinks about "spatial orientations". We should 
not blame naive learners, we should eliminate confusing words. Or at least 
we should be aware of potential traps they present to students.

                                                     Ludwik Kowalski