Re: Physics is a human construct

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

Michael N. Monce <mnmon@conncoll.edu> wrote:

> Mathematics, like physics, is a human description of reality. It is 
> the description (ie. Mathematics or Physics) which is human, not the 
> reality being described.  

But some components of both disciplines are lasting while others are not.
The more lasting they are the more objective they are. Time is a filter.

I learned geometry 50 years ago and it is useful to me today, as it has
been to many generations. I learned Pascal only 5 years ago and it is 
not useful; students are introduced to programming via C++ today. And
it will be Java, or something else, tomorrow.

Yes, Pascal is not mathematics. But it is a good illustration of what
happens today. What is the point of learning something that becomes
outdated faster than we can get used to it? Are all free creations of
human mind worth persuing? Pascal is also a "human construct" but this
construct is very different from physics and mathematics. How do we decide 
what to impose on our students? What is worth teaching and what is not?

                                               Ludwik Kowalski