Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: physics before math????




3b) Another possibility would be to teach physics and the relevant math
topics concurrently. This has advantages and disadvantages. One advantage
is that it is easier to teach math if the students can see immediate
physical applications. The corresponding disadvantage is that it might put
too much emphasis on applied math, to the detriment of the abstract and
rigorous thinking that is the hallmark of real math. Math and physics are
not the same. Physics is validated by experiment. Math is validated by
rigor.

John, I have long espoused this approach -- much to the consternation of
Math Depts. It seems to me that "tools" should be taught when they are
needed. It is like teaching that awful programming language, Pascal, (or
any programming language) without having a problem to solve. To teach all
that silly calculus stuff (that math people bathe in) before there is a
problem to solve, is silly. If students learned calculus (first,
derivatives for dynamics, and, in the second semester, integrals) in
physics, they would see the value of the tool (Just as Newton did) -- they
could learn all the useless calculus stuff later in a semester of math --
just to keep the math dept happy. But even real math people don't consider
calculus a math thing.

OK this would require a 6 unit physics course instead of the usual 5, but
it would be far more efficient -- except for the intramural battles. (:-)

Jim Green
mailto:JMGreen@sisna.com
http://users.sisna.com/jmgreen