Let's imagine an introductory textbook which has eliminated any
idealization/simplification to which someone has strenuously objected. It
would eliminate all of the 'errors' (as perceived by any faction of
physicists). It would deal 'realistically' with friction, capacitors,
entropy, etc., etc. I suspect it would read like a Bowman post--very
detailed and correct in the current understanding of physics. It could be
liberally footnoted like a Hake post. We would then universally require
this text to be used in all introductory physics courses. In the third year
of such use, we could then count up the students voluntarily taking the
course. Would we even have to take off our shoes and socks to finish the
count? ;-)
Rick
{It seems to me that much of the nit-picking done on this list IS of
moderate importance in the teaching of future physicists, but very little is
all that critical in other courses, the courses that comprise the bulk of
our teaching loads. We need to digest and discuss these points, but each of
us, as educators, need to make decisions on the pedagogical value of any
suggested change in method or content in the context of our classes and our
students.}