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: serializing the facts

What is physics? From my perspective it is a body of
knowledge about Nature, described in current textbooks.
Most introductory textbooks are more or less identical, as
far as the "logical sequence" is concerned. This shows
an agreement among practitioners. Thus I accept the
statement about the "serial nature" of physics.

Yes, a structure of teaching and learning is not unique;
it will change again. Linearity (the serial nature) does
not mean uniqueness. I would change if the textbooks
changed. But for the time being my role is make sure
that the current sequence makes sense to me and to
my students. I am not trying to create a new sequence.
I am trying to preserve physics for future generations.
Ludwik Kowalski

Leigh Palmer wrote:

At 7:48 PM -0700 8/19/00, John Denker wrote:

Science is not serial. It is a very high-dimensional tangled latticework
of facts. There is no natural ordering of the facts.

I think this view is the one that we want to get across to our students;
it is certainly my own view. Science is not serial. The one thing John
has omitted here is that this tangled latticework is *self consistent*,
and that this consistency is demonstrable *mathematically*. This view
of Nature permits us to sort the nodes of our latticework to find the few
that are not quite consistent with the others, and we tend to prune the
latticework (discard new nodes inconsistent with the greater structure)
to preserve this consistency. ....