Re: Coriolis myths and draining bathtubs - was Re: Supporting vs stifling curiosity

[Hugh Haskell <hhaskell@MINDSPRING.COM>]

At 18:31 -0500 2/11/02, Robert Cohen wrote:
> I admit I haven't read the references provided.  I assume this is addressed
> in the articles but...How prevalent IS this misconception among
> physics-department faculty in the great research universities of the U.S.?
>
> Given all of the highly precise measurements that physicists have been able
> to carry out, I figured most would say it could be observed under very
> controlled conditions (with "heroic" efforts).  I am surprised that such a
> misconception (that it is not possible to observe the effect) is prevalent.
> Then again, I don't know what "prevalent" means.
I can't speak authoritatively, but I doubt it's prevalence among
physics departments. Among the general public, however, its another
matter. Among the general public, it is "general knowledge" that this
is true. Which James bond movie (Goldfinger?) had 007 being kidnapped
and taken to Argentina, but he realized that he was in the southern
hemisphere when he noticed the sink drain the the hotel room he was
being held captive in was draining clockwise? All of my students are
sure its true when they come into my class, and it usually takes a
day or two to disabuse them of the notion that the Coriolis force is
anywhere near strong enough to be evident in toilet bowls or bathtubs.

Remember, elementary and middle school texts are seldom written by
the leading lights that appear on the title pages of these august
tomes. Usually all they have done is read a few chapters and signed
off on them. Sometimes they don't even bother to read what has been
ghost-written for them. An acquaintance of mine had the unnerving
experience of being included on the title page of a book without ever
being contacted by the publisher! It's bad enough what goes on with
preparation of  high school science (and probably other) textbooks,
but it's criminal what goes on with preparation of lower level texts.
The publisher usually throws together something written by the
in-house staff, usually cribbed from other books on the subject, cons
some people who should know better into signing off on the book, send
it to their production department where the layout folks make it look
glitzy, with multi-colors, lots of picture, whether they're relevant
or not, and an impressive list of "editorial staff." Then they bounce
it past the state review committees who are typically clueless about
the subject and at most go through the book to see if all the topics
on their state curriculum are mentioned (no matter how ineptly), and
there you have the latest elementary school science text. They
usually get execrable reviews in every journal that knows anything
about the subject matter, but nobody reads them so the book sails
through, gets used and makes big bucks for the publisher. Three or
four years later the whole process is repeated. It's a cash cow for
the publishers in these fields.

Hugh
--

Hugh Haskell
<mailto://haskell@ncssm.edu>
<mailto://hhaskell@mindspring.com>

(919) 467-7610

Let's face it. People use a Mac because they want to, Windows because they
have to..
******************************************************