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: Derivation of Planck Function



I must agree with JD. My objections to this sort of lesson stems from
science education research. If you have many non "formal operational"
thinkers, this sort of explanation will be completely opaque. PE
researchers are now putting together curricula for teaching quantum theory,
so you might be able to find some good papers on the subject. I believe
there was a recent article on this subject in the past year, but I can't
remember where. Just remember that most of the research is at the college
level with students who are formal operational thinkers so it will not work
as well with the average HS class which may have 30% concrete operational
thinkers. The concrete operational thinkers generally do not build
understanding well from lecture or books.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX


William Lutschak wrote:
My lesson plan for the
?introduction to quantum mechanics? involves an illustration of
Max Planck?s quantum mechanics explanation of cavity radiation.
...
come up with a way to best present these statistical
mechanics ideas to second level students

1) Please post plain text, not html, especially not malformed
html.

2) Like others who have responded, I am mystified by the
question. Planck's formula is a profoundly interesting and
important result, but it seems very unsuitable for an "introduction
to quantum mechanics".

As the saying goes, learning proceeds from the known to the
unknown. I know how to derive the Planck formula, but it is
about 15 steps removed from the typical high-school physics
syllabus.

If I were doing it, I would teach things separately:
-- "introduction to quantum mechanics" with its own simple
examples
-- waves, modes, and fields with its own simple examples
-- statistical mechanics with its own simple examples

... and only then, after weeks of preparation, would I combine
the building blocks to achieve an understanding of Planck's
formula.

Suppose Planck's formula is the final step in a 15-step process.
If you "explain" it starting at step 13, you are just explaining
one unknown thing (Planck's formula) in terms of other unknown
things (unknown to the students that is) and this doesn't do
anybody any good.

==============

The ideas behind Planck's formula are so spectacularly non-
introductory that I have to assume we are misunderstanding the
question. Presumably there is something very unusual about the
situation, or the question would never have come up. If so,
please explain.