Re: Nuclear topics in physics?

[Rick Tarara <rtarara@SAINTMARYS.EDU>]

Eisberg and Lerner is an example of a text that is very complete and
very thorough but essentially unusable as an introductory text unless
one is teaching at MIT, Cal-Tech (or the equivalent).  Such was the case
with the Feynman lecture series (which was neither complete or thorough)
but when first out was used as the introductory E&M text (Vol II)in my
undergraduate sophomore level class--with predictable results  ;-(

Anyway, I think one of Ludwik's points is that IN ORDER to get more
nuclear physics into the introductory curriculum, it needs to be
integrated, often as examples, into other areas so as not to bloat the
already huge texts.  [I have my students get the Hecht-Calculus text in
the two volume form simply so they don't get stoop shouldered carrying
around the full 10 pound book!]

Few of us have students, even in our intro classes for scientists and
engineers, who are ready for the math or detail that John D suggests,
and certainly none of our life-science or Gen-Ed students can handle
such, yet it does seem a good idea to get more nuclear into their
curricula so I favor Ludwik's original suggestion.

Rick

***************************************************
Richard W. Tarara
Professor of Physics
Dept. of Chemistry & Physics
Saint Mary's College
Notre Dame, IN 46556
rtarara@saintmarys.edu
**************************************************
Free Physics Instructional Software
www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara/software.html
Windows & Mac software
NEW:  Mac versions of Lab Simulations
**************************************************

> -----Original Message-----
> From: phys-l@lists.nau.edu: Forum for Physics Educators [mailto:PHYS-
> L@lists.nau.edu] On Behalf Of Bernard Cleyet
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 12:32 PM
> To: PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu
> Subject: Re: Nuclear topics in physics?
>
> > What happens to the released energy? What
> > prevents heavy nuclei from fissioning very rapidly?
>
> That seems to be going overboard.  Answering those two
> questions requires knowing a lot of detail about nuclear
> processes.  I don't know how to make an idealized/simplified
> version of that question without throwing the baby out
> with the bathwater.
>
> JD must be requiring more rigor than I think necessary.  Eisberg and
> Lerner discuss this, I think well, in one page.  This is after
> discussing chemical reactions, etc.  The sub ch. "Energy and Rest Mass
> in Chemical and Nuclear Reactions" is ~ ten pp.
>
> bc