Re: heat, centrifugal force, etc.

[Rick Tarara <rtarara@SAINTMARYS.EDU>]

I'm with John here, and that applies to most of our intro-level College
courses as well.  Most of the constantly repeated arguments we have here
(heat, weight, centrifugal force, flow, etc.) are only relevant to physics
majors which make up a very small percentage of our students.  From both a
practical and a pedagogical point of view, the common intro texts DO have it
right (99% of the time ;-).   There is no point in trying to eradicate
heat-flow (and other 'objectionable' terms)  from these books or from the
intro courses.  Admittedly, centrifugal force is more difficult _because_ of
the kinesthetic experience of students, but if one is trying to build the
intellectual Newtonian model with students, centrifugal force will only get
in the way.

Rick

*********************************************************
Richard W. Tarara
Professor of Physics
Saint Mary's College
Notre Dame, Indiana
rtarara@saintmarys.edu
********************************************************
Free Physics Educational Software (Win & Mac)
www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara/software.html
NEW:  Windows & Mac Animated Chalkboard Package
   FCI animations for Instructor led review.
********************************************************


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Barrer" <forcejb@YAHOO.COM>
To: <PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: heat, centrifugal force, etc.


> I would argue that the small percentage of my students
> who go on to more advanced coursework are fully
> capable of comprehending the effects of rotating
> reference frames, especially as they mature and their
> abstract/theoretical reasoning improves. It is hard
> enough to get (younger, ie, less intellectually
> mature) HS students to understand physics in a "fixed"
> reference frame. Would the list purists be satisfied
> if we (in HS) said "There is no such thing as
> centrifugal force in our usual reference frame"? I do
> not see our goal in HS as producing "better"
> scientists and engineers; you univ folks do that
> rather well already. Our (IMO more difficult)
> challenge is to produce a higher percentage of HS
> graduates who have at least some degree of scientific
> literacy and reasoning ability. John Barrere  Apex, HS
>  Apex, NC
>
> --- Robert Cohen <Robert.Cohen@PO-BOX.ESU.EDU> wrote:
> > Savinainen Antti wrote:
> >
> > > Phys-L among other sources have taught me not to
> > ban centrifugal
> > > forces; they do belong to more advanced courses
> > and modern
> > > physics.
> >
> > The question is whether such a hard stance in intro
> > courses causes
> > hardship in the advanced courses.
> >
> > I agree that using the term "centrifugal force"
> > (like "centripetal
> > force", by the way) confuses students.  For this
> > reason, I prefer
> > using the phrase "apparent force away from the
> > center" instead of
> > "centrifugal" until the students get used to the
> > idea.
> >
> > ____________________________________________
> > Robert Cohen; rcohen@po-box.esu.edu; 570-422-3428;
> > http://www.esu.edu=
> > /~bbq
> > Physics, East Stroudsburg Univ., E. Stroudsburg, PA
> 18301
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com