Re: heat, centrifugal force, etc.

[Robert Cohen <Robert.Cohen@PO-BOX.ESU.EDU>]

There is a difference between avoiding the use of the
term "heat" and saying "there is no such thing as heat".

There is a difference between avoiding the use of the
term "weight" and saying "there is no such thing as weight".

Similarly, there is a difference between avoiding the use
of the term "centrifugal force" and saying "there is no such
thing as centrifugal force".

I fully agree that we should avoid the use of the term
"centrifugal force" because it tends to mislead students
(just as the term "centripetal force" tends to mislead
students; ask students what force provides the force
toward the center necessary to keep the moon moving in
a circle and many students will say "the centripetal
force").

Stating that there is no such thing, however, is misleading
and can actually encourage students to memorize the
mantra without fully understanding it because it goes
against their experience (and, yes, such adherence to the
mantra does prevent those who go on from understanding
such things as the coriolis force - is there no such
thing as coriolis force?).

____________________________________________
Robert Cohen; rcohen@po-box.esu.edu; 570-422-3428; http://www.esu.edu/~bbq
Physics, East Stroudsburg Univ., E. Stroudsburg, PA 18301

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Barrer [mailto:forcejb@YAHOO.COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 2:24 PM
>
> 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