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: impulse/momentum

I agree with Herb. The first day should put something real in their hands,
require a measurement, establish that this is the only source of the
numbers available for computation, that uncertainty will forever flavor the
results of mathematical tools. One personal favorite was to empty the
classroom onto a campus pathway, ask each person to walk away from a
computer monitor just far enough to align a set of sight and audible clues
to measure the speed of sound. My professed tactic has always been "...I'll
throw your body in first and bring your mind in later."

Tom Ford

At 12:33 AM 12/16/03 -0500, you wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 20:42:35 -0500 Bob Sciamanda <trebor@VELOCITY.NET>
writes:
> Early in my teaching career I decided to devote the entire first
> lecture of the beginning intro course to giving the students at least a

> tentative philosophic framework on which they might hang the ideas to
be
> developed in their study of physics.


*** Such a lecture is an EXCELLENT idea. However, I suggest
that you give it at the end of the course rather than give
it on the first day! Students will appreciate it more.

Herb Gottlieb


> This lecture would cover such topics as:
> Physics as
> a human construct of models; the construction, use and limitations
> of models
> (conceptual, empirical, mathematical); our search for usefullness
> rather
> that "truth"; the unique nature of revolutions in physics, etc.
>
> I have not been so grateful to myself for any other pedagogical
> choice. (I
> recognized the students' need for this ground work because it was a
> lacuna
> in my own education.) Throughout the subsequent physics course(s)
> the
> material of this foundational lecture lies in wait as a reference to
> quickly
> and meaningfully answer questions which otherwise lead to endless
> semantic
> confusion.
>
> Bob Sciamanda
> Physics, Edinboro Univ of PA (Em)
> http://www.velocity.net/~trebor
> trebor@velocity.net
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jack Uretsky" <jlu@HEP.ANL.GOV>
> To: <PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu>
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 6:43 PM
> Subject: Re: impulse/momentum
>
>
> > Hi all-
> > In the spirit of my answer to Jim Green I will ask Bob:
> Why should
> > this be emphasized in the first lecture? The suggestion has been
> made
> > that this might very well be much more than the student wants to
> know at
> > that time.
> > Regards,
> > Jack
> >
> > On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Bob Sciamanda wrote:
> >
> > > The first lecture in an Intro Mech course should emphasize that
> revolutions
> > > in physics are unique (compared to the "humanities"). In
> physics an
> > > accepted model will have been tried and proven useful, by
> experimental
> > > tests. The new, rival model must include these results as a
> special
> case of
> > > a wider model. He must embrace his predecessor and stand on
> his
> shoulders,
> > > in order to see farther. Contrast this with revolutions in the
> > > non-scientific fields.
> > >
> > > Newtonian Mechanics is an exceedingly useful model - and will
> always be
> so -
> > > both as a learning first step, and as a lasting tool for
> countless
> practical
> > > applications.
> > >
> > > Bob Sciamanda
> > > Physics, Edinboro Univ of PA (Em)
> > > http://www.velocity.net/~trebor/
> > > trebor@velocity.net
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Jack Uretsky" <jlu@HEP.ANL.GOV>
> > > To: <PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu>
> > > Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:58 PM
> > > Subject: Re: impulse/momentum
> > >
> > >
> > > > Jim, you are really raising a number of points here.
> A decade
> ago
> > > > I decided to get a high school teaching certificate; as part
> of the
> course
> > > > I student-taught at a local high school. The chair, who was
> my
> suprvisor,
> > > > had been running a very succussful program requiring 3
> physics
> teachers
> > > > plus others for the so-called physical science courses. He
> was very
> > > > critical of my opening remarks, which were somewhat along the
> line you
> > > > suggested. His criticism, possibly well-based, was that
> young
> students
> > > > don't want to be told that they're not getting the best, the
> latest,
> and
> > > > the most blessed that the educational system has to offer. So
> my
> answer
> > > > to your question "Can't we say...?" is: I don't know. At some
> point
> the
> > > > interested student is going to find out what is being offered
> in the
> big
> > > > tent. Don't give him/her more than it wants to know.
> > > > . . .
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Jack
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Jim Green wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > What we are endeavoring to teach - no! What we
> are
> endeavoring
> > > to
> > > > > >make available to the students is the opportunity to
> attack
> problems
> > > that
> > > > > >they have never seen before, because that is what they will
> be
> doing in
> > > > > >real life. We can model for them how we attack such
> problems, but
> the
> > > > > >actual solutions are irrelevant.
> > > > > . . .
> > > > > True enough, Jack, but there is no need of camouflaging
> reality.
> Can't
> > > we
> > > > > say as we approach Newton's Laws with an introduction that
> explains
> that
> > > > > Newton only deals with slow speeds ie common speeds Ie only
> those
> that
> > > are
> > > > > everyday -- and it does this quite well -- but that later in
> physics
> > > > > education we will deal with faster speeds and then Newton
> doesn't
> work.
> > > > > . . .
> > > > > Jim Green
> > >
> >
> > --
> > "Don't push the river, it flows by itself"
> > Frederick Perls
>
>


Herb Gottlieb from New York City
A nice friendly place to live and visit