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]

Teaching science on the edge of knowledge



Over the weekend I attended a conference on teaching non-majors
introductory astronomy classes. In passing, one of the speakers asked,
"How do we handle alternative theories and gaps in our understanding of
the universe?"

This (and the cold fusion thread) caused me to wonder: At what point is
it appropriate to bring up theories that are hard to handle, are
probably wrong but may be true, and just aren't mature?

Specific Problems:

*Should MOND ever be discussed? I have seen a grad student burned at the
stake for giving a journal review talk on MOND, and I've also seen a
leading astronomer with his face in his hands worried that MOND may have
some validity. I usually rely on Greg Bothun's site:
http://zebu.uoregon.edu/special/mond.html What do you do?

*How do you answer the question: "What was there before the Big Bang?" I
typically say, "Here be dragons" and use magazine articles and popular
books to discuss some of the theories. Do you have problems with
religion creeping into your classroom with this topic?

*How many dimensions do you say the universe has?

*Are string theory or super symmetric particles mentioned? I know I
don't have more than a very surface understanding of these topics. What
should/can we hope for our students to understand? Is this best taught
as a "Why we should spend money to build accelerators and bury
detectors?" and then test their knowledge of FERMI and CERN, and Super
Kamiokande?

*Does Cold Fusion come up when you discuss nuclear energy?

*What other discussions are best dropped or skirted around?

Alternate Problem:

*If these topics aren't discussed in your class, is there any reason for
text books to come out with new versions every other year?

Cheers,
Pamela