Consider the following:
Supersymmetry, String Theory and The Standard Model do not completely
overlap, and are all trying to get toward *similar* things. If "The
Standard Model" is the standard thing to teach, then String Theory and
Supersymmetry are alternative theories. Are you really saying they are
crack pot theories? If they are crack pot theories, why exactly are we
building CERN's LHC?
In discussing the Big Bang, The Hartle-Hawking wave function describes
time as starting at the moment that space started; therefore there was
no time prior to to the Big Bang. At the same time, Andrei Linde has
worked on chaotic inflationary models that describe our universe as one
of many, and certainly not the first, that are forming a multiverse
(http://physics.stanford.edu/linde/) with time starting before our big
bang. Do we ignore Linde's work because it isn't Hartle-Hawkings theory?
I'm beginning to wonder if my astronomy background is causing me to run
into linguistical problems on this list serve. Astronomy is full of
instances where there is a main theory and three or four alternative
theories, and we're still waiting for the final word. Recently,
supernova research and WMAP proved the main theory was wrong and the
alternative theories (dark energy and modern inflation) were right. Is
physics such a mature field that it lacks these places where the main
theory is simply the most popular, but the data fits 3 or 4 theories
equally well?
Once you start getting into the realms of cosmology, particle physics
and the quest for the holy grail of quantum gravity there is no longer a
completely defined model to follow. And then there are the problems of
dark matter and dark energy. How comfortable are you living in a
universe where almost everything is made of something you can't see,
detect or describe? Can we leave ~90% of the universe out of our classroom?
The best of my students (and I'm including high school students I
volunteer with) show up in class having been exposed to multiple
theories in both particle physics and cosmology. When I asked how and
when you teach these topics, it was a real question. Giancoli has 5
chapters on particle physics and astrophysics. What do you do with these
chapters or the corresponding chapters in your books?