| 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] |
The two approaches to SR (special relativity) described by JohnD
reminded me of two approaches of introducing QM (quantum mechanics).
The first starts with Bohr's model and imposes nonclassical assumptions
(orbiting electrons do not radiate and only certain orbits are
allowed). The second starts with Schroedinger's equations and solves it
for different potential energies (different systems, such an H atom,
CO2 molecule or U-235 nucleus) and with different boundary conditions.
The second approach is probably preferable for those who are very
comfortable with advanced calculus, partial differential equations,
etc. I suspect that most teachers on this list, like myself, are not
comfortable with advanced mathematics, even if they were exposed to it
at universities. Learning advanced math but not using it constantly is
probably responsible for this situation.
Ludwik Kowalski
On Sep 9, 2005, at 3:32 PM, John Denker wrote:cut
Hi --
Evidently there are two approaches to thinking -- and teaching -- about
special relativity.
1) One approach is what might be called the "minimalist" approach,
making
as few conceptual changes as possible, using conventional D=3 space as
a framework, plus conventional notions of time, and then explaining how
S