Re: [Phys-l] teaching different descriptions of "reality"

[Bernard Cleyet <bernardcleyet@redshift.com>]

reading about what is real reminds me David Bohm lectured on this -- 
I've got the tape somewhere.   "Wholeness and the Implicate Order"?

bc, perhaps about to reveal his ignorance:

p.s. curious,  since the G force is inverse square (or at least very 
long range) it along w/ EM rad. must be mediated by massless particles, 
n'est pas?


Brian Blais wrote:

> Hello,
>
> On a whim, I made an end-of-semester lecture for my general physics class, which I 
> think could be taken in number of interesting directions.  Near the end of the 
>
>  
cut

> the point here is to reinforce the idea that physics is a description of reality, and 
> the even if the concept is intuitive, it need not be "real" in any sense other than 
> being useful.  Force seems more intuitive to many people, but energy is used 
> exclusively in QM.
>
>
> any thoughts?
>
>
> 			bb
>
>
>