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: [Phys-L] magic



On 02/11/2015 01:51 PM, Anthony Lapinski wrote:
I've heard that all (most?) magic is physics.

Like most things, magic is interdisciplinary.

Once a guy was trying to get an impresario to
represent him. He handed over a business card
that said
magician -- ventriloquist -- entertainer.

He then gave a few examples of his work. The
impresario said magic, OK, ventriloquism, OK,
but you're sorely lacking that other thing.

In-person magic usually depends on a great deal
of psychology, exploiting people's misconceptions
... of which there are many. Sometimes it
leverages some simple physics. On rare occasions
there is some complicated and/or large-scale
physics. For example (*):
"How Did David Copperfield Make the Statue
of Liberty Disappear? EXPLAINED"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDehBet2Tpg

(TV/movie magic is something else entirely.)

This is more than a little bit relevant to teaching,
insofar as it involves
a) being entertaining, and
b) understanding what misconceptions the audience
is likely to have.

Magic cultivates and/or exploits misconceptions,
while teaching seeks to dispel them. The starting
point is the same, but the destination is different.

Students in the introductory course should not be
exposed to magic, because it tends to reinforce
misconceptions, or (worse) to plant misconceptions
where there was only tabula_rasa previously.

IN CONTRAST, with more advanced students, figuring
out the physics and psychology of magic makes for
some excellent exercises.

----------
*) Note: A point not mentioned in the video:
What role did the searchlights play?
I claim the lighting played an important
but non-obvious supporting role.