For the first time this Fall, I'm teaching a class in "How Things Work"
to a group of non-science majors. This, I have never done before, and
it's a bit daunting to know that I need to connect to them in a
different way from STEM majors.
At any rate, we're using the book How Things Work, by Bloomfield, and he
explains that the dishes remain on the table when you whisk a tablecloth
from under them "because of inertia." He expands only slightly, and I do
get what he's saying, but I feel like this isn't the best way to try to
get Newton's First Law across. This "experiment" depends sensitively on
factors such as the acceleration of the tablecloth, and the static and
kinetic coefficients of friction. If you use a looong tablecloth you
will probably get in trouble. To the contrary, it seems that friction is
one of the reasons that people don't really get the First Law: "objects
in motion stay in motion" but virtually everything that you slide across
a table doesn't do this. Isn't this regarded as one of the reasons that
the force-and-motion connection became so ingrained?
Like I said, I do understand how one could use this demo to discuss the
first law, but it seems to me that a glider on an air track or a puck on
an air table are more instructive given a finite class time. What does
everyone think?