Re: Empiry

[twayburn@juno.com (Thomas L Wayburn)]

On Sun, 11 Jan 1998 12:45:18 +0100 (MET) "Miguel A. Santos"
<msantos@etse.urv.es> writes:
> > But, I don't believe computer simulations are a good way to teach
> > physics, which I shall not defend just yet, but I have already 
> admitted
> > that I have not been a successful teacher; so, all *ad hominem* 
> attacks
> > can be considered to have been made *a priori*.   I don't believe
> > computers represent reality well enough for teaching regardless of 
> how
> > well they succeed in industry and science.
> >
> > Best regards / The Dilettante
> How could one get some  intuition on a system subjected to a 
> difussion process with a reactive term a la Ginzburg-Landau plus
> a cubic term? How coul one check what some non-rigorous arguments
> tell us about it? Do there a dynamical selection appears as we
> think from studying other similar systems?...
>
> Well simulations can help us in checking if a given model
> could be appropiate for a given real process.  
>
> If we tell them this, would it prevent some of the misleading
> ideas strudents get about simulation?
>
> MA Santos
******************************************************************

Please repeat this communication with some of the garbled sentences
cleaned up and some motivation for its intent supplied.  I can't read
your mind without eye contact ;-)   (I'm sure we will both benefit from
that exercise.)

I think you are making a case for *some* (thoughtful?) computer
simulations (after some analysis, hopefully) in research but not in the
classroom.    But I'm not sure. - TLW