Re: understand understanding, simple explanations, etc.

[Leigh Palmer <palmer@sfu.ca>]

> QED? how have you proven anything?

Slightly obscure reference. QED is the best nonmathematical physics
book I've ever read.

> To say that a partial understanding is useless is like telling me that
> because I lack the finer details of music thoery I cannot somewhat
> understand the subleties of theme and harmony interplay at the symphony.

Did I imply that? I hope not; I didn't mean to.

> I hope I misunderstood your comment! As "conceptual physics" is near
> and dear to me!

I teach conceptual physics. I do it with mathematics. I'm betting that
I get my concepts across better than you do, and not just because, as
you correctly observe, it is easier to teach the mathematically adept.
I will guess that you are deluding yourself when you think that you
are teaching concepts. You suggest that you teach your students the
colors of the rainbow. I assume you do not mean that in the trivial
sense, that is that they learn the order of the colors. Tell me how to
predict the order of the colors knowing only the indices of refraction
for blue and red. You need not draw the standard diagram. We all know
it, so you can refer to it verbally in this forum.

I'll play Sagredo, the discriminating student. You may adopt the
corresponding *persona* of your choice.

Leigh