Re[2]: My view of science and science teaching

[Zell@act.org]

> I would call Kepler's laws factoids (leaving more profound factoids
> to be called fundamental principles, or laws of Nature) and I would
> teach them for their historical significance. In my opinion they
> should not be taught as the ultimate topic in any course. Even if
> no mathematics is done, it should always be emphasized that they
> were superceded in the same century by Newton's laws, and that they
> were observably discrepant even in Kepler's own time. I feel this
> additional step is always necessary. The teaching of conceptual
> planetary motion should not end with Kepler's laws.
>
> Leigh


  Even Newton's laws can be taught like factoids....'factoid' probably
  describes the level of most students' understanding of Newton's laws,
  even those who have completed a descriptive intro physics course.

  Flipping the same token, Kepler's laws can be taught at a deeper level.
  For example, the second law describes conservation of angular momentum,
  and this can be demonstrated graphically.  Moreover, with simplifying
  assumptions and some basic physics, students can be shown how the 3rd law
  can be used to derive Newton's law of gravitation.

  Philip Zell
  zell@act.org