Re: work done by friction

[Ludwik Kowalski <KowalskiL@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU>]

I strongly agree with Rick:

Phys-L is only a club where physics topics are discussed and
unusual ideas are debated. Each of us is responsible for the
overall usefulness of what how we actually teach, according
to specific local conditions. Phys-L is not a place to decide,
only a place to debate. I do not know about places (federal or
state institutions) whose role is to make specific binding
decisions. Things seems to be happening by themselves after
textbook authors and publishers make individual decisions.
Like them, we should definitely respect traditional approaches
to avoid anarchy.

P.S.
As a coauthor (the textbook is out of print now) I know that
expert consultants are hired to evaluate proposed textbooks.
In our case they suggested "more pictures showing girls and
minorities", elimination of "militaristic illustrations", etc.
Their role should be to weed out bad old approaches. Yes,
"be damn sure the pedagogical gain is worth the extra effort".
But do not hesitate sharing your ideas, and virtual proposals,
on this forum. Sooner or later they may prevail.

Richard Tarara wrote:

> I'd be very careful about using any non-standard curriculum (no work,
> non-standard weight, no centripetal anything, 'real' centrifugal forces,
> 'heat' as a forbidden noun, etc.) especially in the high-school setting.
> While there may well be advantages to some of these (maybe ;-), if your
> students are going to be taking College physics courses where work is used
> as typically defined in texts, where weight is mg, where centripetal
> accelerations and (alas) forces abound, where almost all centrifugal forces
> are fictitious, etc., then such non-standard approaches could well do more
> harm than good.  You also need to deal with the disparities between your
> instruction and the text book (if used).  In other words, be damn sure the
> pedagogical gain is worth both the extra effort on your part and the
> potential confusion that the students may experience later.  {Same for intro
> college courses that feed students to other physics courses--but probably
> not as serious a concern.)

He was referring to:

> > That is great. Please try to make you "teaching aid" accessible
> > to high school teachers. As a veteran of the Arizona modeling
> > workshop you certainly know that audience.
> >
> > Bob Sciamanda wrote:
> >
> > > Let me take this occasion to note that the I am re-writing (and
> > > expanding) the essay
> > > which I posted at this thread's earlier incarnation ("Without
> > > Work") as a stand-alone teaching aid, and will put it on my web page.
> > > Will let you know when it happens.