Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: A wave or not a wave ?



John Denker muses as follows:

The general question as to what can be simplified and what cannot is a
monumental question. It's one of the reasons why teaching is hard.

John I share your concern -- and share it abundantly.

To illustrate how general the problem is, here are a couple of extreme
examples:

1) .....You can't have it both ways. Either hydrogens are big or they
aren't. If
they're not big, don't tell me fairy stories about it. Deal me straight or
deal me out. This is an example of completely boneheaded bad pedagogy,
because the right answer is not at all more complicated than the fairy story.

2) Pilot training (including textbooks as well as oral tradition) is full
of fairy stories about how airplanes respond in various
circumstances. Some of these fairy stories put lives at risk, by leading
people to use the controls inappropriately in emergencies.

But, John, I am a bit confused. Aren't you one of those who say that the
language of having energy flow or move or generally reify the concept is
tolerable if not accurate -- and the all time favorite: "heat flow". Have
I not heard correctly? Are you not one of those who bridle at Leigh or me
or others on the list when we object to these malformed expressions? All
the while we sit in our little corners and claim that it is just as easy to
say it correctly. Just the other day I explained the First Law to a
inquiring HS student. He acclaimed "Oh now I understand it!" I guess he
would say that it is in fact _easier_ to say it correctly!


Jim Green
mailto:JMGreen@sisna.com
http://users.sisna.com/jmgreen