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: Nuclear topics in physics?



Referring to this:

1) The E=m*c^2 formula is likely to be introduced, superficially,
when concepts of mass and energy are discussed in mechanics.

"John S. Denker" wrote:

The law that you want to remember is E^2 - p^2 c^2 = m^2 c^4

This was introduced in about the 4th week of that course as
an application of the idea of the invariant length of a 4-vector.

I would not refer to a 4-vector in the 4th week of the first
physics course. Most of university physics courses in the
US are not based of what students are expected to know from
a high school physics course. But the E=m*c^2 formula
(make p=0 above) is well known (but not well understood).

John also wrote:

Tangential but important note:

Ludwik makes some important points here about how to handle
the depth versus breadth issue. Students need a certain
amount of breadth. But breadth that is nowhere deep is
not right. The diagram I have in mind is this:

bbbbbbbbbdbdbdbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb
bbbbbbbbbdbdbdbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb
ddddd
ddddd
ddddd
ddddd
ddddd
ddddd
ddddd
ddddd

where breadth is indicated by "b" and depth (in one or
two topics) is indicated by "d".

This picture is the best possible outcome for a course.
The breadth of background is there ... and the students
see what is involved in thinking deeply about some topic.
In later life, they can do their own deep thinking about
topics that weren't deeply covered in class.

So this is an argument for having a "theme" to the course.
Ludwik is specifically suggesting a nuclear theme, but
that isn't the only choice. You could have a biophysics
theme, or an aerospace transportation theme, or whatever.

True; what is covered in depth should be determined
by a teacher, according to individual preferences and
expertise. I wish textbook writers also followed this
approach. It is pity that textbooks are nearly identical
in terms of what is presented. But as a co-author of a
textbook (out of print long time ago) I know about
pressure from publishers to imitate successful books.
Ludwik Kowalski