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] |
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob LaMontagne [mailto:rlamont@POSTOFFICE.PROVIDENCE.EDU]
I find this to be the case with my non-science majors. They never
fully
understand the concept of 'acceleration'. But they can easily grasp
the
idea that when an object falls, it picks up 10 m/s in speed every
second. They can work out fairly sophisticated problems just by making
out a little table with the speed being 0 initially, 10 m/s after 1
sec,
20 m/s after 2 sec, etc. It also doesn't bother them in the least to
think of the speed decreasing by 10 m/s every second as a ball rises.
The transition from positive to negative speeds at the top never
bothers
them - in fact they usually suggest it before I do. But - mention
acceleration and they're totally confused - especially the idea that
the
acceleration is g at the peak of the balls motion. They need to deal
with finite intervals. I think this is one of the advantages of the
momentum approach to N2.