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] |
On 11/06/2008 06:04 AM, Rick Tarara wrote:
I'll 'stick to my guns' too. Clearly some groups use the pound as mass,....
other groups (engineers and intro physics textbook writers) take it as
force. I will continue to go with the engineers and intro books. Students
come to us with the clear knowledge that WEIGHT is measured in pounds.
If you want to persuade anybody, you'll need a better
argument (see below). Students "come to us" with innumerable
misconceptions, and it would be very bad policy to
redefine basic physics to match students' naive beliefs.
....
They 'know' pounds to be weight!
Yeah, but:
*) They 'know' that _elastic_ is soft and squishy.
*) They 'know' that red means hot and blue means cold.
*) They 'know' that heating something raises its temperature.
*) They 'know' that the bubbles in boiling water are air bubbles.
*) Etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
===========
We agree that students "come to us" with misconceptions, and
we must take that into account ... but taking it into account
does not mean letting the inmates run the asylum.
We take each misconception as a starting point, and then move
away from it as quickly as possible.
weight of 1 kilogram is 2.2 lbs,
That is going from bad to worse. Even if/when we use lbf as
a unit of force, it is a unit of _force_ not a unit of "weight".
The weight of a kilogram will be dramatically unequal to 2.2 lbf
on the surface of the moon, or in the weightless environment of
a space station.