I, again, have no desire to belittle the necessity of clearly communicating the ideas of physics (be it in an exciting or dull way). Without that, all the excitement in the world is worth nothing. All I mean to say is that if you really think something is neat and cool your students are more likely to adopt a similar viewpoint. Further, if they are interested in and see the validity of, the topic at hand they are more likely to process the information centrally as opposed to peripherally (Elaboration Likelihood Model [of communication], Petty & Cacioppo, 1986).
ELM states that in order for central processing to take place the processor must have the ability AND desire to do so. You may perceive my desire for power points and such as a peripheral processing technique, not so...the power points are only pretty and fancy to people who don't use them. To us it is the norm. It would be like watching TV without a remote. The remote isn't appreciated because it is expected, no special attention is given it, however its absence would be quickly noticed (and potentially distracting).
The theory goes on to state that after considering the message through central processing, if the message is favorable, it is far more likely to become part of the processor's belief system and they are far less likely to be persuaded against that message. You may say that physics is not about persuasion, it is about information, and quite so...but the physics that is counterintuitive can be hard to swallow and does require persuasion to a certain extent (for those less apt at physics). For instance, I entered this discussion board with questions about light and time dilation...I did not believe it existed. However my (somewhat limited) ability to and my desire to process the information centrally has persuaded me otherwise and I now accept it and am less likely to change my viewpoint than if I simply accepted that my professor said it was so and I respect him (peripheral processing).
Also, to touch on the comment about Piaget and the learning of children. Do you mean to compare college student to preoperational children? The gap in psychology and learning abilities/styles between the two is vast. I'm interested to see how you mean to relate them.
This is an enjoyable discussion for me, thank you for continuing it. I believe in my gut that what I said was correct and I am rather enjoying finding information to support it, but even more so enjoying watching you bat it back down and making me look for more.