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: [Phys-l] What's in a Touch?



Feynman describes the incident in "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman," a collection of autobiographical short stories that is an excellent read.

Bob Yeend
Justin-Siena H.S.
Napa, CA

On Nov 5, 2010, at 8:25 PM, William Robertson wrote:

Feynman's experience on this is a great read. I encourage everyone to
take a look at his exploits in reviewing texts for the state of
California. Not sure which book it was. Anyway, such problems are
manifest. I used to use Mario Iona, deceased but used to be with
University of Denver, as a reviewer for much of what I wrote. He was
relentless in countering bad science. He was a kind and gentle person
(invited me to his house for tea to discuss his comments!), but you
wouldn't know it from talking to people in science education. At
conferences, a presenter's greatest fear would be that Mario would
rise and ask a question during the presentation. Very sad, actually,
because they would rather escape in ignorance than confront what might
be wrong with what they were doing. An executive at an unnamed
curriculum development group once told me, after I expressed interest
in having Mario do a review, was, "Fine. The camel has his nose under
the tent and you're inviting him in." Bad state of affairs when
science educators don't want to be certain their science is correct.
Yes, it's difficult for someone to tell you you don't have it quite
right, but the alternative...............? Another comment from
Mario that supports what you say here. He told me that he was upset
that so many books and other resources listed him as a consultant, yet
followed maybe half of his recommendations. That left the impression
that he somehow approved of what was in the resource.

And a personal experience: I was at a NARST (National Association for
Research in Science Teaching) conference and looked through a poster
session. One author, a relatively big name in science education, had a
mistake in his description of gases. He said that when you heat a gas,
the molecules "need more room and therefore expand." Now, I was young
and not famous (now old and not famous), so I respectfully asked him
if I could talk about what I saw as incorrect science in his
materials. He listened politely and then turned away to talk to
someone else, without any more acknowledgement. The published paper
later had the same error. So, it's not just textbook authors who have
a problem with getting the concepts straight.

Bill


William C. Robertson, Ph.D.


On Nov 5, 2010, at 12:51 AM, John Clement wrote:

The web page content was apparently designed by
willisb@telusplanet.net
So anyone who has looked at the page could E-mail this person with
exactly
what you think of it. Be specific. Also your comments could go on
this
list, or copy me at clement@hal-pc.org

Your academic credentials and a link to your university web page
would also
serve as a useful bludgeon. This sort of thing needs to be exposed,
embarrassed, and terminated.

My take is that it could be mad more accurate, but the idea of touch
simply
doesn't have any meaning when you are talking about 2 atoms. They
don't
really have a surface. Indeed the concept of touch as we use it
macroscopically has no meaning in the sub-microscopic world. It
could be
redefined I suppose.

Apparently the designer also puts out other web pages on science,
and if
they are as bad as this drivel, he needs to be firmly chastised. We
need to
try to make the textbooks and other physics sources more correct.
Texbooks
are intractable because the publishers stone wall and don't make the
needed
changes. Read Feynman if you need evidence here. But encyclopedias
and
other references can be changed, and I have even been an agent for
such
change on occasion. John Hubisz put out a good report on texts, but
the
publishers then claim the new editions are OK, but they lie through
their
teeth.

Hmm, I was just struck by the phrase "lie through their teeth" and
wondered
where it originally came from. A quick web search revealed only
speculation.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX


Teachers often ask me, when I point out what's wrong with the
explanations in their textbooks, how this can happen. Unfortunately
it's as you said--writers with limited science background just copy
from bad sources or even somewhat reputable sources without knowing
they are propagating wrong science. It's always interesting to see
electrons in orbit around a nucleus, but their version of nuclear
force is a new one for me!

Bill


William C. Robertson, Ph.D.


On Nov 4, 2010, at 6:26 PM, John Clement wrote:

This is the drivel they are feeding the students! Actually the
other
physics sections of this schools web site are not really bad at all.
Actually a good Canadian expression in keeping with the location.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l