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] |
...It is not being pedantic...The energy rich terminology is not understood by students to mean that the
energy is higher compared to other bonds...Language does matter in that it telegraphs analogies to students and
sometimes inappropriate analogies.
The major problem with the "shorthand" explanation is that it simply
does not make sense....
John M. Clement
Houston, TX
The terminology 'energy-rich phosphate bonds'is not helpful in this
regard, but perhaps 'easily-disrupted-by-energy phosphate bonds' does
not have quite the same ring? Of course, energy does tend to be given
out when these bonds break (in the context of the whole reaction
going on), and I think some biologists feel it is therefore being
pedantic to point out that like any bond energy is required to break
them. I've rather come to the view that whilst this is an alternative
conception acquired by students, for some of the biologists this is
more a different formalism reflecting their own disciplinary concerns
and priorities rather than an actual misunderstanding of the science
(just as some chemistry teachers seem to think that explaining
patterns in successive atomic ionisation energies in terms of the
sharing out of nuclear force is fine as it's a useful heuristic that
generally works).
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l