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] Another alternative theory horror




On 30 Aug 2011 at 21:31, John Denker wrote:

I explain that over time, we
correct our models until in the end there is one remaining model for the given phenomenon.

Slight nitpick: We are not necessarily restricted to "one" remaining
model. Commonly there are multiple models with overlapping coverage.
This is where the correspondence principle comes in.
Physical optics says that geometric optics is OK in certain limits.
Quantum mechanics says that classical mechanics is OK in certain limits.
Special relativity says that non-relativistic mechanics is OK in certain limits.
General relativity says that the flat-spacetime model is OK in certain limits.
You can do chemical reactions neglecting nuclear reactions in certain limits.
Et cetera. Other examples abound.


John, you are quite right. These points are made in my next lecture to the class when I talk about how
Newton's laws are widely applicable, but then point out observations which resulted in Special
Relatvity. I have been careful with my students to explain the limited applicability of a given model and
that there may be overlap with other models, etc. I just didn't want to recreate my whole presentation
in my e-mail to the list.

My point is that it is up to us as educators and even with speaking with other scientists to use the
coreect language of science, so that we can put to rest these notions that science is a lot of hand
waving and guess work that can be dismissed to promote a religious or political agenda.