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] unification or not .... was: standard DC circuits

bc comments, "I think the difference is B. Sher. is interested in “basic

Indeed. Ruth and I believe that the intro physics course should be about
the fundamental physics and should not be a simplified version of the
sophomore engineering courses but should offer value added -- something
different and unique to physics. No one expects the required chemistry
course or history course to provide practice for the sophomore engineering
statics, dynamics, and circuits courses, nor should the physics course have
this as its main goal.

Analyzing even the very simplest circuit in terms of charge and field is
effortful and inefficient compared to the standard macro methods, but it is
highly educational, we do also teach the main aspects of the macro
approach, and any engineer (or physicist) who is going to analyze complex
circuits in depth will learn the necessary (typically macro) techniques in
far greater detail in later courses than should be attempted in the intro
physics course. As I reported engineering students saying, "I'm taking EE
circuits this semester at the same time I'm taking your physics course, and
they complement each other. In my circuits course I'm calculating voltages
and currents, and in your course I'm learning why there are these voltages
and currents."