Re: [Phys-L] Ex: Re: Coronavirus, Most Vulnerable Demographic

[bernard cleyet <bernardcleyet@redshift.com>]

> On 2020/Apr/10, at 11:44, Anthony Lapinski <alapinski@pds.org> wrote:
>
> Well said! We all need to keep the political discussions out. (and CV19
> naturally leads to heated debates). We all need to be whistleblowers. For
> me, the CV19 discussion has not helped me in my remote teaching (of sound
> and optics). Curious if it has helped anyone else. And if so, how? 


I think this is the answer:  

> On 2020/Apr/10, at 11:36, Albert J. Mallinckrodt <ajm@cpp.edu> wrote:
>
> Modeling phenomena is absolutely central to physics and teaching HOW to model phenomena is absolutely central to physics teaching.  And because epidemiology is applied math (i.e. physics) in as pure a form as you will find anywhere, nothing could be a more appropriate topic for this list.

bc apologizes for not initially remembering that.  

I’ve done extensive modeling of pendula:  http://cleyet.org/Pendula,%20Horological%20and%20Otherwise/.   


> I DO understand that modeling THIS epidemic leads to inescapable—and, for those who still haven’t faced the consequences of their own bad choices, highly unwelcome—political implications.  But it is THAT that has nothing to do with physics or physics teaching and it should not deter us.
>
> John Mallinckrodt
> Cal Poly Pomona


BTW:   because phys-l is largely populated by college teachers and research physicists, a rather homogenous membership,  it’s been largely free of controversy; even though there’ve been “off list” posts — especially since the "Twerp” became president. So, when there’s a “hetero” post, some complain.  Of my interest is what drives the differing personality of the complainers and the ignorers.  In my and one or two others the response has been an attempt to educate.    



much cut