🚀 go-pugleaf

I say to Dan MacIsaac's reply about teaching real physics:  AMEN!!!!  Where
did we ever get the idea that there is some real world out there waiting to
be discovered?  The world is nothing more than what we perceive it to be.
Admittedly, there are broad areas of agreement on how we describe the
world and part of teaching is to set things up so that students will likely
discover for themselves these areas of agreement.

And I couldn't emphasize more strongly that I agree with Dan's position about
models and reality.  We delude ourselves if we think because a concept is
developed to a high state of complexity it is "real" and not an approximation
to reality.

I would NEVER,NEVER,NEVER tell any student, "You aren't capable of learning
this!"  My job is to inform the student what might be required to learn it so
that he or she can make an intelligent decision about whether to proceed.

AS for simplified models and their usefulness,  I suppose it all depends
on what you mean by usefulness.  We use simplified ideas all the time in
economics and politics, knowing full well that the details can get very,
very complicated; yet, we find that the simplified models are useful paths
to deeper understanding.

I hope you didn't mean to sound that way, but the idea that ordinary folk
shouldn't be dallying in "real physics" smacks of the kind of elitism that
has gotten us in trouble from a PR standpoint.  It's the kind of arrogance
that a TEACHER should never be guilty of.

No offense intended, but I meant what I said.

Peace.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Van E. Neie                                      ven@physics.purdue.edu
Purdue University
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------