Postmodern Physics - Colleges Fail to Teach Basics - Even in Physics!

popecenter.org ^ | May 16, 2007 | Frank Tipler

[Psycho_Bunny]

lol.....what?

[Eva]

You’re right, I should know how to spell precedents.

Anyway, the day that Harvard announced the new president and the curriculum changes (more post modernism), they also stated that the most dramatic changes would be to the law school and in the field of science. I was suspicious of what the changes would be and went to the Harvard Law School web site, where the change away from the freshman study of precedents was stated as the first real change in the freshman curriculum since... (I don’t remember the date, but I think it was some time in the 1800s.)

[Moonman62]

At the overwhelming majority of American universities, including Harvard, M.I.T. and Cal Tech, one is not even required to take a course in general relativity to get a Ph.D. in physics!

Unless you're going to be a researcher there isn't much need to know it. Even NASA uses the Newtonian equations.

[Eva]

By the way, the changes that Harvard is making in the science curriculum involved a new emphasis on current topics of interest and how they pertain to the community. (I think that stem cell research was mentioned, but not global warming)In other words, they are going to feminize science to make up for the gender gap.

[jude24]

I’d like a citation, if possible.

[Fiji Hill]

Looks like Shakespeare is out, and Foucault, Derrida, Marcuse, and Adorno are in.

[napscoordinator]

I am so sick of these stupid stories. Our education system is fine especially at the College level. Sure some kids are majoring in stupid majors, but so what. Our country is and always will be prosperous and that is due to the American People. Good God who do you think is advancing all of our technology. It sure as hell is not the over the hill, way past shelf life baby boomer's. I am sick to death of this group of losers complaining constantly about everything when they ruined the country.

[Mariebl]

I'm sure that many members of typical university’s English faculty no longer have a basic understanding of Shakespeare. How could they, if they themselves have never taken a course on Shakespeare?

I thought it was a good article, right until I read this. When I read that second sentence, I decided that the author was either not too bright, or, more likely, writing fast and carelessly. In any event, not writing anything to be taken seriously.

[AdamSelene235]

I don't think GR qualifies as "basic" physics. I would expect a class in SR but not GR.

I've a pretty good grasp of "basic" physics for an engineer. Taken courses in plasma physics, particle physics, nonlinear optics, acoustic physics, quantum, a bit of special relativity. I don't see general relativity as necessary for an undergrad physics degree.

[Coyoteman]

I’mma calling in backup! (hope ya’ll don’t mind!)

RadioAstronomer was banned. He's over at Darwin Central.

[lostlakehiker]

Rubbish. At the speeds and densities that occur in the vicinity of a newly forming star, the difference between relativistic physics and classical Newtonian physics is negligible. Planets do form, of course. We know of planets around other stars, and we know that stars form. How could there be planets about young stars, if planets cannot form?

We know that there are young stars because we know about the rate at which stars go through their nuclear fuel. A hot, bright star cannot last nearly as long as a dim, red star. Any hot bright star we see today must have formed relatively recently.

Finally, how can there be a moon without a planet for that moon to orbit? Such a `moon’ would be a protoplanet, and over time, as it swept up the remaining mass in its vicinity, it would become a planet.

[xenophiles]

Newton gave us the industrial revolution. Einstein explained how light bends in a gravity lens. Both systems are interesting, but only one has any practical application in the real world. This poor slob who payed his own way through an engineering degree is glad that all of his limited time and money were applied toward something that would put meat on the table rather than something that tickles the fancy of an erudite prof.

Not to knock your status as a practical and self-made man, but pure scientific research pays off tremendously in the long run.

Newton's theory of gravity was of no practical use when he devised it. Galileo's model (gravity applies the same acceleration to everything and points down to the center of the Earth) was good enough for all practical purposes.

The quip "of what use is a newborn baby?" has been attributed to several scientists who were supposedly asked what useless-looking discoveries were good for. One of them was Michael Faraday demonstrating electromagnetic induction to Prime Minister Grey in 1831 -- he's also rumored to have said "some day, Sir, you shall tax it." Whether or not these zingers were actually spoken, a lot of hugely valuable discoveries don't look very lucrative at first. Look at Euclid, Mendel, Darwin, Curie...

The GPS navigation system absolutely depends on general relativity to function correctly... Well, to be fair, we could have kept sending up satellites and watching them drift out of synch until we learned a good rule of thumb for how much to slow down their clocks, but that would have been expensive.

[AdamSelene235]

MIT'S undergrad requirements.

Course VIII Focused Option

The Course VIII focused option is designed to provide the best possible preparation for graduate study in physics. Many students have also found this program to be an excellent, broad based preparation for professional work in related fields such as astrophysics, biophysics, geophysics, and many engineering disciplines. The focused option is unusual among pre-professional programs at MIT in that it offers a particularly large amount of elective freedom: as many as six subjects may be chosen as unrestricted electives without exceeding the minimum requirements for an undergraduate degree. The Departmental program for the focused option consists of the following required subjects and restricted electives. The full requirements for the degree, including the General Institute Requirements, may be found in the MIT Bulletin.

Required Subjects

8.03 Physics III (vibrations and waves)

18.03 or 18.034 Differential Equations

8.033 Relativity

8.04 Quantum Mechanics I

8.044 Statistical Physics I

8.05 Quantum Mechanics II

8.06* CI-M Quantum Mechanics III

8.13* CI-M Experimental Physics I

8.14 Experimental Physics II

8.ThU Thesis (12 units)

Course VIII Flexible Option

This option is designed for students who wish to develop a strong background in the fundamentals of physics and then build on this foundation as they prepare for career paths that may not involve a graduate degree in physics. In the past many students have found an understanding of the basic concepts of physics and an appreciation of the physicist's approach to problem solving an excellent preparation for careers in business, law, medicine or engineering. This option should be even more attractive today in light of the growing spectrum of non-traditional, technology-related career opportunities.

The freedom of choice associated with the flexible option does not preclude the possibility of going on to graduate school in physics. The number of physics subjects in this program is still comparable to that required of physics majors at many of our peer universities.

The Departmental program for the flexible option consists of the following required subjects and restricted electives. The full requirements for the degree, including the General Institute Requirements, may be found in the MIT Bulletin.

Required Subjects

8.03 Physics III (vibrations and waves)

18.03 or 18.034 Differential Equations

8.04 Quantum Mechanics I

8.044 Statistical Physics I

and one of the following subjects:

8.05 Quantum Mechanics II, or

8.20 Introduction to Special Relativity, or

8.033 Relativity

and one of the following experimental experiences:

8.13 CI-M* Experimental Physics I

or a laboratory subject of similar intensity in another dept.

or an experimental research project or senior thesis

or an experimentally oriented summer externship

[agere_contra]

Still, I am surprised that physics majors are not required to have a course in relativity.

I'm not remotely suprised that Physics UGs, Graduates, etc don't need a course in General Relativity. Despite the article, it is a niche subject. Special Relativity is another matter - it's a simple enough course and forms part of what every physicist ought to know.

[x_plus_one]

Get a tool to measure the RF energy in the air and you will have a starting point for realistic problem solving.

http://www.blockemf.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=758&products_id=4970

[Oberon]

...general relativity has been known to be the correct theory of gravity for almost a century.

LOL. Before that (though not immediately before), Newton's principles of celestial mechanics were "known" to be the correct theory of gravity.

General relativity is our best theory, and a good one it is, but we don't know we won't stumble across a better one tomorrow.

[-YYZ-]

This is what I was thinking. A standard 3 or 4 year undergraduate degree is probably just enough to get a real good handle on classical physics, including the classical model of elctromagnetism. In fact, I’m wondering, who does take an undergraduate degree in physics, and for what purpose? Short of the high energy and particle physics end of it, most of the practical aspects of physics are addressed by engineers, and for most of what they do relativistic and quantum effects just aren’t relavent.

[onedoug]

Send $2.00 and a boxtop for a PhD. in physics to....

[aruanan]

Well, Harvard Law school has stopped basing the freshman law courses on precidence, and instead are teaching the effects of foreign law on the US legal system. My husband (not a physicist) has been trying to work out a problem with radio waves that are producing a strong electrical current on ships' cranes. The FCC granted a radio license to operate a station, very close to the docks. The tankers were the first company to be effected, but it wasn't long before all the companies in the area were effected. It seems that no one at the FCC understands the physics of radiowaves and the effect that they can have on surrounding industry.

[-YYZ-]

“Unless you’re going to be a researcher there isn’t much need to know it. Even NASA uses the Newtonian equations.”

I do wonder, though, what one would be studying in post-graduate physics other than things at either the quantum or relativistic scales? Of course, I don’t really know what the active areas of research are in the physics faculties of the world. And there’s a lot of crossover between physics and chemistry in the quantum/particle physics area.