Honestly, this article was a little difficult for me to fully understand. I think I got the major points out of it though by rereading some sections. I had no idea the pendulum was so important to time keeping and science. Previously, all I knew was that it was the big swinging thing in grandfather clocks. haha! I learned that it was inspired by Galileo and that it went from being accurate to plus or minus half an hour to just a second. I also did not know that the pendulum played such a major role in the work of Isaac Newton and the development of modern science.
Another thing I did not know was that having an accurate time measurement (the pendulum) had such a positive impact on navigation. The problem was with determining longitude. Before the pendulum was developed, ships were getting lost, crashing, and running out of food. It was quite a problem for societies, and scientists were searching for the solution. They had already figured out how to determine latitude. With a reliable clock being taken on journeys, longitude could finally be determined. In order to determine longitude, captains had to look at the clock when the sun was at its highest to find out how many degrees east or west they were. This discovery allowed for the world to be mapped and allowed for European exploitation, colonization, and commerce. I think this proves that science is influenced by social and economic problems, and can in turn influence societies and cultures. Other examples include scientists finding cures for diseases. A problem arises (an outbreak of disease) and scientists begin searching for a cure. If a cure is found then this will affect the society for the better.
Galileo's work with the pendulum faced criticism from Guidobaldo del Monte. Galileo claimed that no matter the size of the pendulum, the amount of time it takes to swing would be the same. Del Monte found this to be untrue with his experiments. Galileo was using math to prove his theory, while del Monte was using actual cylinders and balls to do his experiments. Del Monte argued that math only tells us about an "abstract unreal world" and that "physics (natural philosophy) has to tell us how the real world actually behaves. I can see both sides of the argument.For Galileo's case it is easy for me to believe that if the math is done correctly it should hold true. But only in situations were everything is exact and there is no type of interference. I think it is highly unlikely for things to be exact with no interference in real life all the time, but I do see the point. I also can agree with del Monte and his idea that things need to be examined in the real world as they actually happen. This seems like the natural way of thinking to me. I think Nancy Cartwright sums the issue up very well. She says, "My basic view is that fundamental equations do not govern objects in reality; they govern only objects in models." I would have to say that I completely agree with her statement. I think there are benefits to both sides of the argument.
Galileo's use of math in science was the beginning of the Scientific Revolution. His work with the pendulum eventually lead to being able to keep time that was accurate to one second per day. This then lead to a rapid progression of Western Science. I think this article shows that there will be many differing views and opinions in science, but that it is OK. If everyone agreed on things in science, then there would not be much investigating. I think it is good for people to question other people's theories and work to find out the truth. To me that is one of the basics of science. Trying to find what is true, and experimenting until you find the answer.
Friday, September 16, 2011
Friday, September 9, 2011
Flashlight Observations
I wanted to experiment and see under what conditions I would see a beam of light. I decided to go outside at night in the dark with two different flahslights.
First, I turned on an off-brand flashlight. When I shone it on the ground it made a circle shaped like an egg. There was a spot that was brightest towards the bottom middle of the egg shape. The light got dimmer as it went out from that center bright spot until the ground was not illuminated. I think there was a brighter center because the light from bulb in the flashlight was shining directly on that spot. I think the light becoming dimmer and dimmer towards the outside is due to the mirrors in the flashlihght. I think the light from the bulb in the flashlight reflects off of the mirrors in the flashlight and onto the ground. Since it is reflected light, it is not as bright as that center light that is direct from the bulb. When I shone this light up into the sky, I did not see anything. I was shocked by this and a bit disappointed that I did not see a beam.
Next, I used a bigger Mag-Lite flashlight. When I shone it on the ground it made a similar egg shaped circle onto the ground. The egg shape was bigger and brighter. I think this is because it was a bigger flashlight with a stronger current/light. When I shone the flashlight up into the sky, I saw a beam! The beam was smaller than I thought it would be. Holding the flashlight (pointed upward to the sky) while looking up into the sky, the beam looked like a cylinder. I could see the beam for a little distance but couldn't see a bright circle in the sky, like I did when I shone the flashlight on the ground. I also saw a very small number of particles in the beam. I am not sure what the particles were. They might have been dust. When someone else held the flashlight and I looked from the side, I could not see the beam. But if I stood behind them and looked up into the sky, I could see the beam.
I am not sure as to why there was a beam outside with the Mag-Lite but not in the box experiment we did in class. I am positive that the reason there was not a beam with the off-brand flashlight is because it was not a strong enought light. A possible reason for the beam with the Mag-Lite could be that there was moisture in the air and the light reflected off of it. Another possibility could be that it is darker outside than it was in the box.
First, I turned on an off-brand flashlight. When I shone it on the ground it made a circle shaped like an egg. There was a spot that was brightest towards the bottom middle of the egg shape. The light got dimmer as it went out from that center bright spot until the ground was not illuminated. I think there was a brighter center because the light from bulb in the flashlight was shining directly on that spot. I think the light becoming dimmer and dimmer towards the outside is due to the mirrors in the flashlihght. I think the light from the bulb in the flashlight reflects off of the mirrors in the flashlight and onto the ground. Since it is reflected light, it is not as bright as that center light that is direct from the bulb. When I shone this light up into the sky, I did not see anything. I was shocked by this and a bit disappointed that I did not see a beam.
Next, I used a bigger Mag-Lite flashlight. When I shone it on the ground it made a similar egg shaped circle onto the ground. The egg shape was bigger and brighter. I think this is because it was a bigger flashlight with a stronger current/light. When I shone the flashlight up into the sky, I saw a beam! The beam was smaller than I thought it would be. Holding the flashlight (pointed upward to the sky) while looking up into the sky, the beam looked like a cylinder. I could see the beam for a little distance but couldn't see a bright circle in the sky, like I did when I shone the flashlight on the ground. I also saw a very small number of particles in the beam. I am not sure what the particles were. They might have been dust. When someone else held the flashlight and I looked from the side, I could not see the beam. But if I stood behind them and looked up into the sky, I could see the beam.
I am not sure as to why there was a beam outside with the Mag-Lite but not in the box experiment we did in class. I am positive that the reason there was not a beam with the off-brand flashlight is because it was not a strong enought light. A possible reason for the beam with the Mag-Lite could be that there was moisture in the air and the light reflected off of it. Another possibility could be that it is darker outside than it was in the box.
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
"The Virtues of Not Knowing" by Eleanor Duckworth
This article is about the difference in already knowing the answer and having to think through and figure out the answer. The writer, Eleanor Duckworth, states that knowing the answer is a passive virtue because it "requires no decisions, carries no risks, and makes no demands." I agree with this statement. When a student does not know the answer they must actively think and reason within themselves and with others to come to a conclusion. Duckworth believes that the virtues involved in not knowing are more important than the ones involved in already knowing the answer. A quote from the article really stands out to me, "What you do about what you don't know is, in the final analysis, what determines what you will ultimately know." I completely agree with this. I think it is more important to know how to find the answer, rather than just knowing the answer. It reminded me of the phrase "give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."
Duckworth proposes that classrooms should help children develop these virtues by allowing for children to "explore their ideas and to try to make more sense of them." The problem is that teachers rarely do this mostly due to pressures of standardized tests. The tests are only concerned with students knowing the right answers, not how they got to the right answer. Since teachers are judged based on student test scores, they also stress students knowing the right answer. I think there are many other problems brought about due to standardized testing, but am not sure how they all can be solved.
Duckworth gives two examples of students using virtues of not knowing. In one of the examples there is a particular student, Alec, who seems to always know the answer and is one of the first to state it. The other students tended to always agree with Alec. In this case, however, Alec was wrong. Students slowly started to state opinions other than Alec's. Duckworth noted that it takes courage to do this and make your ideas open for scrutiny of others. I think that many classrooms have a situation similar to this, where there are one or two people who students view as the smart one. Sometimes students may sit back and let them do all the answering. I think it is important for teachers to realize this and call on all students to answer questions and allow them enough time to think and come up with an answers. It is also important for teachers to create a safe environment where students feel comfortable to share their own ideas and thoughts.
Duckworth proposes that classrooms should help children develop these virtues by allowing for children to "explore their ideas and to try to make more sense of them." The problem is that teachers rarely do this mostly due to pressures of standardized tests. The tests are only concerned with students knowing the right answers, not how they got to the right answer. Since teachers are judged based on student test scores, they also stress students knowing the right answer. I think there are many other problems brought about due to standardized testing, but am not sure how they all can be solved.
Duckworth gives two examples of students using virtues of not knowing. In one of the examples there is a particular student, Alec, who seems to always know the answer and is one of the first to state it. The other students tended to always agree with Alec. In this case, however, Alec was wrong. Students slowly started to state opinions other than Alec's. Duckworth noted that it takes courage to do this and make your ideas open for scrutiny of others. I think that many classrooms have a situation similar to this, where there are one or two people who students view as the smart one. Sometimes students may sit back and let them do all the answering. I think it is important for teachers to realize this and call on all students to answer questions and allow them enough time to think and come up with an answers. It is also important for teachers to create a safe environment where students feel comfortable to share their own ideas and thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)