From: Wave-Structure-Matter@yahoogroups.com
   [mailto:Wave-Structure-Matter@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
   Kenneth Udut Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2008 1:25 PM To:
   Wave-Structure-Matter@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re:
   [Wave-Structure-Matter] Re: Dedicated WSM website Good example
   of explaining physics to non-physicists: Feynmann. If you* read
   his "Six Easy Pieces" (which you can read in a short afternoon
   -- and* for 1961 physics, not too bad), he uses analogy and
   descriptions and* illustrations to take the place of the
   mathematics. There's also a fantastic lecture he have in 1979 in
   New Zealand which is* available online where he tries his
   darn'dest to explain QED to regular* folks. (not even college
   students, per se - a lot of the audience* apparently were
   NEWSPAPER REPORTERS!) It was a series of four weekly* lectures
   and while he is explaining QED in terms of particles,*
   nevertheless, it shows how a very difficult to understand
   concept CAN be* explained, if given enough time and some good
   analogies plus a little* teaching of "shorthand" (and feynmann
   diagrams are pretty simple to grasp* once explained). As a
   physics enthusiast, I want to know how the world works, what
   lies* underneath it all, whether the descriptive text is words,
   equations or* algorythms, analogies, metaphors, pictures, movies
   or animations, musical* compositions, or even parables. ("Once
   there was a boy named Tyler. Tyler* was a ripple....") According
   to Gardener, there are at least 7 styles of learning. Visual,*
   Acoustic, Kinetic, Introspective, Interspective, and a couple
   more that I* can't remember right now. But the gist of it is: If
   you are teaching, you* have to use a variety of teaching methods
   in order to get your points* across. (or should I say, "get your
   standing waves across?" Not "points"!) The process of developing
   a learning program can go in many directions at* once. For
   example: Someone who is familiar with explaining things to*
   physicists, in terms that physicists should understand, should
   begin by* explaining things to physicists in terms that
   physicists should understand. Another who is good at taking
   complex concepts and explaining them in* analogies or in word
   pictures, should do so, perhaps taking what was* intended for
   the physicist audience and writing word pictures, stories,*
   analogies, metaphors, parables. Another who is good at computer
   animations could take the equations and* render them
   graphically, but can also animate the stories being used for*
   explanations, assisting both efforts at once. The direction can
   go from simple --> complex AND from complex ---> simple* AT THE
   SAME TIME. For example, when I think of WSM, I think of ripples
   in a pond. It* doesn't matter whether it was rocks thrown in the
   pond that caused the* ripples, or whether there is 'something'
   unseeable in the pond which is* causing particular ripples at a
   particular spot. Either way, there are* ripples. In this pond,
   there are multitudes of ripples of different sizes and*
   frequencies. Each of the ripples interact slightly with the
   others but in general, most* ripples seem to do their ripplings
   almost independently of each other,* only really touching on the
   fringes. But, at the fringes of the waves, where waves are
   touching, they reinforce* each other, interacting in such a way
   that waves are not only traveling* out from the center of the
   ripple, but also travelling from the fringe of* the ripple back
   inwards towards the center of the ripple (making it a* standing
   wave). But there are more than just ripples on the surface of
   the pond that you* can see! There are much larger ripples that
   are barely noticable. These ripples* that come from deep within
   the pond itself cause the little ripples on the* surface to move
   with the big ripple, almost unnoticable -- yet it affects* all
   other ripples on top. Yet this pond does not exist in isolation
   of the rest of all things. The* pond ITSELF is moving at a rate
   of speed, so much so that all of the* ripples in the pond are
   affected not just by the undulations from deep* within the pond,
   or from their own ripplings, or each others ripplings,* but also
   from ripples created from the velocity of motion of the entire*
   pond! These particular ripples are akin to the sound waves heard
   when a* train is coming towards you (higher pitch) and then
   passes you (much lower* pitch) - the doppler effect. And THIS
   pond that is moving at a rate of speed is also interacting with*
   OTHER ponds that are moving right along side it, in front of it,
   on top of* it, at the bottom of it, all acting somewhat
   independently of each other,* yet still somewhat influencing
   each other. I suppose you could call them.... ahem (::; clearing
   throat :::) ....* "Space Ponds". It's a horrible analogy
   perhaps, but it's the closest word picture I can* paint off the
   top of my head to describe how I mentally envision WSM at* this
   point in time. (rather, "at this standing wave in time")