There can be a bit of difficulty when people propose new theories without first having understood the old theories. Also there might be people who feel they can explain things despite lacking the basic skills required to explain anything to anyone.

Here we have a nicely written online physics textbook.
http://www.motionmountain.dse.nl/contents.html

The author has posted on this forum and seems 'willing and helpful'.

I suggest we have a class thread .. possibly one for each chapter.. where we can sort out things people don't understand in the 'book'.

Possibly a new 'department' would be nice .. but we can have a dry run to see how it goes if anyone is interested and/or willing to help .. basically by reading your selected chapter and being able to deal with anything that is not (or cannot) be understood. No new theories, no arguments (is that possible?) .. just mainstream school physics.

Any comments?

-C2.

Hi C2,
I really like the idea. I could sure use the brush up, and subsequent discussions.
Let me know if I can help in any way.
Thanks,
Ron

Great idea! But I think it will be hard for many of the people here NOW to be polite. Most of the nice people that actually KNOW what they are talking about have become frustrated with this place and left. High majority of "bullies" are here now.........

We would need help from admin to screen people for who they really are, then if they are 100 legit and suitable, they can have a gold star or something to identify them. There is a big difference between saying you have a PhD and having one........

Thanks Ron and THEY.

Perhaps I should make clear I see myself as 'pupil' .. ie forced to read and understand any chapter I subsequently (or previously) demonstrate little or no knowledge or understanding of. Also spam reporter.

When I tell anyone who knows me that I am trying to organise something their reaction is normally
"Oh dear..".

Anyone is welcome to adopt the idea as their own and/or change it in any way they please.

-C2.

Hi C2, THEY,
Sounds like were gonna wing this so I downloaded the book and I'll go through Ch. 1. (Projectile motion's always been a favorite of mine anyways.) Let y'all know if I find anything real interesting.
Take care,
Ron

Hi Confused2,

I would be happy to help out with this as a teacher. I am a full time professional physics tutor retained by the University of Washington to assist students who are in difficulties with their homework. I've been doing it for 18 years now, and I can pretty much cover ANY undergraduate physics, together with most undergraduate engineering courses (mechanical, electrical, chemical, civil) and undergraduate astronomy courses. At the graduate level, my training is in pure mathematics. Algebraic homology theory anyone?

Here is a link to our instructional center websits, so that you can see who I am in real life. I really don't know why I hang out at this site so much when it is just more of my day job. What can I say, I like doing it! BTW, please, do not abuse the email links on that webpage. If someone wants to ask a physics question, I'll be glad to answer it in the physorg forums, but not via the email address in the link, please.

--Stuart Anderson

Good idea!

We have experts and teachers because in reality they occupy a seat and position much higher than we do (if we're not one of them and/or students). They are in "the know" and we are not. So we have to refer to them for everything just why we have schooling and we only pass if we memorize and reproduce exactly what they have taught us to.
We have to at least know what they ALL say and teach worldwide before making own suggestions as fact. So there has to be a separation between whats accepted as fact and whats someones own idea of it.

Many people speak (here and elsewhere) as if they know, yet they don't. But because this is an open classroom where the student or unlearned as well as the ignorant has an equal say at just about anything sane or insane, they survive with equality which is too confusing for the truth in the matters.

I had a link to a PDF with most physics basics and they are well and easily laid out but after downloading it, I deleted the link in my notes

I've loaded one I was still in posession of, which deals with the importance of mass at a basic level and in particle physics. People, check it out its very good for basic physics help:

TITLE: The Importance of Mass and How We Describe it
BY: Philip Bechtle
INSTITUTION: SLAC
DATED: 06/25/2005
SIZE: approx.1MB and 27 pages

http://www.freefilehosting.org/public/1728...e%20physics.pdf

I hope it proves useful to someone

Hi All,
C2, That's a very interesting text that you've got me reading (Motion Mountain). It's not your standard 'These are the laws, these are the equations, try these exercises'. Right off the author gives food for thought about the nature of motion itself and asks you to keep it in the back of your mind while progressing. By quoting people like Parmenides and Zeno of Elea he describes the thought that by taking one instant of say acceleration, there is no difference between motion and rest, and the age old favorite 'to get from point a to point b you must first cut the distance in half and, by continuing this process, theoretically you can never reach point b. Thanks again for the link and I'll keep digging.
Mr_Homm, IonaK, and THEY, I really appreciate the 'open door policy' you've offered.
Take care all,
Ron

If I can help in any way to clarify the discussions, I am available.

Regards

Christoph Schiller


P.S. And of course I would introduce all clarifications that are necessary
into the next edition of motionmountain, which is in work at present.

Thanks for your generous offer, Mr. Schiller. I'm looking forward to hearing your opinions.
Take care,
Ron

Many many thanks to those who have responded. I just identified a possible need .. those who have responded so generously are a possible solution.

Possibly admin would allocate a new section

"First steps in physics" springs to mind (ties in with MotionMountain). Any other suggestions?

I have to say that whenever I dive into the MotionMountain book I am struck by the sheer elegance of it. Whatever approach (or book) I'm sure we all agree that some things aren't going to be easy .. physics isn't like history where you just have to remember the names and dates (hopefully no historians will object).

As I write I'm looking at the introduction of the Lagrangian in chapter 3 .. many times I have wanted to make a point and the Lagrangian pops up .. and I have to let it go. This is despite being familiar with the notation.

That aside..

I may as well offer my whole 'vision' for criticism.

Chapter by chapter threads for discussion with 'students' .. from this emerges a FAQ thread which maybe feeds back into the book at a later stage.

A 'tutor only' thread for discussion (or simply notes) of points arising. Possibly chapter by chapter because I suspect the same level of scholarship (specialization) isn't required for all chapters.

A thread for worked examples (and possibly 'exercises for the student'). Hopefully this will be fun for everyone but I must admit I've always found putting numbers into things helps me a lot even though it's painful at the time.

A thread for Disgruntled to raise objections to anything and everything.

Suggestions/criticism/help always most welcome.

My part in this is very small.

Thanks (again) to you all.

Confused2.

Yes C2 thats similar to what I think would be best.
I reckon they should have a section above the "Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and New Theories" section on the main page so all younger or less familiar and even stuck visitors/members can look into that before moving downwards. And the news can stay in the top sections.
It can be named "Introduction to all the basics of physics" or something along them lines and it would be clear and easily identifiable by anyone visiting the forum.

In one pinned thread of the this section you can have "Comments/Suggestions" and "Queries/Problems" in another. Maybe even "Differences/Resolutions" between members and their theories or beliefs as a pinned thread and another with "Useful Resources/Links".
Then you can have pinned threads under each one of these for each subtopic like RC has. I believe this will be a massive additional load in all spheres on the mods/admin though so its maybe not feasible although it'll be greatly appreciated. But thats IF they want the site to expand.

I support of the current setup, its well known that all of the information required is available online anyway, so it maybe better in most ways to just provide a links section and anyone who wants to learn can do by visiting those sites.

I don't think chat is a good idea though. The internet is too messy for it and although its good for some its not good for all which should is taken into consideration for site owners. Still, I'd agree for a "open" chat like the forum panel where its instant reply mechanisms but where all can see what you write. That will act as a useful deterrent.

On a 2nd initiative: maybe they should allow chat, a private instant chat for the serious ones but by cost That will also act as a deterrent for nigglers and ensure only those actually requiring it undertake that option and get much resolved and talked about.

motionmountain that site is fabulous! Thanks and to C2 and all else with input as well.

Here's a few (possibly) useful sites:
Activities/Experiments for Science students of all ages
Basic Particle Physics
(parent site: http://particleadventure.org/particleadventure/)
Physics Education Website
Physics Classroom: tutorials, multimedia and help

Many Links to Physics Resources

Either way a section for the younger to 'learn' physics would definitely prove good all round IMHO. Colors, pictures and illustrations usually work wonders.

Thanks to all.

Hi Iona,

Many thanks for your comments ..

For discussion..

I should confess that the existence of Christoph Schiller's book and the willingness of Stuart Anderson (and others) to give up a great deal of time to answer questions, these things were fundamantal to turning a vague idea of self-help on the net into a 'possibility'.

The MotionMountain book has a 'wow' factor to it that links do not. Not only can you print it out but you can access fron anywhere .. instead of wandering about in links you start at page 1 and when you get to page 1,100 .. you know some stuff.. solid .. all the way through. One of the problems with books like this is that one (me at least) tends to give up because I'm (clearly) not an Einstein. Happily even Einstein had to explain to people that he wasn't an 'Einstein' either.

Thanks to Peter Schiller .. any problems can be fed back round and the book will get better.

With 15 threads per physorg page all 11 chapters + Tutor + Disgruntled will fit on one page. Given the likely number of people involved it could probably share with 'homework help' if a 'So you want to learn more' thread is pinned at the top.

Another 'point' I should admit is that I see this as a test bed for .. itself, since I don't think there is anything like it.

I'd be keen to see (say) a chapter 1->5 'tutor' and a chapter 6+ 'tutor' simply to reduce the burden on each .. if one wants or other wants a holiday it will be easier to find a temporary (or permanent) replacement if the work is split. All (?) that is required is thet thay know their subject well and are prepared to ask for help if they are unsure of anything.

In the context of 'education' I feel the object is not so much to attempt to impart the ultimate truth as to give the student the skills and the critical ability so they can be sent off to find it for themselves (hopefully they don't keep coming back to tell you about it - I'd make an exception for Feynman though). As far as I can tell, Peter Schiller's book is ideal for the purpose.



As an electrical engineer I can't judge the 'level' of the end of the book .. in UK terms I'd guess about first year physics undergraduate.. ? Is there any potential for harm in this? I see none myself.

For the site .. more traffic, more credibility, better discussions .. ? Hopefully admin will see it that way too.

Many thanks again,

Confused2.