Re: New jim beam claims

In article <rubrum-7200BE.23410120092007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Michael Press <rubrum@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <timmcn-AFE998.12055220092007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Tim McNamara <timmcn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <1190291557.769429.23980@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
peteymills@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Sep 19, 1:32 am, jobst.bra...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Don't reveal that you didn't take advantage of higher
education. What one should learn in those years is WHY rather
than how. Mechanics work on machines daily and know how to
make them work, but don't understand the science behind those
failures... as we see here often enough.

While working in Stuttgart, an NSU Wankel drove into our
research yard as we looked down from the design office. I said
at that time: "Mark my words, that engine will not survive on
the market." to the amazement of my colleagues, all engineers
of one ilk or another. I could say that because I had been
exposed to the theory of operation of internal combustion
engines, a dull subject to most auto aficionados but well worth
the time.

Unfortunately, today the rush to "get on with reality" has
shifted the emphasis to a trade school approach, spending much
time on current hardware.

It makes a difference. The theory offered in good engineering
schools is worth a lot and experience reinforces those
principals. I have come across many of these instances in my
work. For instance,the failures of the Shay steam locomotive
was never understood in more than 100 years of service, yet it
jumped out at me when reviewing derailment pictures and reading
about them, so I wrote about it:

http://www.spikesys.com/Trains/grd_loco.html

Jobst Brandt

This example doesn't seem to rely too much on theory and could
easily be diagnosed by someone with good practical knowledge and
no formal training. Intelligent people can pick up theory just
as they can pick up practical knowledge.

You're talking about people being able to apply inductive versus
deductive reasoning. Unfortunately we do not require taking a
class in logic in order to graduate from high school (IMHO the
single biggest improvement we could make to our educational system
is to teach logic). Unless the "intelligent person" has an
understanding of how different types of logic work, they have a
high risk of coming to an erroneous conclusion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deductive_reasoning

(interestingly enough, the latter article is not as well written).

In the case of engineering, knowing the principles can
significantly speed up analysis and can reduce the number of
trial-and-error iterations needed in product development.

I support teaching Euclidean plane geometry. One of the necessary
skills constructing mathematical proofs is suspicion of ones own
devices. We learn to doubt every step of our proposed proof. It is
humbling to see how puny one's own abilities are. Euclidean plane
geometry teaches how to construct a logical, articulated argument.
Once a student can find his own logical fallacies, finding them in
the arguments of others is free. The benefit of geometry over a logic
course is that geometry brings geometric figures into it and they are
worth studying in and of themselves.

While that is true, the difficulty is in making sure that the students
understand that this is logical analysis and not just math problems.
This is something my high school math teachers failed to do in my
algebra, geometry and advanced algebra/trigonometry classes. I got more
of the sense of the broader implications of those processes elsewhere.
I think that a class in formal logic would be (1) simpler and (2) more
likely to be generalized by the average student.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: New jim beam claims
    ... education. ... Unfortunately we do not require taking a class in logic in order to graduate from high school. ... In the case of engineering, knowing the principles can significantly speed up analysis and can reduce the number of trial-and-error iterations needed in product development. ... Euclidean plane geometry teaches how to construct a logical, ...
    (rec.bicycles.tech)
  • Re: New jim beam claims
    ... shifted the emphasis to a trade school approach, ... In the case of engineering, ... I support teaching Euclidean plane geometry. ... understand that this is logical analysis and not just math problems. ...
    (rec.bicycles.tech)
  • Re: Tutorage for lost boy - how?
    ... Hilbert's axioms of Euclidean geometry would be another matter but the ... trigonometric functions as ratios of edges of right-angled triangles ... what he wanted, and mentioned that it's quite simple to assemble hub, ... Same education. ...
    (comp.dsp)
  • Re: Error/Omission in high school geometry book?
    ... was tutoring geometry the other day and they had a tree diagram showing the hierarchy of quadrilaterals. ... It's not what I was learning in high school. ...  Is it used to fill up space that previously was used proving theorems. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Is there really that big of a change in high school geometry teaching in the past 15 years?
    ... Euclidean geometry, let's call it "postulates and proofs". ... "How Prevalent is Students' Proving Theorems in Plane Geometry???" ... I have been largely out of touch with high school mathematics ... Plane Geometry courses that strongly emphasize students' proving ...
    (sci.math)