Mobile science lesson

[Benonymous]

I took a couple of friends for a spin in the Prius on the weekend and one of them paid the car a big compliment. He said "this thing's like a mobile science lesson!" I was suitably pleased

[Godiva]

Yeah, I think we should teach physics first, before biology and chemistry. And it should be taught a lot earlier in school. Of the three, I think physics is easiest.

[dreichla]

I've heard the Prius called a "gadget car". To be sure, that's one of the reasons I love driving my car.

I'll bet if more "traditional" cars had the MFD with the mpg readouts, the overall fuel consumption would go down drastically as people became obsessed with fine tuning their driving techniques in an effort to become as efficient as possible.

[Betelgeuse]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 15 2006, 09:21 PM) [snapback]303839[/snapback]</div>

Yeah, I think we should teach physics first, before biology and chemistry. And it should be taught a lot earlier in school. Of the three, I think physics is easiest.
[/b]

Moreover, Physics is the most "basic" of the sciences. All Chemistry is Physics and all Biology is Chemistry. In high school, I was taught the subjects in the exact opposite order (i.e. Biology, Chemistry, then Physics). The one argument that I've heard that makes some sense is that Physics involves more math than the other two (at least at the level that they're taught in high school), so it's reasonable to wait until the students have had more math.

[Skwyre7]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Betelgeuse @ Aug 16 2006, 08:50 AM) [snapback]304003[/snapback]</div>

Moreover, Physics is the most "basic" of the sciences. . In high school, I was taught the subjects in the exact opposite order (i.e. Biology, Chemistry, then Physics). The one argument that I've heard that makes some sense is that Physics involves more math than the other two (at least at the level that they're taught in high school), so it's reasonable to wait until the students have had more math.
[/b]

I don't necessarily agree that Physics should be taught first. I don't think it matters which order the sciences are taught, so long as they are taught.

At the high school level the basic ideas/principles are taught. It is in the details supporting those ideas/principles where cross-overs to the other subjects are (i.e., all Chemistry is Physics and all Biology is Chemistry). Now if we would teach the sciences earlier in our education systems, we could go more in depth in high school science classes. Then students would be more prepared for college science courses. And my rant about how our education systems are deficient begins... I'll stop though.



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Benonymous @ Aug 15 2006, 08:38 PM) [snapback]303821[/snapback]</div>

I took a couple of friends for a spin in the Prius on the weekend and one of them paid the car a big compliment. He said "this thing's like a mobile science lesson!" I was suitably pleased
[/b]

Yes, it certainly is.

[tacomel]

As someone who majored in chemistry and then went on to graduate school in physical chemistry, I'll somewhat agree with this.

For me, high school level physics was mainly things like falling objects, springs, electrical fields, magnetism, relativity, and torque. Chemistry was atoms, bonds, reactions, acids and bases, and so on. There was little overlap between the two at this level. Biology at the high school level was mainly an exercise in memorization, with little understanding taught.

It was only in the upper-level college chemistry and physics courses (300 level and higher) that the two seemed to interrelate. For example, thermodynamics, computational chemistry, and quantum mechanics. Of course, at this level, a significant background in mathematics was also required. I took no biology classes in college so I cannot comment as to the interrelation between the fields, although by the time I got to graduate school, even the hardcore physical chemistry groups were beginning to explore biological systems.

[David Beale]

Whenever I have been able, I have installed devices somewhat similar to the MFD in my cars.

First was a "Driving Computer". It had inside and outside temp. sensors, system voltage readout, a fuel use sensor (either injector pulses or inline fuel flow sensor) and driveshaft magnetic sensor. It also had a vacuum solonoid for throttle control (cruise control). You could tell it - cruise set - 100 set, and the car would accellerate to 100 km/hr in cruise. Way cool for the day. It could display fuel economy, distance to empty, etc. Used it in a Subaru and a Toyota 4Runner.

Last week I got my "Scangauge II", and it's way easier. It just plugs into the OBDII port. Now I'm beginning to understand why my SUV (Pathfinder) drinks gas! It never shuts off the injectors, and my guess is it's to reduce emissions. Turns out if I gear down, I actually use more fuel than if I just use the brakes when coming to a stop.

I'm ready for my Prius, once my car sells and I get the thing. Till then I will continue to subsidize the poor oil companies.

[jburns]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 15 2006, 09:21 PM) [snapback]303839[/snapback]</div>

Yeah, I think we should teach physics first, before biology and chemistry. And it should be taught a lot earlier in school. Of the three, I think physics is easiest.
[/b]

All US high schools follow the Biology, Chemistry, Physics order. Wait til you hear why. In 1912 there was a meeting of educational leaders to set the standard course of study for US high schools. Everything went fine until they got to the sciences. There was much discussion over in what order the sciences should be taught, but they could not reach agreement. Finally, running out of time they settled on a time tested method.

Ready?

Alphabetical order! Since then it has become ingrained that you can't take physics before you take biology and chemistry. No practical reason for it.