View source for Must physics basics come first?

From ShawnReevesWiki

← Must physics basics come first?

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:

---

You can view and copy the source of this page.

==Issues== ===Physical science, the union and division of chemistry and physics=== In a policy recommendation, the AAPT defended against the integration of physics and chemistry in a 2010 national standards document, arguing that "Since these disciplines have very different fundamental principles and discuss the principles using very different language; we believe that a more effective approach would be to explicitly define the core ideas for each discipline separately and then build bridges between the two content areas." http://www.aapt.org/Resources/policy/conceptualframeworks.cfm ===What are basics=== ===Are so-called basics prerequisites to learning?=== In William Thomson's introductory lectures, he stated before any considerable progress can be made in a philosophical study of nature a thorough knowledge of dynamical principles is absolutely necessary. See p.241 of Sylvanus P. Thompson's The Life of William Thomson v.1, 1910. [[Category:Teaching]]

Return to Must physics basics come first?.