On Jan 23, 6:23*pm, TonyS wrote:
On 24/01/2012 5:39 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:







spamtrap1888 wrote:

Let people get a good working understanding of things before you drown
them with abstractions. Thank goodness when I first became interested
in electronics, no one sat me down and emphasized the difference
between the abvolt and the statvolt.

I didn't say anything like that at all. *I said resistance is defined in
terms of voltage and current, not the other way around, and if you aren't
ready to define voltage then just don't do it.

You can omit lots of things without being compelled to teach something that
isn't so, but most "science" teachers think the resistor color code is the
root of everything.

And lots of abstrations are taught to 5-year-olds, like the concept of time.
You don't have to teach them SR. *You just teach them how things are
affected by time. *But you don't teach them that the clock makes time
happen, do you?

Kids are more capable of learning abstractions than adults. *Adults assume
incorrectly that kids need an explanation for abstractions, so they provide
one that is wrong and make learning harder rather than easier.

That's how it's explained:https://plus.google.com/photos/11044...bums/567266019...

Where are the coulombs and joules in that drawing?

The best way to explain three new concepts is not by adding two more
new concepts.

Drilling down to bedrock is not always the best way to learn
something. As a kid, the current convention always bothered me,
because I knew current was a flow of electrons, and electrons went the
other way. Did current reflect a hole-centric way of looking at
things?

But then I realized electrons were irrelevant to my study of current
flow. They're important to a deeper understanding of electronics, but
if you're not operating at that level they just get in the way.