Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “Is It Possible For Students Who Can Solve Traditional Problems To Lack Conceptual Understanding? ” [Hake (2012)]. The abstract reads:
**********************************************
ABSTRACT: Math-Teach’s Robert Hansen, in his post “An Interesting Study” http://bit.ly/xRJ4Nw wrote (paraphrasing): “Thomas Judson’s study ‘High School Calculus in the United States and in Japan’ http://bit.ly/z13oSx shows what I’ve been asserting all along – Hake’s hypothesis that good students who can solve problems lack conceptual understanding is BS.”
That “good students who can solve problems lack conceptual understanding” is NOT the “Hake hypothesis” and is NOT “BS,” unless “BS” means something like “Basic Sense.” See, for example Kim & Pak’s “Students do not overcome conceptual difficulties after solving 1000 traditional problems” http://bit.ly/ApWSju.
**********************************************
To access the complete 10 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/xE2vbg.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/rrhake
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 06 March 2012.]
Hake, R.R. 2012. “Is It Possible For Students Who Can Solve Traditional Problems To Lack Conceptual Understanding?” on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/xE2vbg. Post of 5 Mar 2012 19:42:03-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Listserves Are a 21st Century Tool With Advantages Over ‘Web 2.0 Social Media’ #2
Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “Listserves Are a 21st Century Tool With Advantages Over ‘Web 2.0 Social Media’ #2” [Hake (2012)]. The abstract reads:
************************************************
ABSTRACT: In an article “Where Do Listservs. . . . [[sic – “listserv” is a trademark of L-soft , the generic term is “listserve”]]. . . . . Fit in a Social Media World? The networking tool of the 90s is starting to show its age,” law librarian Greg Lambert implied that listserves are a “20th Century Tool in the 21st Century” which clog up the email inbox.
But if Greg had subscribed to discussion lists running on LISTSERV software by L-Soft [see at http://www.lsoft.com/ and http://www.lsoft.com/catalist.html ] he could have subscribed in the NOMAIL mode, thus receiving NO MAIL from the list while being free to browse the archives and post at his leisure, thus saving time, hard drive space, and sanity.
More generally, that Web 2.0 social media tools are much more efficient than listserves is problematic at best - see, e.g., Gerald Grow’s (2009) list of 11 advantages of listserves at http://bit.ly/wBApNg (scroll down about half way). ************************************************
To access the complete 14 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/y2M2t3.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/rrhake
“It is not enough to observe, experiment, theorize, calculate and communicate; we must also argue, criticize, debate, expound, summarize, and otherwise transform the information that we have obtained individually into reliable, well established, public knowledge.”
John Ziman. 1969. “Information, Communication, Knowledge,” Nature 224:
318-324; abstract online at http://bit.ly/cNPB1d.
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 04 March 2012.]
Hake, R.R. 2012. “Listserves Are a 21Century Tool With Advantages Over ‘Web 2.0 Social Media’ #2,” on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/y2M2t3. Post of 4 Mar 2012 13:08:07-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
************************************************
ABSTRACT: In an article “Where Do Listservs. . . . [[sic – “listserv” is a trademark of L-soft , the generic term is “listserve”]]. . . . . Fit in a Social Media World? The networking tool of the 90s is starting to show its age,” law librarian Greg Lambert implied that listserves are a “20th Century Tool in the 21st Century” which clog up the email inbox.
But if Greg had subscribed to discussion lists running on LISTSERV software by L-Soft [see at http://www.lsoft.com/ and http://www.lsoft.com/catalist.html ] he could have subscribed in the NOMAIL mode, thus receiving NO MAIL from the list while being free to browse the archives and post at his leisure, thus saving time, hard drive space, and sanity.
More generally, that Web 2.0 social media tools are much more efficient than listserves is problematic at best - see, e.g., Gerald Grow’s (2009) list of 11 advantages of listserves at http://bit.ly/wBApNg (scroll down about half way). ************************************************
To access the complete 14 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/y2M2t3.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/rrhake
“It is not enough to observe, experiment, theorize, calculate and communicate; we must also argue, criticize, debate, expound, summarize, and otherwise transform the information that we have obtained individually into reliable, well established, public knowledge.”
John Ziman. 1969. “Information, Communication, Knowledge,” Nature 224:
318-324; abstract online at http://bit.ly/cNPB1d.
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 04 March 2012.]
Hake, R.R. 2012. “Listserves Are a 21Century Tool With Advantages Over ‘Web 2.0 Social Media’ #2,” on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/y2M2t3. Post of 4 Mar 2012 13:08:07-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
Friday, February 24, 2012
Flipping the Classroom vs Traditional Lecture
Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “Flipping the Classroom vs Traditional Lecture” [Hake (2012)]. The abstract reads:
****************************************************
ABSTRACT: Dan Berrett (2012a) in a recent Chronicle of Higher Education reported on “How ‘Flipping’the Classroom Can Improve the Traditional Lecture.”According to Berrett “Flipping describes the inversion of expectations in the traditional college lecture. It takes many forms, including ‘interactive engagement,’ ‘just-in-time teaching,’ and ‘peer instruction’,” all originating in physics education.
However, the chief criticism of Melissa Franklin, chair of Harvard’s physics department, is based on the intensity of students’ responses - the average score on a student evaluation of a flipped course is about half what the same professor gets when using the traditional lecture, she says “When the students are feeling really bad about required courses, it doesn't seem like a good thing.”
Quoting Berrett: “Liking the class is ultimately beside the point, Mr. Mazur says. He says his results from using Peer Instruction show that, on the Force Concept Inventory, non-majors who take his class outperform physics majors who learn in traditional lectures. ‘You want students to like class, but that's not the goal of education,’ Mr. Mazur says. ‘I could give them foot massages and they'd like it.’ ”
In this post I give a highly condensed version of Berrett’s report, into which I have inserted some hot-linked academic references.
****************************************************
To access the complete 29 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/wYdWIl.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/rrhake
“I point to the following unwelcome truth: much as we might dislike the implications, research is showing that didactic exposition of abstract ideas and lines of reasoning (however engaging and lucid we might try to make them) to passive listeners yields pathetically thin results in learning and understanding - except in the very small percentage of students who are specially gifted in the field.”
Arnold Arons in Teaching Introductory Physics (p. vii, 1997)
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 25 Feb 2012.]
Arons, A.B. 1997. Teaching Introductory Physics. Wiley. Amazon.com information at http://amzn.to/bBPfop. Note the searchable “Look Inside” feature.
Hake, R.R. 2012. “Flipping the Classroom vs Traditional Lecture,” online at http://bit.ly/wYdWIl. Post of 24 Feb 2012 19:51:14-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
****************************************************
ABSTRACT: Dan Berrett (2012a) in a recent Chronicle of Higher Education reported on “How ‘Flipping’the Classroom Can Improve the Traditional Lecture.”According to Berrett “Flipping describes the inversion of expectations in the traditional college lecture. It takes many forms, including ‘interactive engagement,’ ‘just-in-time teaching,’ and ‘peer instruction’,” all originating in physics education.
However, the chief criticism of Melissa Franklin, chair of Harvard’s physics department, is based on the intensity of students’ responses - the average score on a student evaluation of a flipped course is about half what the same professor gets when using the traditional lecture, she says “When the students are feeling really bad about required courses, it doesn't seem like a good thing.”
Quoting Berrett: “Liking the class is ultimately beside the point, Mr. Mazur says. He says his results from using Peer Instruction show that, on the Force Concept Inventory, non-majors who take his class outperform physics majors who learn in traditional lectures. ‘You want students to like class, but that's not the goal of education,’ Mr. Mazur says. ‘I could give them foot massages and they'd like it.’ ”
In this post I give a highly condensed version of Berrett’s report, into which I have inserted some hot-linked academic references.
****************************************************
To access the complete 29 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/wYdWIl.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/rrhake
“I point to the following unwelcome truth: much as we might dislike the implications, research is showing that didactic exposition of abstract ideas and lines of reasoning (however engaging and lucid we might try to make them) to passive listeners yields pathetically thin results in learning and understanding - except in the very small percentage of students who are specially gifted in the field.”
Arnold Arons in Teaching Introductory Physics (p. vii, 1997)
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 25 Feb 2012.]
Arons, A.B. 1997. Teaching Introductory Physics. Wiley. Amazon.com information at http://amzn.to/bBPfop. Note the searchable “Look Inside” feature.
Hake, R.R. 2012. “Flipping the Classroom vs Traditional Lecture,” online at http://bit.ly/wYdWIl. Post of 24 Feb 2012 19:51:14-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
The Modern Rift Between Physics and Philosophy #3
Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “The Modern Rift Between Physics and Philosophy #3” [Hake (2012b)]. The abstract reads:
*************************************************
ABSTRACT: My post “Physicist Steven Weinberg's Essay ‘AGAINST PHILOSOPHY’ ” [Hake (2012a)] initiated a thread on the HOPOS-L archives at which had grown to 10 posts on 22 Feb 2012 16:19-0800. I give excepts from the posts of philosophers Kristian Camilleri and Val Dusek, both pointing out the modern rift between physics and philosophy.
*************************************************
To access the complete 12 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/AxsEa2.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/rrhake
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 22 Feb 2012.]
Hake, R.R. 2012a. “Physicist Steven Weinberg's Essay ‘AGAINST PHILOSOPHY’ (was ‘References for Hermeneutics of Physics’), ” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/xupPFH. Post of 20 Feb 2012 16:48:24-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
Hake, R.R. 2012b. "The Modern Rift Between Physics and Philosophy 3," online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/AxsEa2. Post of 23 Feb 2012 09:02:38 -0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
*************************************************
ABSTRACT: My post “Physicist Steven Weinberg's Essay ‘AGAINST PHILOSOPHY’ ” [Hake (2012a)] initiated a thread on the HOPOS-L archives at
*************************************************
To access the complete 12 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/AxsEa2.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/rrhake
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 22 Feb 2012.]
Hake, R.R. 2012a. “Physicist Steven Weinberg's Essay ‘AGAINST PHILOSOPHY’ (was ‘References for Hermeneutics of Physics’), ” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/xupPFH. Post of 20 Feb 2012 16:48:24-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
Hake, R.R. 2012b. "The Modern Rift Between Physics and Philosophy 3," online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/AxsEa2. Post of 23 Feb 2012 09:02:38 -0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
Monday, February 20, 2012
Physicist Steven Weinberg’s Essay “AGAINST PHILOSOPHY” (was “References for Hermeneutics of Physics”)
Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “Physicist Steven Weinberg’s Essay ‘AGAINST PHILOSOPHY’ (was ‘References for Hermeneutics of Physics’) ” [Hake (2012)]. The abstract reads:
************************************************
ABSTRACT: Faye Pasamonte of the PhysLrnR list requested references on the “hermeneutics of physics.” [An online dictionary tells me that hermeneutics is “the branch of knowledge that deals with interpretation, esp. of the Bible or literary texts.”] My relay of her request - along with a dismissal of hermeneutics by philosopher Denis Phillips - to the HOPOS-L list (History of Philosophy of Science) initiated a 20-post thread replete with references and a mix of opinions on the value of hermeneutics. Philosopher George Gale, a hermeneutics skeptic, wrote (paraphrasing) “Steven Weinberg in Chapter 7 ‘AGAINST PHILOSOPHY’ of his book Dreams of a Final Theory holds his own pretty damn well against the despised philosophers.”
Weinberg wrote: “. . . we should not expect it [philosophy] to provide today’s scientists with any useful guidance about how to go about their work or about what they are likely to find. . . . After surveying three decades of professional writings in the philosophy of science, the philosopher George Gale. . . . .[[in Science and the Philosophers (Gale, 1984)]]. . . . . concludes that ‘these almost arcane discussions, verging on the scholastic, could have interested only the smallest number of practicing scientists.’. . . . . . . . .[[my italics]]. . . . Wittgenstein (1980) wrote that ‘nothing seems to me less likely than that a scientist or mathematician who reads me should be seriously influenced in the way he works.’ ”
************************************************
To access the complete 15 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/xupPFH.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/rrhake
REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 20 Feb 2012.]
Hake, R.R. 2012. “Physicist Steven Weinberg’s Essay ‘AGAINST PHILOSOPHY’ (was ‘References for Hermeneutics of Physics’), ” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/xupPFH. Post of 20 Feb 2012 16:48:24-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
L
************************************************
ABSTRACT: Faye Pasamonte of the PhysLrnR list requested references on the “hermeneutics of physics.” [An online dictionary tells me that hermeneutics is “the branch of knowledge that deals with interpretation, esp. of the Bible or literary texts.”] My relay of her request - along with a dismissal of hermeneutics by philosopher Denis Phillips - to the HOPOS-L list (History of Philosophy of Science) initiated a 20-post thread replete with references and a mix of opinions on the value of hermeneutics. Philosopher George Gale, a hermeneutics skeptic, wrote (paraphrasing) “Steven Weinberg in Chapter 7 ‘AGAINST PHILOSOPHY’ of his book Dreams of a Final Theory holds his own pretty damn well against the despised philosophers.”
Weinberg wrote: “. . . we should not expect it [philosophy] to provide today’s scientists with any useful guidance about how to go about their work or about what they are likely to find. . . . After surveying three decades of professional writings in the philosophy of science, the philosopher George Gale. . . . .[[in Science and the Philosophers (Gale, 1984)]]. . . . . concludes that ‘these almost arcane discussions, verging on the scholastic, could have interested only the smallest number of practicing scientists.’. . . . . . . . .[[my italics]]. . . . Wittgenstein (1980) wrote that ‘nothing seems to me less likely than that a scientist or mathematician who reads me should be seriously influenced in the way he works.’ ”
************************************************
To access the complete 15 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/xupPFH.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/rrhake
REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 20 Feb 2012.]
Hake, R.R. 2012. “Physicist Steven Weinberg’s Essay ‘AGAINST PHILOSOPHY’ (was ‘References for Hermeneutics of Physics’), ” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/xupPFH. Post of 20 Feb 2012 16:48:24-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
L
Friday, February 17, 2012
Why Wikipedia is a Relatively Reliable Source (was Why Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source)
Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “Why Wikipedia is a Relatively Reliable Source (was Why Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source)” [Hake (2012)]. The abstract reads:
******************************************
ABSTRACT: Lloyd Carroll of the Chemed-L list, in a post “Useful for students to read - Why Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source,” wrote (paraphrasing): “I plan to require that my students read Messer-Kruse’s (2012) “The ‘Undue Weight’of Truth on Wikipedia,” wherein he shows that new discoveries may be slow in coming to Wikipedia, especially if they are controversial.”
But the same can be said of Encyclopedia Britannica and is not necessarily a reason for non-citing of either encyclopedia. "In Defense of Wikipedia" [Hake (2009)] I wrote: "Those who dismiss Wikipedia entries as a mere 'opinion pieces,' may not be aware that a study by Nature [Giles (2005)] indicated that Wikipedia comes close to Britannica in terms of the accuracy of its science entries. . . . . . Nature's claim of comparable accuracy of scientific entries in Britannica and Wikipedia was disputed by Britannica (2006), but Nature's initial formal response [Nature 2006a), an editorial Nature (2006b), and point-by-point rebuttal [Nature (2006c] suggest that Nature's claim was correct.
******************************************
To access the complete 7 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/zHmOEm.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/rrhake
REFERENCES [URL's shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 17 Feb 2012.]
Giles, J. 2005. “Special Report - Internet encyclopaedias go head to head - Wikipedia comes close to Britannica in terms of the accuracy of its science entries, a Nature investigation finds.” Nature 438: 900-901, 15 December; online as a 508 kB pdf at http://bit.ly/xERbDe.
Hake, R.R. 2012. Why Wikipedia is a Relatively Reliable Source (was Why Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source); online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/zHmOEm. Post of 17 Feb 2012 17:07:4-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
Messer-Kruse, T. 2012. "The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia" Chronicle of Higher Education, 12 Feb, online at http://bit.ly/zUka0c
******************************************
ABSTRACT: Lloyd Carroll of the Chemed-L list, in a post “Useful for students to read - Why Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source,” wrote (paraphrasing): “I plan to require that my students read Messer-Kruse’s (2012) “The ‘Undue Weight’of Truth on Wikipedia,” wherein he shows that new discoveries may be slow in coming to Wikipedia, especially if they are controversial.”
But the same can be said of Encyclopedia Britannica and is not necessarily a reason for non-citing of either encyclopedia. "In Defense of Wikipedia" [Hake (2009)] I wrote: "Those who dismiss Wikipedia entries as a mere 'opinion pieces,' may not be aware that a study by Nature [Giles (2005)] indicated that Wikipedia comes close to Britannica in terms of the accuracy of its science entries. . . . . . Nature's claim of comparable accuracy of scientific entries in Britannica and Wikipedia was disputed by Britannica (2006), but Nature's initial formal response [Nature 2006a), an editorial Nature (2006b), and point-by-point rebuttal [Nature (2006c] suggest that Nature's claim was correct.
******************************************
To access the complete 7 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/zHmOEm.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/rrhake
REFERENCES [URL's shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 17 Feb 2012.]
Giles, J. 2005. “Special Report - Internet encyclopaedias go head to head - Wikipedia comes close to Britannica in terms of the accuracy of its science entries, a Nature investigation finds.” Nature 438: 900-901, 15 December; online as a 508 kB pdf at http://bit.ly/xERbDe.
Hake, R.R. 2012. Why Wikipedia is a Relatively Reliable Source (was Why Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source); online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/zHmOEm. Post of 17 Feb 2012 17:07:4-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
Messer-Kruse, T. 2012. "The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia" Chronicle of Higher Education, 12 Feb, online at http://bit.ly/zUka0c
Friday, February 10, 2012
Could the U.S. Significantly Reduce Its Yearly Emission of CO2 By Covering Its Rooftops With Photovoltaic Solar Panels? #2
Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “Could the U.S. Significantly Reduce Its Yearly Emission of CO2 By Covering Its Rooftops With Photovoltaic Solar Panels? #2” [Hake (2012b)]. The abstract reads:
*************************************************
ABSTRACT: In a previous post “Concentration of Energy by Photovoltaic Solar Panels” [Hake (2012a) I posed the following “Fermi Problem”:
“What fraction ‘f’ of the yearly total U.S. fossil-fueled electrical energy (and thus fraction of yearly tons of CO2 emission from U.S. fossil-fueled electrical energy production) could be eliminated if all rooftops in the U.S. were covered by photovoltaic solar panels?”
In this post I estimate f = 1.1 - considerably larger than the estimate f = 0.08 of MathEdCC’s Guy Brandenburg. Perhaps others would like to consider this problem.
In Hake (2012a) I warned (paraphrasing): “Before recommending that all U.S. rooftops be covered with Photovoltaic Solar Panels one should consider the EMERGY associated with such a plan. Odum wrote: “EMERGY measures both the work of nature and that of humans in generating products and services. . . . The photovoltaic power grid at Austin, Tex., evaluated by King & Schmandt (1991), is taking more EMERGY out of society than it is generating.”
So is the motto of Solar Forward http://solarforward.com/: “SAVING THE PLANET, ONE SOLAR SYSTEM AT A TIME” a deception? I THINK NOT because the evaluation of King & Schmandt (1991), failed to consider the devastating decrease in EMERGY due to global warming if the world’s dependence on fossil fuels is not reduced.
*************************************************
To access the complete 18 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/zT7dKj.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi
http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com
http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 10 Feb 2012.]
Hake, R.R. 2012a. “Concentration of Energy by Photovoltaic Solar Panels” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/wdkAoL. Post of 6 Feb 2012 09:59:03-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post were transmitted to several discussion lists and are also on my blog “Hake'sEdStuff” at http://bit.ly/Aimt1K with a provision for comments.
Hake, R.R. 2012b. “Could the U.S. Significantly Reduce Its Yearly Emission of CO2 By Covering Its Rooftops With Photovoltaic Panels? #2” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/zX0oHw. Post of 10 Feb 2012 13:43:02-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
*************************************************
ABSTRACT: In a previous post “Concentration of Energy by Photovoltaic Solar Panels” [Hake (2012a) I posed the following “Fermi Problem”:
“What fraction ‘f’ of the yearly total U.S. fossil-fueled electrical energy (and thus fraction of yearly tons of CO2 emission from U.S. fossil-fueled electrical energy production) could be eliminated if all rooftops in the U.S. were covered by photovoltaic solar panels?”
In this post I estimate f = 1.1 - considerably larger than the estimate f = 0.08 of MathEdCC’s Guy Brandenburg. Perhaps others would like to consider this problem.
In Hake (2012a) I warned (paraphrasing): “Before recommending that all U.S. rooftops be covered with Photovoltaic Solar Panels one should consider the EMERGY associated with such a plan. Odum wrote: “EMERGY measures both the work of nature and that of humans in generating products and services. . . . The photovoltaic power grid at Austin, Tex., evaluated by King & Schmandt (1991), is taking more EMERGY out of society than it is generating.”
So is the motto of Solar Forward http://solarforward.com/: “SAVING THE PLANET, ONE SOLAR SYSTEM AT A TIME” a deception? I THINK NOT because the evaluation of King & Schmandt (1991), failed to consider the devastating decrease in EMERGY due to global warming if the world’s dependence on fossil fuels is not reduced.
*************************************************
To access the complete 18 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/zT7dKj.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi
http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com
http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 10 Feb 2012.]
Hake, R.R. 2012a. “Concentration of Energy by Photovoltaic Solar Panels” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/wdkAoL. Post of 6 Feb 2012 09:59:03-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post were transmitted to several discussion lists and are also on my blog “Hake'sEdStuff” at http://bit.ly/Aimt1K with a provision for comments.
Hake, R.R. 2012b. “Could the U.S. Significantly Reduce Its Yearly Emission of CO2 By Covering Its Rooftops With Photovoltaic Panels? #2” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/zX0oHw. Post of 10 Feb 2012 13:43:02-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
