Which groups is the law more fair to?
The clue:
"More
fair" suggests that "fairness" can be rank ordered.
Missed:
The essence of "fairness": freedom from favoritism; a symmetrical relationship
between parties; unbiased;…
And...
Symmetrical relationships between opposite sides creating a completeness
and wholeness is often missed. In, for example: Newton's third
law of motion; "All men are created equal"; Yin - Yang principle;…
If we don't recognize the contribution to a conflict that we
contribute, we easily end up with a complete wholeness that can get nasty:
this failure to see symmetry is one of the stupidities of war. RTN
We don't inhale carbon dioxide.
The clue:
The statement is absurd on its face. We inhale air. Air contains about
one percent carbon dioxide.
Missed:
A very simple multiple relationship: we
both inhale and exhale carbon dioxide. This was an especially
egregious appeal to "OFOT" (One False, One True statement).
And...
The speaker was trying to justify the U.S.
abrogation of the treaty to reduce greenhouse gases. (On PBS's "Talk of the Nation,"
April 4, 2001)
This error was only one of a steady stream of similarly defective arguments.
All-some confusions, inverted implications, and repeated use
of the "Prove Anything Ploy" along with the glittering generalities and name calling of
the Seven Tools of Propaganda.
That the speaker was in strong disagreement
with one of the strongest conclusions of the scientific community illustrates both the
logical basis of science and the "logic blindness" of those who fail to understand
the larger scientific community. This discussion provided a rich exercise
in analysis of propaganda and scientific illiteracy. Furthermore, the speaker
was not trying to dissemble. His argments were offered with a genuine belief
that he was making a good case for his viewpoint.
RTN
Lack of confidence not easily restored.
The clue:
What was said was not what was meant.
Missed:
A multiplicative negation, negation
of
negation.
And...
This is an interesting variant of a
common error.
Errors of negation are very common, ambiguities in statements of negation very commonly not seen. For example, consider the placement of the word "only." The work of Lawrence Kolberg suggests that ability to see abstract negation of negation can lead to seeing compassion as a logical imperative.“I could care less”
“He hasn’t got no food on his plate,”
“The ship will self-destruct in T minus five minutes,”
“The record low temperature is minus 25 degrees below zero.”
“Not over my dead body will they raise your taxes!”*
Six seconds of zero gravity, and then you descend.
The clue:
Gravity is always present. "Zero gravity"
is being confused with free fall. You "come down" after some
free fall has already occurred.
Missed:
The correct relationships between position,
velocity and acceleration. The nature of gravity.
And...
The advance of science during the past several
centuries got its start through understanding of these relationships.
They remain largely missed by a large fraction of even those who pass courses
in physics. RTN
"Motion implies a force."
The clue:
The statement contradicts Newton's first law
of motion.
Missed:
Newton's first law.
And...
Missing Newton's first implies missing most
of physics.
[This is a key to useful understanding of elementary physics: I'm working
on several alternative approaches. We'll try to make it like reading
a blueprint: using several different projections to reveal the subtlety.
Help would be appreciated. We will link here to work being done in
physics education research: there are several outstanding resources--certainly
Lillian McDermott's group at U.
of Wash, among others. "Motion implies a force" was the topic
of a paper (in Amer J Phys in the early 70's) by John Clement.]
RTN
Rocket scientists, no. Musicians, yes.
The clue:
What topics do "rocket scientists" study?
Many scientists are also musicians.
Missed:
The term "rocket scientist" seems to want
to associate the power and spectacular behavior of a rocket with some kind
of spectacular, but imaginary, kind of science. The true nature of
science and the fields of studies of actual science are apparently missed.
And...
The statement suggests stereotyping. Stereotyping
is a broad failure of identifying relevance and irrelevance among multiple,
interacting influences and characteristics.
RTN
Everyone knows rockets need something to push against.
The clue:
The notion that rockets need something to
push against is an old, common misconception; persistent, pervasive, pernicious,
pre-scientific, predictable, preposterous, ... It was corrected by
Newton, but the newspaper writer who made this statement apparently didn't
understand Newton.
Missed:
Newton's three laws of motion—therefore, most
of physical science.
And...
The most common example of Newton's law of
action and reaction is probably the rocket engine, perhaps exemplified
by releasing a toy balloon. That's an example fraught with peril,
and almost guaranteed to reinforce the misconception that the law is about
cause and effect. The "action" and "reaction" forces are obscure
here.
To see where they are, consider the rocket engine to be a simple hollow sphere, very, very strong because we want to start by exploding the fuel before we make a small hole in the sphere. The gasses are now very, very hot. The gas pressure inside is very, very high, and each little bit of area on the inside has a very, very great force pushing away from the center of the sphere.
The sphere goes nowhere because all the forces pushing outward add up to zero; the force on each little bit of area is exactly cancelled by the force on the corresponding bit of area on the opposite side.
Now, drill the hole. The material you removed no longer has a force acting on it, and the force on the bit of area opposite it is unopposed. The forces no longer add up to zero. It's the force on the inside of the rocket engine opposite the hole that accelerates the rocket forward.
The expanding gasses rushing out the hole don't "push" on the gasses outside. In fact, a rocket works best in a vacuum where the forward motion of the rocket isn't impeded by those outside gasses. The "action" force of interest in a rocket engine is essentially only that opposite the hole where the gasses are pushing on the wall (action force) and the wall pushes back (reaction force), plus the fact that there is no similar pair of forces at the hole.
It would be hard to come up with a more misleading illustration of Newton's
third law
RTN
The clue:
Two identical photos give an illusion
of depth..
Missed:
Stereoscopic depth results from the fact
that the two photos are not identical. Any "depth" seen when identical
photos are placed in a stereoscope is surely illusory; all in the imagination
of the viewer. The depth perceived with an actual stereoscopic pair
is no more illusory than the images—and the information conveyed through
those images—in any photograph. Photos, including stereoscopic pairs
of photos, reproduce rather faithfully the light patterns you would get
if you were actually at the scene. Furthermore, stereopsis
can be a powerful tool if you understand a little about it: see
the "stereoscopic model."
And...
These errors are surprisingly common, although
the "illusion" misunderstanding is much more common than the "identical
photo" misunderstanding. Those who believe all they need to do is
make a copy of a photo and place the original and copy in a stereoscope
seem always to "see depth" when they peer though their stereoscope.
(As I finish writing this—on April 24, 1999—the PBS TV program I
took the example from is still airing. Posting to the Web can be
fast!) RTN
The metal crystallized
The clue:
Virtually all solidified metals are crystalline.
Being crystalline is not a condition of weakness; it's generally a condition
of strength. The notion of "crystal" being weak and brittle comes
from glass being extremely brittle (but it's not particularly weak).
"Glass" and "crystal" are antonyms when considered scientifically.
The shiny, faceted part of the failed surface of metal is not the weak
part, its the strong part than held up to the very end. The bluish,
smooth part that looks like strong gun metal, is actually the failure:
it a fatigue crack.
Missed:
A lot of today's knowledge of
materials science.
And...
This common syndrome of errors and misunderstandings
unarguably identifies the "expert" as "pseudoexpert." It's surely
one of the most convoluted and tangled web of errors. RTN
The one hundredth centenary. . .
The clue:
That would be ten thousand years.
Missed:
Apparently, the meaning of centenary.
And...
Perhaps it was a typo...?
RTN
Spotted owl
The clue:
The gold eagle might be an endangered specie.
The spotted owl is an endangered species.
Missed:
The singular of "species" is "species."
And...
Latin plurals often are gotten wrong. How
much of this is a matter of learning and how much a matter of conceptual
understanding? I toss this one out because improper use of Latin
plurals is so persistent and prevalent it seems to be an edge-of-human-comprehension
phenomenon. But it’s different from the others in not appearing to be conceptual.
Any ideas? RTN
Exponential growth
The clue:
"Exponential" is used to mean "extremely large";
"exponential growth", to mean "extremely fast growth."
Missed:
The meaning of "exponential." Exponential
growth is growth which is proportional to the current size. It might
be extremely fast, and it might be extremely slow. When growth is
exponential (with time), size doubles in some definite period of time.
That doubling time might be seconds, it might be millions of years.
Growth can be exponential and still be so slow as to be imperceptible.
And...
Human population growth cannot remain exponential
(and increasing at an easily perceived rate), yet when everyone insists
on a personal population pressure equal to everyone else's, population
growth
is exponential. Current doubling time is, perhaps,
several tens of years. That makes each new century with a population
about 10 times the previous. Each millennium, about 10,000,000,000
times the previous. This does not mean that sometime in the
not terribly far future human bodies will solidly pack the surface of the
Earth and be streaming from that surface at the speed of light (the "Harrison
Brown date"). It means simply that something will put an end
to the exponential growth. A person who understands exponential growth
sees that we have a choice: let that population growth be a matter of human
decision, or let it be according to the "laws" of statistics and chaotic
instabilities. The mechanisms of evolution
will have their say, too. (Because "Nature is
full of traps...") RTN
The clue:
That use of "egregious" jars the senses.
Missed:
Perhaps the correct meaning of "egregious,"
because here the intended meaning seems to be "excessive."
And...
Some words lie in a no-man's-land of comprehension
of their meaning. These are between words virtually everyone really
understands, and words that are either rare and obscure or, like "parameter,"
"unique," and "exponential," refer to things that are themselves at the
edges of easy human comprehension. This particular use of an only
moderately well known word probably will remain a mystery: Did he
really
mean "egregious"? Scientific terms are especially subject to misunderstandings
and frequently get used so often in a some misunderstood way that the (mis-)usage
becomes standard usage. RTN
A Thousand Milligrams
The clue:
That's one gram!
Missed:
Ratio and proportionality
And...
This time it's not the speaker who doesn't
understand. Here, the speaker assumes the listener doesn't
understand. This is the world of advertising, the world of swifts
and gulls. How many on the receiving end of this communication
"see" the obvious? How many get taken by the "subtleties" of
the ad writer's pen? How many let the intended (but not the actual)
meaning subtly sink in and do its work? How many notice that
the strength of a medicine is lower, not higher, when a standard
dose is larger. In this battle of the big pharmaceutical companies,
a competitor counter punched by advertising its analgesic by pointing
out that their product is so powerful that only a little, tiny pill
will do the job of the huge "thousand milligrams" pill of its competitor.
RTN
Flow is the number of cubic feet per second.
The clue:
Or it might be the number of cubic meters
that flows past in one week. Or the acre-feet in one year.
Etc. The speaker implied that the "cubic feet per second" units is
a definition of flow.
Missed:
Possibly the abstraction, water flow
as a rate defined generally as a volume per unit of time.
And...
If the speaker really meant to define flow
in terms of a specific set of units, then this is another example of the
errors in "A vegetable is a potato" ("Energy is the capacity to do work").
A definition of "flow" should not be so specific as to be but one particular
set of units; flow need to be defined as something somewhat more abstract.
To those who can easily convert units from one to another, this will probably
seem a bit nitpicky. But if a person fails to abstract here, the
more specific picture of a concrete thing, like a cubic foot of water going
past in one second, might give a necessary feeling of reality, without
which "flow" is something "ivory-towered and out of touch with the real
world." Therefore, this example really is something at the edges
of easy human comprehension and is a good example for demonstrating differences
in the way different people "see" abstract reality. These points
might be further demonstrated by observing a group of people trying to
actually convert between different sets of flow units—say cubic feet per
second, and cubic meters per minute, and acre-feet per year, etc—and then
observe the discussion as those who can do the calculations explain to
those who cannot how to do it. RTN
Car in lightning
The clue:
The tires prevent grounding.
Furthermore, whether or not the car is grounded makes little difference.
Missed:
The reason for getting into a "Faraday cage"
when lightning is striking in the vicinity: current flows easily
through the conductor (making up the cage which surrounds us), and potential
differences don't much develop from point to point in that conductor.
Potentially dangerous voltages are shorted out. The
statement suggests that many features of electric currents were not understood:
grounding, circuits, short circuits, the relationship between voltage and
current, etc. The insulation provided by the rubber tires seems—
in some vague way informed by little or no understanding—to be confused
with a need for insulating our bodies from the lightning.
And...
Elementary electricity is widely not understood.
Arnold Arons of Univ. of Washington once presented each of a large group
of people, from a wide range of ages, with some pieces of wire, a light
bulb, and a dry cell (one of those big ones with screw terminals on the
top). Their task was to connect up the dry cell to the bulb with
the pieces of wire so that the bulb lights up. Very few could do
it. Many shorted out the dry cell. RTN
2000 square acres.
The clue:
How big is a "square acre"?
Missed:
An acre is a measure of area, and area is
measured in units of the square of distance. A "square acre" would
be measure in units of the fourth power of a distance.
And...
Understanding units of measure and the necessity
of consistency in the way units are expressed is a little concept that
can foster a lot of comprehension of science. This is comprehension
that is missed more than it is "seen." This quotation comes from
a national TV network weather forecast on October 4, 1999. That such
a widely recognized "authority" would make this error constitutes a serious
breach of the trust the public should be able to expect in a very important
source of knowledge. RTN
More heat than light.
The clue:
Heat and light are seen as mutually exclusive.
Missed:
The science meaning of "heat." The significance
of radiation being one of the three types of heat: radiation, convection,
and conduction. Light, the most common kind of radiation, is
(almost always) a form of heat, which is energy being transferred solely
because of a temperature difference.
And...
Although infrared is often recognized to be
heat, it's rather anthropocentric to believe that the low-wavelength cutoff
of our eye's sensitivity could make a difference in something as fundamental
as whether some energy is heat or not heat.
RTN
Positive Feedback
The clue:
"Positive feedback" is used to mean "positive
reinforcement" or "favorable response."
Missed:
The correct meaning of "feedback" (information
about deviation from some desired value–used to control a process) and
the meaning of "positive feedback" (response in the same direction
as the error). A thermostat sends information about room
temperature to the heating/cooling system. If the information turns
on the heater when the room is too hot, or turns on the cooler when the
room is too cold,
that is positive feedback.
We want the heater to come on when the room is too cold: that is
negative
feedback. Positive feedback creates instabilities, which can
be dangerously explosive. (However, positive feedback is occasionally
designed into oscillators where wild swinging back and forth is desired.)
And...
"Buying elections" is a positive feedback
system, a fact seldom recognized and even more seldom discussed.
In South Carolina, gambling casinos have been pouring money into campaigns
for candidates who favor laws that tend to boost casino profits.
Candidates who oppose the casinos have learned that they can be easily
outspent by their opponents, sufficiently that they lose elections.
Legislative opposition to casinos has dried up because opponents can't
get sufficient campaign funding. (Reported on Saturday Edition,
NPR, June 26, 1999.) Note that an essential element of this feedback
loop is effectiveness of campaign advertising. Ralph Nader has pointed
out that most people deny that effectiveness, and that an advertiser can
reinforce advertising's effectiveness by telling its target audience, "You
are too smart to be swayed by irrationality." [Gull
or swift?] This, too, is positive feedback?.
[Casinos rely on logic-blindness to statistical reasoning at the edge of
human comprehension.] RTN
Mine comets for rocket fuel.
The clue:
This comment appears to
lack understanding of the function of fuel. It was made by an entrepreneur
looking for ways to get rich, not so much by brilliant invention, but more
by imagining something (that sounds) wonderful. "If it seems too
good to be true, it probably is."
Missed:
Fuels provide necessary negative entropy
to help sweep away entropy buildups that always irreversibly occur.
(And this function is what is commonly–and very misleadingly–seen as providing
"an energy source.") The ice in a comet lacks this necessity until
the hydrogen and oxygen are chemically separated, and the separation process
requires that necessary essence (negative entropy) colloquially known as
"an energy source." It's possible that our entrepreneur assumes we
have a quasi-infinite "source of energy" (negative entropy), such as nuclear
fuel, and that the value of the hydrogen and oxygen is in the fact that
they are gasses and therefore suitable for rocket fuel. It's also
possible that this is simply a scam based on the widespread misunderstanding
of "energy" (and the rest of elementary physics).
And...
We see variations on this error elsewhere,
too. It's very important to environmental issues because the energy
- entropy relationships are too widely unrecognized..
|
|
| Hydrogen is frequently suggested as "a clean fuel
for automobiles." Burning hydrogen in a heat engine produces an exhaust
composed only of high temperature water vapor. However, somewhere
that hydrogen was separated from some compound–probably water. At
the separation factory, fuel was consumed, the colloquial "energy" was
expended, and pollution got concentrated there. Furthermore, unless
the oxygen (assuming it was water) was also bottled and shipped
to the automobile along with the hydrogen, a large fraction of the "energy"
got lost, and the overall process was terribly inefficient. The "pollution"
at the separation factory can be of many kinds, many of which are usually
unrecognized.
Burning coal produces not only the particulates and carbon and nitrogen oxides; it often carries a rather high radioactive fallout. (As mineral collecting students at Colorado School of Mines, we got our uranium minerals from local coal mines; they were a great source of carnotite.) Hydroelectric dams create a huge backup of entropy in the form of silt in the reservoir (not to mention the havoc to whatever ecological equilibrium had gotten established over the millennia); hydroelectric power is "buying on credit card" with an assumption that somebody else, somebody in the far future, will have to pay the entire bill. (That makes it seem free, today–how attractive!). . . How ultimately disastrous! To the extent that heat is pollution, heat engines always pollute with unavoidable "waste heat." This is the fundamental discovery of 19th century science that led to thermodynamics. It's also a part of that conceptual stuff of elementary physics that lies "at the edge of human comprehension" and goes almost totally misunderstood. All "energy" (colloquial use of the word) processes are a function of all things that are affected by the process: the input "source of energy," any additional reactants (such as oxygen in the air) and all byproducts ("exhaust" or "waste"), plus anything else that got changed by the process. The "energy" is "in" all those things, and not simply "in" the fuel. Comet-ice hydrogen in rockets and hydrogen fuel for automobiles are both ideas that are usually suffused with the oversimplification of considering only the one aspect that is "most obvious." That renders the ideas useless, even meaningless. |
"M" stands for matter.
The clue:
The letter "m" in E = mc2
stands for mass.
Missed:
The distinctions between mass, weight
and matter. Seeing the distinction between mass and weight is one
of a few indicators that someone is ready to understand elementary physics
beyond the first week of a first course in physics. Surprisingly
many students still do not understand that distinction when they graduate
from the course. (Weight is a force, that due to the pull
of gravity; mass is resistance to force, resistance to being accelerated
by a force.) Confusing weight and mass indicates a very serious failure
of comprehension of some very simple science. Failing to see the
distinction between mass and matter is even more serious. "Matter"
refers to little more than "quantity of substance" and can have many different
meanings, meanings that must be distinguished before we try to understand
those basic principles.
Also missed is the profound meaning of E = mc²: "Energy and mass are merely different expressions of the same thing." When we query nature we may see mass or we may see energy, but we are seeing two sides of the same thing. Einstein called E = mc², the "energy-mass equivalence," and that's a logical (Boolean) equivalence.
And...
This error comes from one of PBS's "highly
acclaimed" science series. The scientists that were interviewed always
used the word "mass" where appropriate, but the narrator consistently used
"matter" for "mass." We see a reflection of Feynman's comment,
"Perpetual absurdity. . . That's the way all the books were: They said things that were useless, mixed-up, ambiguous, confusing, and partially incorrect. How anybody can learn science from these books, I don't know, because it's not science."
|
|
With such a large sample of textbooks (seventeen
feet on the shelf) being so uniformly bad, we can expect that a
high percentage of the teaching of elementary science at the K-12
schools level, also fits Feynman's description. There's plenty of
evidence that it does. A national science education organization
once published, in a newsletter, "...and for the purists who insist on
a distinction between weight and mass..." In a set of science understanding
standards for tenth and twelfth grades these criteria were recently published:
It appears that a "purist" is someone who understands some of the science of the past four centuries, as seen by someone who does not. Feynman found "perepetual absurdity" in all of those seventeen shelf-feet of textbooks because understanding of the simple but subtle science of the past four centuries is something quite different from the very widespread knowledge of that science as being taught by a large fraction of its teachers. That knowledge is, more often than not, useless and cannot be used in applying "scientific concepts in projects, investigations, and further learning (within the sciences and other disciplines)." |
Silicon implants. . .
The clue:
Breast implants are made from silicone not silicon.
Missed:
The distinction between silicone, silicon...and probably silica
And...
See the distinctions HERE (Different site: Use "Back" to return)...
RTN to Misconceptions page