Re: (ReacTor) Defining Our Terms: What Do We Mean by "Hard SF"?

Michael F. Stemper <michael.stemper@gmail.com> wrote:

On 24/08/2024 10.30, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Paul S Person  <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

On 22 Aug 2024 23:12:48 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>
I think memorizing integral tables is kind of a standard thing for
engineering calc classes.  The whole point of the class is to be able to
solve hairy integrals as quickly as possible and there's no time to =

derive

anything that you can memorize.  If you try to derive everything you'll
never get through a fraction of the exams in time.

>
Ah.
>
Teaching to the test.

 
No, not at all.  The purpose of the class is to teach a specific set of
skills, which is to say rapid integration and derivation, because those
skills will later be required in engineering classes and then in the real
world of engineering.
 
That is, it's skills training and not education.

>
Well, in the real world, even before Matlab and such, if an engineer was faced
with an ugly integral, he'd[1] pull the CRC book off the shelf, rather than
try to apply integration by parts or something.

Maybe.  Sometimes you can plot it on paper, cut out the graph, then weigh
it and divide by the weight of one square of graph paper.

But I can see some need to solve things in closed form now and then, even
if I haven't had to do it more than once or twice in my career.

I could see more of a need back a century ago when most of my teachers
were in school.  Things change slowly.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."