The misery of school

[FALCON_12]

Izy reasons about both COVID and physics. Digression, paralogism, figure of speech.

to sum up: to compensate for its weight, the plane (or the fly!) leans on the air and the air in turn leans on the ground.

It's relentless, and it ain't even mechanics fluids. It's Newton's 3rd law...

This is the principle of reciprocal actions.

I have the impression of reliving what I experienced several years ago with my colleagues and the workers of a forum.

I had been trying to "see" the thing for weeks. How many ways of showing the phenomenon had I tried? I don't know anymore and it doesn't matter because the logical arm wrestling is useless and what put an end to the discussions I had was the intervention of a third person seen as a referent.

School stuffed our brains with equations and theories with which we identified ("I am what I know") but also a whole hierarchical belief system like the political, philosophical and religious pyramids: we are 'depends on the referents, on the leader, on the one we see as a n+1 in our field without really seeing and understanding what is going on, we say "ok that's how it is", we admit and then we say “Ah but X said that!”.

How many formulas, how many theories have we accepted without seeing them, understanding them, linking them to reality? isn't that called believing? isn't that indoctrination?

So we don't see very clearly, we manipulate concepts. We try to reconstitute reality with reasoning that we put end to end. It works sometimes, it also leads to say that in a space where each grain of matter is attracted towards a center certain grains of matter can maintain a constant altitude without relying on those which are below.

How can such nonsense inhabit such intelligences? such intellectual capacities?

I started this discussion on this forum of philosophy to talk about that. How brains capable of solving complex logic problems can be reached with such blindness?

Doesn't our school system produce brains full of holes? punctiform intelligences that often arrive at responsibilities. To all of our misery, I'm sure.

[FALCON_12]

I remember a materials physics course where the professor introduced quantum mechanics. He told us that an electron only jumps to a higher orbit when it has acquired enough energy to do so.

This intrigued me and I asked why, arguing that a ball attached to a rubber band continually moved away from its center of rotation when its angular velocity increased. It didn't stay at constant R to jump all at once as its angular velocity increased.

How did the electron "know" when to jump? How did he know he had enough energy to enter the upper orbit by constantly staying in his orbit before doing so?

I remember the reactions of my comrades: "oh but stop with your stupid questions", "it's good, we're wasting time", "Hehe, we're not in mecha class there!" etc

The professor replied that it was the question he was waiting for because it was this phenomenon that separated quantum mechanics from Newtonian mechanics and that he had precisely chosen this one to highlight this difference.

He had therefore had before him about twenty students, many of whom had done a deug A or "prépa" who swallowed without flinching tons of theories to know by heart without questioning them, without relating them to reality, without trying to see them work. Brains ready to swallow any concept because it was said by an authority.

This is yet another way of showing the disease of French education.

[fracass]

After reflection, the system being closed, I vote for falcon...
The mass does not change....it would be magic

[izentrop]

After reflection, the system being closed, I vote for falcon...
The mass does not change....it would be magic

Me too for his last statement.

In fact, what raised the question is that when the plane reaches a certain altitude, the force that it sends back to the ground is no longer felt, because it is diluted over a large surface.
A statement lacking precision and not a sufficient reason to denigrate the teaching, because I think on the contrary that they would have answered well for the box...

On the other hand in a box, indeed for a small drone which does not go up too much in altitude ...

[fracass]

The statement did not lack precision, it was a closed matchbox it seems to me

[Remundo]

But we don't need these aero tricks to understand that in all cases, the support force of the plane on the air is also that of the air on the ground.

No and no. All of this is a popularization, and a bad one because it's wrong about basic physics.
Already we speak of "force" as if we were in static, first error, the plane has a lift in return for a drag x the speed of the wing = the engine power.

you who invoke "basic physics", remember that reciprocal actions apply in both dynamic and static situations...

[izentrop]

The statement lacked precision.

I was thinking about that society-and-philosophy/la-misere-de-l-ecole-t17411.html#p522935 and the fact that on a gaseous planet without soil the plane would have flown just as well.

But hey, my answer is indeed poorly worded.
The atmosphere is actually "carried" by the ground, but we can no longer distinguish the weight of the plane which at 7000 m is an integral part of it. That's a bit like the subtlety of "carried by the ground".

[fracass]

Catch up!
He was talking about a closed box on a scale with a fly in it, the question was whether when the fly takes off the mass displayed by the value varies... you screwed up, it doesn't matter, everything is to recognize it

[SebastianL]

Well thanks to you, we have the demonstration that consensus can be found on bogus thinking.
I would have liked the first msg of the topic then I read the second and realized that the philosophy had been created ad hoc in 1 to justify the idea pourave in 2.

Welcome to ideologistan, very common these days

[fracass]

I don't understand your message Sebastian. Did you watch the video posted by izentrop?