DOCSLIB.ORG

Student Misconceptions About Newtonian Mechanics: Origins and Solutions Through Changes to Instruction Dissertation by Aaron

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Student Misconceptions About Newtonian Mechanics: Origins and Solutions Through Changes to Instruction Dissertation by Aaron Student Misconceptions about Newtonian Mechanics: Origins and Solutions through Changes to Instruction Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Aaron Michael Adair, M.S. Graduate Program in Physics The Ohio State University 2013 Dissertation Committee: Lei Bao, Advisor Andrew Heckler Gordon Aubrecht Samir Mathur Copyright by Aaron Michael Adair 2013 ABSTRACT In order for Physics Education Research (PER) to achieve its goals of significant learning gains with efficient methods, it is necessary to figure out what are the sorts of pre- existing issues that students have prior to instruction and then to create teaching methods that are best able to overcome those problems. This makes it necessary to figure out what is the nature of student physics misconceptions—prior beliefs that are both at variance to Newtonian mechanics and also prevent a student from properly cognizing Newtonian concepts. To understand the prior beliefs of students, it is necessary to uncover their origins, which may allow instructors to take into account the sources for ideas of physics that are contrary to Newtonian mechanics understanding. That form of instruction must also induce the sorts of metacognitive processes that allow students to transition from their previous conceptions to Newtonian ones, let alone towards those of modern physics. In this paper, the notions of basic dynamics that are common among first-year college students are studied and compared with previous literature. In particular, an analysis of historical documents from antiquity up to the early modern period shows that these conceptions were rather widespread and consistent over thousands of years and in numerous cultural contexts. This is one of the only analyses in PER that considers the original languages of some of these texts, along with appropriate historical scholarship. Based on the consistent appearance of these misconceptions, a test and interview module was devised to help elucidate the feelings students have that may relate to fictitious forces. The test looked at one-dimensional motion and forces. The first part of the ii interview asked each student about their answers to the test questions, while the second part asked how students felt when undergoing three cases of constant acceleration in a car. We determined that students confabulated relative motion with the experience of force; students claim to feel a force in the direction of relative motion even when the actual force is in the opposite direction. The interview process also showed how students had both their intuitive sense of physics as well as Newtonian concepts from instruction, and how each model was activated could be influenced by questions from the interviewer. In order to investigate how changes to instructional method and pedagogy may affect students’ ability to overcome their non-Newtonian intuitions, an experimental lecturing series was devised that used individual voting machines (“clickers”) to increase class participation and dialog in a fashion that was more student-centered. The experimental section also had video recordings of the lectures as well as concept-based video homework solutions. The initial availability of the videos hindered early use, and overall students rarely used these additions. The clicker system also had technical issues due to the volume of students and an interface that was not streamlined. Nonetheless, the results showed the experimental section to have significantly greater learning gains (d > 0.5, p ~ 0.01), and we determined that this was most likely due to the clicker system. iii VITA June 2003...................................................... Bay City Western High School 2008.............................................................. B.S. Physics, Michigan State University 2008.............................................................. B.S. Astrophysics, Michigan State University 2008.............................................................. B.S. Mathematics, Michigan State University 2011.............................................................. M.S. Physics, The Ohio State University 2008 to present............................................. Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of Physics, The Ohio State University Publications Adair, A. & Bao, L. (2012). Project-Based Learning: Theory, Impact, and Effective Implementation. REAL: Research in Education, Assessment, and Learning 3(1), 6-21. Adair, A. (2012). The Star of Christ in the Light of Astronomy. Zygon: Journal of Science & Religion 47(1), 7-29. Fields of Study Major Field: Physics Education iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii Vita ..................................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ................................................................................................................... viii List of Figures .................................................................................................................... ix Chapter 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 A. Physics Education Research—its Problems and Goals .............................................. 1 B. Lines of Investigation ................................................................................................. 4 i. Learning Approaches ............................................................................................... 4 ii. Student Misconceptions .......................................................................................... 9 iii. Use of Technology in Curricula .......................................................................... 13 C. Purpose of this Thesis .............................................................................................. 16 Chapter 2. Students Physics Misconceptions: Previous Research and Assessment Tools 18 A. Newtonian Misconceptions ...................................................................................... 19 i. Forces and Linear Motion ...................................................................................... 19 a. Modern Examples ............................................................................................. 20 b. Historical Examples .......................................................................................... 24 1. Aristotle’s Physics of Motion ....................................................................... 25 2. Ancient Thinkers on Motion after Aristotle.................................................. 29 3. Medieval Islamicate Physicists ..................................................................... 32 4. Medieval European Physicists ...................................................................... 33 5. Physics of the Scientific Revolution ............................................................. 36 6. Conclusions from History of Science ........................................................... 39 ii. Circular Motion .................................................................................................... 39 a. Modern Examples ............................................................................................. 40 b. Historical Examples .......................................................................................... 44 1. Circular Forces in Ancient and Medieval Commentary ............................... 45 2. The Scientific Revolution and Circular Motion ............................................ 51 v 3. Conclusions from History ............................................................................. 57 iii. Sources of Misconceptions .................................................................................. 58 B. Assessment Tools ..................................................................................................... 60 i. Force Concept Inventory ....................................................................................... 61 a. Creation and Assessment with Factor Analysis ................................................ 61 b. Model Analysis and FCI ................................................................................... 66 ii. Other Inventories .................................................................................................. 73 Chapter 3. Student Physics Misconceptions: Tests and Interviews .................................. 76 A. Previous Research and History of Science .............................................................. 76 B. Research Questions .................................................................................................. 79 C. Experimental Designs .............................................................................................. 81 i. 1D Motion Test and Interview ............................................................................... 82 a. Multiple Choice Test ......................................................................................... 82 b. 1D Force Question Interviews .......................................................................... 85 ii. Experience of Forces and Motion during Constant Acceleration ......................... 87 a. Constant Acceleration in
Load more

Recommended publications
  • On the Transformation of Torques Between the Laboratory and Center
    On the transformation of torques between the laboratory and center of mass reference frames Rodolfo A. Diaz,∗ William J. Herrera† Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Departamento de F´ısica. Bogot´a, Colombia. Abstract It is commonly stated in Newtonian Mechanics that the torque with respect to the laboratory frame is equal to the torque with respect to the center of mass frame plus a R × F factor, with R being the position of the center of mass and F denoting the total external force. Although this assertion is true, there is a subtlety in the demonstration that is overlooked in the textbooks. In addition, it is necessary to clarify that if the reference frame attached to the center of mass rotates with respect to certain inertial frame, the assertion is not true any more. PACS {01.30.Pp, 01.55.+b, 45.20.Dd} Keywords: Torque, center of mass, transformation of torques, fictitious forces. In Newtonian Mechanics, we define the total external torque of a system of n particles (with respect to the laboratory frame that we shall assume as an inertial reference frame) as n Next = ri × Fi(e) , i=1 X where ri, Fi(e) denote the position and total external force for the i − th particle. The relation between the position coordinates between the laboratory (L) and center of mass (CM) reference frames 1 is given by ′ ri = ri + R , ′ with R denoting the position of the CM about the L, and ri denoting the position of the i−th particle with respect to the CM, in general the prime notation denotes variables measured with respect to the CM.
    [Show full text]
  • Explain Inertial and Noninertial Frame of Reference
    Explain Inertial And Noninertial Frame Of Reference Nathanial crows unsmilingly. Grooved Sibyl harlequin, his meadow-brown add-on deletes mutely. Nacred or deputy, Sterne never soot any degeneration! In inertial frames of the air, hastening their fundamental forces on two forces must be frame and share information section i am throwing the car, there is not a severe bottleneck in What city the greatest value in flesh-seconds for this deviation. The definition of key facet having a small, polished surface have a force gem about a pretend or aspect of something. Fictitious Forces and Non-inertial Frames The Coriolis Force. Indeed, for death two particles moving anyhow, a coordinate system may be found among which saturated their trajectories are rectilinear. Inertial reference frame of inertial frames of angular momentum and explain why? This is illustrated below. Use tow of reference in as sentence Sentences YourDictionary. What working the difference between inertial frame and non inertial fr. Frames of Reference Isaac Physics. In forward though some time and explain inertial and noninertial of frame to prove your measurement problem you. This circumstance undermines a defining characteristic of inertial frames: that with respect to shame given inertial frame, the other inertial frame home in uniform rectilinear motion. The redirect does not rub at any valid page. That according to whether the thaw is inertial or non-inertial In the. This follows from what Einstein formulated as his equivalence principlewhich, in an, is inspired by the consequences of fire fall. Frame of reference synonyms Best 16 synonyms for was of. How read you govern a bleed of reference? Name we will balance in noninertial frame at its axis from another hamiltonian with each printed as explained at all.
    [Show full text]
  • THE PROBLEM with SO-CALLED FICTITIOUS FORCES Abstract 1
    THE PROBLEM WITH SO-CALLED FICTITIOUS FORCES Härtel Hermann; University Kiel, Germany Abstract Based on examples from modern textbooks the question will be raised if the traditional approach to teach the basics of Newton´s mechanics is still adequate, especially when inertial forces like centrifugal forces are described as fictitious, applicable only in non-inertial frames of reference. In the light of some recent research, based on Mach´s principles and early work of Weber, it is argued that the so-called fictitious forces could be described as real interactive forces and therefore should play quite a different role in the frame of Newton´s mechanics. By means of some computer supported learning material it will be shown how a fruitful discussion of these ideas could be supported. 1. Introduction When treating classical mechanics the interaction forces are usually clearly separated from the so- called inertial forces. For interaction forces Newton´s basic laws are valid, while for inertial forces especially the 3rd Newtonian principle cannot be applied. There seems to be no interaction force which can be related to the force of inertia and therefore this force is called fictitious and is assigned to a fictitious world. The following citations from a widespread German textbook (Bergmann Schaefer 1998) may serve as a typical example, which is found in similar form in many other German as well as American textbooks. • Zu den in der Natur beobachtbaren Kräften gehören schließlich auch die sogenannten Scheinkräfte oder Trägheitskräfte, die nur in Bezugssystemen wirken, die gegenüber dem Fundamentalsystem der fernen Galaxien beschleunigt sind. Dazu gehören die Zentrifugalkraft und die Corioliskraft.
    [Show full text]
  • On the History of the Radiation Reaction1 Kirk T
    On the History of the Radiation Reaction1 Kirk T. McDonald Joseph Henry Laboratories, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544 (May 6, 2017; updated March 18, 2020) 1 Introduction Apparently, Kepler considered the pointing of comets’ tails away from the Sun as evidence for radiation pressure of light [2].2 Following Newton’s third law (see p. 83 of [3]), one might suppose there to be a reaction of the comet back on the incident light. However, this theme lay largely dormant until Poincar´e (1891) [37, 41] and Planck (1896) [46] discussed the effect of “radiation damping” on an oscillating electric charge that emits electromagnetic radiation. Already in 1892, Lorentz [38] had considered the self force on an extended, accelerated charge e, finding that for low velocity v this force has the approximate form (in Gaussian units, where c is the speed of light in vacuum), independent of the radius of the charge, 3e2 d2v 2e2v¨ F = = . (v c). (1) self 3c3 dt2 3c3 Lorentz made no connection at the time between this force and radiation, which connection rather was first made by Planck [46], who considered that there should be a damping force on an accelerated charge in reaction to its radiation, and by a clever transformation arrived at a “radiation-damping” force identical to eq. (1). Today, Lorentz is often credited with identifying eq. (1) as the “radiation-reaction force”, and the contribution of Planck is seldom acknowledged. This note attempts to review the history of thoughts on the “radiation reaction”, which seems to be in conflict with the brief discussions in many papers and “textbooks”.3 2 What is “Radiation”? The “radiation reaction” would seem to be a reaction to “radiation”, but the concept of “radiation” is remarkably poorly defined in the literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Classical Mechanics
    Classical Mechanics Hyoungsoon Choi Spring, 2014 Contents 1 Introduction4 1.1 Kinematics and Kinetics . .5 1.2 Kinematics: Watching Wallace and Gromit ............6 1.3 Inertia and Inertial Frame . .8 2 Newton's Laws of Motion 10 2.1 The First Law: The Law of Inertia . 10 2.2 The Second Law: The Equation of Motion . 11 2.3 The Third Law: The Law of Action and Reaction . 12 3 Laws of Conservation 14 3.1 Conservation of Momentum . 14 3.2 Conservation of Angular Momentum . 15 3.3 Conservation of Energy . 17 3.3.1 Kinetic energy . 17 3.3.2 Potential energy . 18 3.3.3 Mechanical energy conservation . 19 4 Solving Equation of Motions 20 4.1 Force-Free Motion . 21 4.2 Constant Force Motion . 22 4.2.1 Constant force motion in one dimension . 22 4.2.2 Constant force motion in two dimensions . 23 4.3 Varying Force Motion . 25 4.3.1 Drag force . 25 4.3.2 Harmonic oscillator . 29 5 Lagrangian Mechanics 30 5.1 Configuration Space . 30 5.2 Lagrangian Equations of Motion . 32 5.3 Generalized Coordinates . 34 5.4 Lagrangian Mechanics . 36 5.5 D'Alembert's Principle . 37 5.6 Conjugate Variables . 39 1 CONTENTS 2 6 Hamiltonian Mechanics 40 6.1 Legendre Transformation: From Lagrangian to Hamiltonian . 40 6.2 Hamilton's Equations . 41 6.3 Configuration Space and Phase Space . 43 6.4 Hamiltonian and Energy . 45 7 Central Force Motion 47 7.1 Conservation Laws in Central Force Field . 47 7.2 The Path Equation .
    [Show full text]
  • Power Sources Challenge
    POWER SOURCES CHALLENGE FUSION PHYSICS! A CLEAN ENERGY Summary: What if we could harness the power of the Sun for energy here on Fusion reactions occur when two nuclei come together to form one Earth? What would it take to accomplish this feat? Is it possible? atom. The reaction that happens in the sun fuses two Hydrogen atoms together to produce Helium. It looks like this in a very simplified way: Many researchers including our Department of Energy scientists and H + H He + ENERGY. This energy can be calculated by the famous engineers are taking on this challenge! In fact, there is one DOE Laboratory Einstein equation, E = mc2. devoted to fusion physics and is committed to being at the forefront of the science of magnetic fusion energy. Each of the colliding hydrogen atoms is a different isotope of In order to understand a little more about fusion energy, you will learn about hydrogen, one deuterium and one the atom and how reactions at the atomic level produce energy. tritium. The difference in these isotopes is simply one neutron. Background: It all starts with plasma! If you need to learn more about plasma Deuterium has one proton and one physics, visit the Power Sources Challenge plasma activities. neutron, tritium has one proton and two neutrons. Look at the The Fusion Reaction that happens in the SUN looks like this: illustration—do you see how the mass of the products is less than the mass of the reactants? That is called a mass deficit and that difference in mass is converted into energy.
    [Show full text]
  • PHYSICS of ARTIFICIAL GRAVITY Angie Bukley1, William Paloski,2 and Gilles Clément1,3
    Chapter 2 PHYSICS OF ARTIFICIAL GRAVITY Angie Bukley1, William Paloski,2 and Gilles Clément1,3 1 Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, USA 2 NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, USA 3 Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Toulouse, France This chapter discusses potential technologies for achieving artificial gravity in a space vehicle. We begin with a series of definitions and a general description of the rotational dynamics behind the forces ultimately exerted on the human body during centrifugation, such as gravity level, gravity gradient, and Coriolis force. Human factors considerations and comfort limits associated with a rotating environment are then discussed. Finally, engineering options for designing space vehicles with artificial gravity are presented. Figure 2-01. Artist's concept of one of NASA early (1962) concepts for a manned space station with artificial gravity: a self- inflating 22-m-diameter rotating hexagon. Photo courtesy of NASA. 1 ARTIFICIAL GRAVITY: WHAT IS IT? 1.1 Definition Artificial gravity is defined in this book as the simulation of gravitational forces aboard a space vehicle in free fall (in orbit) or in transit to another planet. Throughout this book, the term artificial gravity is reserved for a spinning spacecraft or a centrifuge within the spacecraft such that a gravity-like force results. One should understand that artificial gravity is not gravity at all. Rather, it is an inertial force that is indistinguishable from normal gravity experience on Earth in terms of its action on any mass. A centrifugal force proportional to the mass that is being accelerated centripetally in a rotating device is experienced rather than a gravitational pull.
    [Show full text]
  • Physics 101 Today Chapter 5: Newton's Third
    Physics 101 Today Chapter 5: Newton’s Third Law First, let’s clarify notion of a force : Previously defined force as a push or pull. Better to think of force as an interaction between two objects. You can’t push anything without it pushing back on you ! Whenever one object exerts a force on a second object, the second object exerts an equal and opposite force on the first. Newton’s 3 rd Law - often called “action-reaction ” Eg. Leaning against a wall. You push against the wall. The wall is also pushing on you, equally hard – normal/support force. Now place a piece of paper between the wall and hand. Push on it – it doesn’t accelerate must be zero net force. The wall is pushing equally as hard (normal force) on the paper in the opposite direction to your hand, resulting in zero Fnet . This is more evident when hold a balloon against the wall – it is squashed on both sides. Eg. You pull on a cart. It accelerates. The cart pulls back on you (you feel the rope get tighter). Can call your pull the “ action ” and cart’s pull the “ reaction ”. Or, the other way around. • Newton’s 3 rd law means that forces always come in action -reaction pairs . It doesn’t matter which is called the action and which is called the reaction. • Note: Action-reaction pairs never act on the same object Examples of action-reaction force pairs In fact it is the road’s push that makes the car go forward. Same when we walk – push back on floor, floor pushes us forward.
    [Show full text]
  • LECTURES 20 - 29 INTRODUCTION to CLASSICAL MECHANICS Prof
    LECTURES 20 - 29 INTRODUCTION TO CLASSICAL MECHANICS Prof. N. Harnew University of Oxford HT 2017 1 OUTLINE : INTRODUCTION TO MECHANICS LECTURES 20-29 20.1 The hyperbolic orbit 20.2 Hyperbolic orbit : the distance of closest approach 20.3 Hyperbolic orbit: the angle of deflection, φ 20.3.1 Method 1 : using impulse 20.3.2 Method 2 : using hyperbola orbit parameters 20.4 Hyperbolic orbit : Rutherford scattering 21.1 NII for system of particles - translation motion 21.1.1 Kinetic energy and the CM 21.2 NII for system of particles - rotational motion 21.2.1 Angular momentum and the CM 21.3 Introduction to Moment of Inertia 21.3.1 Extend the example : J not parallel to ! 21.3.2 Moment of inertia : mass not distributed in a plane 21.3.3 Generalize for rigid bodies 22.1 Moment of inertia tensor 2 22.1.1 Rotation about a principal axis 22.2 Moment of inertia & energy of rotation 22.3 Calculation of moments of inertia 22.3.1 MoI of a thin rectangular plate 22.3.2 MoI of a thin disk perpendicular to plane of disk 22.3.3 MoI of a solid sphere 23.1 Parallel axis theorem 23.1.1 Example : compound pendulum 23.2 Perpendicular axis theorem 23.2.1 Perpendicular axis theorem : example 23.3 Example 1 : solid ball rolling down slope 23.4 Example 2 : where to hit a ball with a cricket bat 23.5 Example 3 : an aircraft landing 24.1 Lagrangian mechanics : Introduction 24.2 Introductory example : the energy method for the E of M 24.3 Becoming familiar with the jargon 24.3.1 Generalised coordinates 24.3.2 Degrees of Freedom 24.3.3 Constraints 3 24.3.4 Configuration
    [Show full text]
  • Centripetal Force Is Balanced by the Circular Motion of the Elctron Causing the Centrifugal Force
    STANDARD SC1 b. Construct an argument to support the claim that the proton (and not the neutron or electron) defines the element’s identity. c. Construct an explanation based on scientific evidence of the production of elements heavier than hydrogen by nuclear fusion. d. Construct an explanation that relates the relative abundance of isotopes of a particular element to the atomic mass of the element. First, we quickly review pre-requisite concepts One of the most curious observations with atoms is the fact that there are charged particles inside the atom and there is also constant spinning and Warm-up 1: List the name, charge, mass, and location of the three subatomic circling. How does atom remain stable under these conditions? Remember particles Opposite charges attract each other; Like charges repel each other. Your Particle Location Charge Mass in a.m.u. Task: Read the following information and consult with your teacher as STABILITY OF ATOMS needed, answer Warm-Up tasks 2 and 3 on Page 2. (3) Death spiral does not occur at all! This is because the centripetal force is balanced by the circular motion of the elctron causing the centrifugal force. The centrifugal force is the outward force from the center to the circumference of the circle. Electrons not only spin on their own axis, they are also in a constant circular motion around the nucleus. Despite this terrific movement, electrons are very stable. The stability of electrons mainly comes from the electrostatic forces of attraction between the nucleus and the electrons. The electrostatic forces are also known as Coulombic Forces of Attraction.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Inertial, Centrifugal, and Centripetal Forces and Motions The
    Measuring Inertial, Centrifugal, and Centripetal Forces and Motions Many people are quite confused about the true nature and dynamics of cen- trifugal and centripetal forces. Some believe that centrifugal force is a fictitious radial force that can’t be measured. Others claim it is a real force equal and opposite to measured centripetal force. It is sometimes thought to be a continu- ous positive acceleration like centripetal force. Crackpot theorists ignore all measurements and claim the centrifugal force comes out of the aether or spa- cetime continuum surrounding a spinning body. The true reality of centripetal and centrifugal forces can be easily determined by simply measuring them with accelerometers rather than by imagining metaphysical assumptions. The Momentum and Energy of the Cannon versus a Cannonball Cannon Ball vs Cannon Momentum and Energy Force = mass x acceleration ma = Momentum = mv m = 100 kg m = 1 kg v = p/m = 1 m/s v = p/m = 100 m/s p = mv 100 p = mv = 100 energy = mv2/2 = 50 J energy = mv2/2 = 5,000 J Force p = mv = p = mv p=100 Momentum p = 100 Energy mv2/2 = mv2 = mv2/2 Cannon ball has the same A Force always produces two momentum as the cannon equal momenta but it almost but has 100 times more never produces two equal kinetic energy. quantities of kinetic energy. In the following thought experiment with a cannon and golden cannon ball, their individual momentum is easy to calculate because they are always equal. However, the recoil energy from the force of the gunpowder is much greater for the ball than the cannon.
    [Show full text]
  • Coriolis Force PDF File
    Conservation of angular momentum – the Coriolis force Bill Watterson Conservation of momentum in the ocean – Navier Stokes equation dv F / m (Newton) dt dv - 1/r 흏p/흏z + horizontal component dt + Coriolis force + g vertical vector + tidal forces + friction 2 Attention: Newton‘s law only valid in absolute reference system. I.e. in a reference system which is at rest or in constant motion. What happens when reference system is rotating? Then „inertial forces“ will appear. A mass at rest will experience a centrifugal force. A mass that is in motion will experience a Coriolis force. 3 Which reference system do we want to use? z y x 4 Stewart, 2007 Which reference system do we want to use? We like to use a Cartesian coordinate system at the ocean surface convention: x eastward y northward z upward This reference system rotates with the earth around its axis. Newton‘s 2. law does only apply, when taking an „inertial force“ into account. 5 Coriolis ”force” - fictitious force in a rotating reference frame Coriolis force on a merrygoround … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_36MiCUS1ro https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZPSfv_YssA 6 Coriolis ”force” - fictitious force in a rotating reference frame Plate turns. View on the plate from outside. View from inside the plate. 7 Disc world (Terry Pratchett) Angular velocity is the same everywhere w = 360°/24h Tangential velocity varies with the distance from rotation axis: w NP 푣푇 = 2휋 ∙ 푟 /24ℎ r vT (on earth at 54°N: vT= 981 km/h) Eq 8 Disc world Tangential velocity varies with distance from rotation axis: 푣푇 = 2휋 ∙ 푟 /24ℎ NP r Eq vT 9 Disc world Tangential velocity varies with distance from rotation axis: 푣푇 = 2휋 ∙ 푟 /24ℎ NP Hence vT is smaller near the North Pole than at the equator.
    [Show full text]