Ahh, that's a good point! But the whole problem can be worked-out from scratch, in front of them in one hour if you're fast.
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 12:14 PM Wes Turner <wes.tur...@gmail.com> wrote: > > It would be a good team-teaching lesson, one teacher on the white-board > lecturing, and the other typing the python-translation of the lecture into > code on a big screen. > > Do you find teamed presentations to be more effective, contrived, or > overwhelming than just speaking aloud to model the cognitive process of > model development? Modeling a mature process for correcting for mistakes > and errors is sometimes absent from prepared demos that make it look like > it's so easy for *them* (because they spent time preparing and rehearsing) > > > On Sunday, June 23, 2019, Wes Turner <wes.tur...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sunday, June 23, 2019, C. Cossé <cco...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 11:36 AM Wes Turner <wes.tur...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> In one lesson developing a simple solar system in pygame, for example, >>>> you can teach everything from the meaning of pi, periodic motion, dynamic >>>> graphics, orders of magnitude, scaling, OOP, ... all kinds of stuff. >>>> >>>> What a fun problem! Does PyGame have 2D physics? Kerbal Space Program >>>> looks fun, too >>>> >>> >>> It might by now ... but that's another big lesson: don't use somebody >>> else's physics libs ... do that yourself too! For the above problem there >>> is nothing more than F=ma (W=mg ... Weight=mass x accel_due2_grav) ... the >>> rest is circle stuff. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> AND basically lay the ground-work for developing their own 2D plotting >>>>> software. >>>>> >>>> >>>> What grade levels or math and physics knowledge would you think >>>> appropriate for these tasks? >>>> >>> >>> No prior knowledge ... it's all on the teacher to be familiar enough to >>> walk all over and essentially "drag them through" (the kids=them) the >>> process of developing their own quick solar system model. It would be a >>> good team-teaching lesson, one teacher on the white-board lecturing, and >>> the other typing the python-translation of the lecture into code on a big >>> screen. >>> >> >> Do you start with 2D observational data; as a model development exercise? >> Is that freely available online somewhere? >> >> For the 3D cube projected into 2D space rotation problem: >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation >> >> > In each reference frame, an observer can use a local coordinate system >> (most exclusively Cartesian coordinates in this context) to measure >> lengths, and a clock to measure time intervals. An observer is a real or >> imaginary entity that can take measurements, say humans, or any other >> living organism—or even robots and computers. An event is something that >> happens at a point in space at an instant of time, or more formally a point >> in spacetime. The transformations connect the space and time coordinates of >> an event as measured by an observer in each frame.[nb 1] >> > >> > They supersede the Galilean transformation of Newtonian physics, which >> assumes an absolute space and time (see Galilean relativity). The Galilean >> transformation is a good approximation only at relative speeds much smaller >> than the speed of light. Lorentz transformations have a number of >> unintuitive features that do not appear in Galilean transformations. For >> example, they reflect the fact that observers moving at different >> velocities may measure different distances, elapsed times, and even >> different orderings of events, but always such that the speed of light is >> the same in all inertial reference frames. The invariance of light speed is >> one of the postulates of special relativity. >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> - Specify the coordinates of the vertices of a cube >>>> - Draw the cube in 3D (2D from a perspective) >>>> - Rotate the cube or move the 'camera/observer's (around a point other >>>> than the origin) in 3D space and draw each frame at time t >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> -Charlie >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 11:09 AM kirby urner <kirby.ur...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Somewhere every summer, I tend to call into question the wisdom of >>>>>> buying the kids another scientific calculator at the drug store (we call >>>>>> them that here, pharmacies have calculators hanging on racks at the >>>>>> checkout, to cash in on gullibility and impulse buys). >>>>>> >>>>>> This year: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://nbviewer.jupyter.org/github/4dsolutions/School_of_Tomorrow/blob/master/Sandbox_Example.ipynb >>>>>> >>>>>> That's of course the read-only version (vs. mybinder.org) with the >>>>>> benefit of a free video at the bottom, not visible on Github, where I >>>>>> give >>>>>> my viewers the elevator speech i.e. pitch Jupyter Notebooks using Python >>>>>> as >>>>>> superior to slaving away with a graphing calculator. >>>>>> >>>>>> Not that anyone is still using graphing calculators right? Sorry if >>>>>> I'm beating a dead horse (idiom). >>>>>> >>>>>> Kirby >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Edu-sig mailing list >>>>>> Edu-sig@python.org >>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> ccosse.github.io >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> ccosse.github.io >>> >> -- ccosse.github.io
_______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
