Astronomy = astrophysics! Astrophysics = astronomy!
The phrase is true due to the commutative nature of the phrase. Either way it is handled (solved), it comes down to number crunching to explain the physical world.
During my early schooling, I took all the math and physical sciences that I could schedule. Band was the only non-college-prep course I took, the only elective other than a semester course in “humanities” that filled a necessary slot. Opposite a phys ed requirement I took drivers’ ed and typing. Humanities filled the slot opposite phys ed that year.
Despite taking Chemistry, Physics, geometry/trigonometry, algebra I & II, I had better comprehension in those verbal and language skills than in mathematics. I learned enough to perform well in those classes where numbers and unknowns were king but there was never an intuitive, light-bulb overhead moment. I understand the concepts but have to work harder at them than at verbal skills in order to get the grades I wanted.
Had my plans for attending Annapolis panned out, I’d have become immersed in one of the engineering programs and would have been force-fed numbers and theories until they became autonomic. Instead, inadequate vision sent me into history education, and then, fortunately into clinical lab. I’d have been a very poor teacher.
The only university level math course I was required to take was a college algebra course that met once weekly at 0730 on Saturday mornings. That was really bad course selection for the clinical lab program due to the heavy load in chemistry, physiology, biochemistry, analytical chem, and other math-intensive classes that were required in order to qualify for the clinical rotations.
The instrumentation used in major labs was changing rapidly, allowing instruments to crunch the numbers for large patient loads rather than having slide-rule wielding staff cutting performance curves, graphs, and sets of calculations to turn out many fewer results after lengthy analysis. Slide rules and paper graphs began to vanish from clinical labs in favor of “black box” calculations.
Between history and clinical lab, I took an astronomy course as one of my few electives. Less conversant than I should have been with the required math, an advisor who should have questioned my intention and preparation cleared my way to a long and confusing semester tied to a slide rule. The TAs for the course wanted nothing to do with actually teaching students who wanted help. They were prime examples of how I might have turned out had I continued into education as a job. My math skills needed improvement and my slide rule skills were barely adequate to keep pace out of class.
Therefore, I’m taking astronomy this semester. I’m not any better prepared than I was decades ago other than having several calculators to use. The syllabus indicates a “scientific calculator” is required. I actually have several. The oldest was released about 1977. The newest was released about 1989. One of them actually has a screen for graph displays. I don’t know how much help these are going to be, as I haven’t used them in at least 20 years. I suspect that I may wind up needing to update my calculator supplies in order to obtain one with better graphing functions.
Classes start on 30 Aug for us. I plan on taking copious notes, and making sure that my slide rule is well oiled. If attitude matters, I intend to come out of this course with a better understanding of how mathematics explains the basic universe. I’m willing to bet that no one in the class, student or instructor, other than me, has ever seen or worked a slide rule.
Who put that fossil into the universe? Looks like I did. We’ll see how much I’ve evolved!
No comments:
Post a Comment