jhayes
Incidentally, the guy releasing this also directed it.
Also in case you prefer text: http://varatek.com/scott/feynman_problems.html
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0512158
"1.4 Heavier objects fall faster
The classic Aristotelian belief is that heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects. Surely three hundred years after Galileo showed otherwise, students no longer share this belief? Unfortunately, many do, but the belief shows up only in novel situations. Students know that if a stone and a cannonball fall, they should say that both objects hit the ground ‘at the same time’; if they have been carefully taught, they might even say ‘roughly at the same time’. They also know what to say about two objects sliding down an incline, that mass is irrelevant. However, when the problem includes the novel effect of rolling (yet more trouble with circular motion!), many students have no practiced Newtonian answer to quote, and reveal their gut-level Aristotelian belief. For example, in Problem 23, about objects rolling down a plane, some students reasoned that an object with a large moment of inertia, such as a disc, rolls faster than an object with a small moment of inertia, such as a solid sphere. Two students argued that ‘moment of inertia is analogous to mass, and heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects’! I could not agree with the analogy, but I admired its boldness.
The way that rehearsal hides this misconception reminds me of the theory of the English accent: that if you step on an Englishman’s toes in the middle of the night, he’ll shout at you in an American accent. On this view, the one true accent is American. An English accent is just an act, a mask dropped upon surprise. Similarly, the students’ response that ‘all objects fall at the same speed’ is carefully rehearsed. It falls away when we step on their toes by asking about it in a novel context, whereupon they reveal their true belief, that heavier objects fall faster.""
Pros: - Works on any site (I've only checked it out in gchat though).
Cons: - Not as pretty (if it matters to you) and requires both sides to d/l firefox extension really (not for emails though).
http://www.instructables.com/id/Crazy-Star-Cube-!/
Looks to be an hour long project tops, requiring just starched paper and sellotape.
Also, for interest's sake, a few years ago a physicist (http://insectnation.org/projects/nightclimbing/) even scanned in an old book on climbing; t'was pretty nifty! (but slightly off topic here probably).
Similar story by same author with some interesting comments from the blue.
Mozilla coming from the remnants of Netscape was like the transition from the decimated Weimar Republic to Third Reich, starting over.
Microsoft of course would represent USSR, and just to force the analogy, because their PR in retrospect seems to be terrible (this western education of mine re:USSR & considering that bashing MS is the standard online really).
And I guess that leaves Google with America, only entering into the (browser) war half way through.
Not implying anything about the future of course, just forcing an analogy.
(And sure, let's stretch it and have Safari as Britain, because it's an island, independent of the bigger land masses).
Pretty sure that that's close to the norm for PhD pay though.
(Sorry, no hard figures to compare, due to a feeling that I shouldn't discuss someone else's financial situation candidly online, even if details probably just a google away).
Jaysus! Hasn't a bleedin' notion what he's bleating on about there; we're not like that at all, like. A right lula.