Last night, I began co-teaching a course on chemistry for science teachers. The other teacher showed a video about the American science education system and problems with it. Our students were also given a test on common chemistry misconceptions. I was amazed at how poorly both the ones interviewed in the video -- Harvard graduates, even -- and
(
Read more... )
Comments 11
Although it surprises me how many people probably presume the greater volume = greater boiling point. Really, it shouldn't, given the undergraduates I've taught who definitely tell me that our education system isn't perfect...
Reply
The actual interview question to Harvard grads was:
"Here is a seed and a log. How did the seed gain so much mass to become the log you are now holding?"
Almost everyone said, "From light, from water, and from minerals in the soil."
Then the interviewer said, "What would you say if I told you the bulk of the weight came from carbon dioxide?"
Most everyone said, "I would have trouble believing that."
"Why?"
"Because air doesn't have weight!"
But of course, air has tons of weight. And minerals make up a negligable amount of tree mass. Light makes up none, because light does not have mass.
The formula of photsynthesis is:
Water and carbon dioxide catalysed by light gives glucose and oxygen.
Glucose is then converted into almost everything else the tree ever needs.
Reply
As for the tree, I recognized that CO2 (btw, it appears you mispelled dioxide) would contribute, but I applied my knowledge of biology that the majority of my weight it H2O to estimate a similar finding for a tree. A log would have been different.
Reply
Reply
Recently Australia introduced a *stupid* citizenship test, asking questions that it thinks citizens should know - including sporting trivia. I don't think sporting knowledge should be part of what people need to know.
Reply
Reply
Reply
(Silly Newlyweds, *sigh*)
Reply
Reply
The question is meant to be asking for dry weight.
Reply
Leave a comment