Glass viscosity calculations debunk the myth of flow in medieval windows (2017)
1–10 of 165 posts
Re: Glass viscosity calculations debunk the myth of flow in medieval windows (2017)
#2Finally! I always knew my 7th grade science teacher was full of shit on that one, she was so adamant about some things that turned out to be wrong.
This one was maybe more excusable because it was common to teach at the time. Maybe it ended up making us better students in the end because we learned to fact-check our teachers, and not to be adamant about things we only think are true (though I'm still guilty of that myself sometimes)...
Re: Glass viscosity calculations debunk the myth of flow in medieval windows (2017)
#3Finally! I always knew my 7th grade science teacher was full of shit on that one, she was so adamant about some things that turned out to be wrong. This one was maybe more excusable because it was common to teach at the time. Maybe it ended up making us better students in the end because we learned to fact-check our teachers, and not to be adamant about things we only think are true (though I'm still guilty of that m…
What other unsubstantiated claims did she make?
Re: Glass viscosity calculations debunk the myth of flow in medieval windows (2017)
#4but tarmac does flow at an observable rate, although only observable over the course of years
Re: Glass viscosity calculations debunk the myth of flow in medieval windows (2017)
#5Finally! I always knew my 7th grade science teacher was full of shit on that one, she was so adamant about some things that turned out to be wrong. This one was maybe more excusable because it was common to teach at the time. Maybe it ended up making us better students in the end because we learned to fact-check our teachers, and not to be adamant about things we only think are true (though I'm still guilty of that m…
What other unsubstantiated claims did she make?
I'm not the original poster, but I was shocked by how many of the otherwise super smart friends I had in college were taught common falsehoods in high school. For example: the idea that your veins look blue through your skin because the deoxygenated blood in them is blue, and that it only turns red outside your body because it's exposed to oxygen.
Re: Glass viscosity calculations debunk the myth of flow in medieval windows (2017)
#6Finally! I always knew my 7th grade science teacher was full of shit on that one, she was so adamant about some things that turned out to be wrong. This one was maybe more excusable because it was common to teach at the time. Maybe it ended up making us better students in the end because we learned to fact-check our teachers, and not to be adamant about things we only think are true (though I'm still guilty of that m…
What other unsubstantiated claims did she make?
To be fair it was usually small, inconsequential things, not major parts of the curriculum.
The only major one I remember is that water is conductive by itself. And that "C++ is the best programming language" (hah).
Re: Glass viscosity calculations debunk the myth of flow in medieval windows (2017)
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
What other unsubstantiated claims did she make?
I'm not the original poster, but I was shocked by how many of the otherwise super smart friends I had in college were taught common falsehoods in high school. For example: the idea that your veins look blue through your skin because the deoxygenated blood in them is blue, and that it only turns red outside your body because it's exposed to oxygen.
Or the whole taste bud taste map of the tongue.
Re: Glass viscosity calculations debunk the myth of flow in medieval windows (2017)
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
What other unsubstantiated claims did she make?
I'm not the original poster, but I was shocked by how many of the otherwise super smart friends I had in college were taught common falsehoods in high school. For example: the idea that your veins look blue through your skin because the deoxygenated blood in them is blue, and that it only turns red outside your body because it's exposed to oxygen.
I think a lot of them have only been solidly disproven in the last ~15 years, and it takes some time for that science update to propagate through the world.
Re: Glass viscosity calculations debunk the myth of flow in medieval windows (2017)
#9but tarmac does flow at an observable rate, although only observable over the course of years
Especially if you live somewhere where the sun heats it over 50ºC! Then you get huge ruts from the trucks and potholes...
Re: Glass viscosity calculations debunk the myth of flow in medieval windows (2017)
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
What other unsubstantiated claims did she make?
To be fair it was usually small, inconsequential things, not major parts of the curriculum. The only major one I remember is that water is conductive by itself. And that "C++ is the best programming language" (hah).
I'm sure you could make the argument using some definition of best. Perhaps best in it's impact via software created in it rather than the language itself. Although then I think C would win over C++ because of Linux.
I'm imagining a slightly tongue in cheek 'best' alongside an implication of subjectivity. But given this was a highschool teacher I wouldn't be surprised if it was instead a multi choice test question with a single "correct" answer? Which of course would be ridiculous.