Why does you Disk Drive work?

[tw]

In the 50s and 60s, school children learned about fission, U-235, and fusion. Concepts of atoms, energy vs mass, and Einstein were necessary to understand fundamentals of new products and industries (as well as war). Today, that new concept is quantum phsyics or, in particular, sub-atomic particles and spin.

The myopic will say that big buck government spending on high profile government projects such as the Moon Landing resulted in the computers we have today. It did not make computers possible then and did not create our current technologies. Such activities were simply another consumer of basic science.

On most everyone's desk is a hard drive. What makes it possible? Breakthrough discoveries involving electron spin. The giant magneto-resistive head on virtually every hard drive today is a direct application of quantum mechanics. The 8 Dec 2001 issue of The Economist demonstrates basics of how your drive was developed and now works, in "The art of the quantum leap". This excellent article is also available for a small price at:
http://www.economist.com/displayStor...%29PQ%5B%23%0A .

However do we really teach our kids the names of basic subatomic particles that are combined to create electrons, protons, and neutrons? IOW do we adults even know of those laymen basics (quarks, bosoms, etc) that are fundamental to a growing American economy? Do our kids even know what fission and fusion are? Maybe that is why fundamental subatomic research must go to Europe for access to that research equipment?

Or do our peers claim to be 'computer literate' only because they are power users - another word for college student not yet technically sufficient to be called a technician? IOW how many of us really know or appreciate where all those new products come from?

Obviously, it depends completely on the parent. We don't learn these things at school (or at least, I didn't). It's basically up to us / the parents to learn these things. My dad helped me out a lot - forced me to learn binary, etc. The rest (UNIX/Linux/hardware/programming/etc) I've learned myself. This really isn't something you pick up in normal classes though.

How did I turn out? I can tell you almost anything you want to know about computers, but I have no clue about calculus.

However, I did manage to put in about 8 credits in a class called Science Research. I did this in 11th & 12th grade (basically, took it 3 times the first year and 5 my senior year). I was given free reign in this class - basically, my assignment was "learn whatever you can about whatever you want." I took this time to accomplish a great number of things - putting together an interactive CD-ROM for my school (complete with 3D Studio MAX walkthrough animation of the Science Research classroom/lab area), spent a great amount of time learning Photoshop, etc. I bring this up because I think more classes should be like this - give advanced students the opportunity to learn what they want to and take it to the next level. All hope is not lost - Science Research was literally the best class I've ever taken, and I do believe I learned more in it than in all of my other classes combined.

I do, of course, encourage parents to ask for these types of classes, provided that the students are responsible enough to do the work without being very supervised.

[MaggieL]

Originally posted by tw
IOW do we adults even know of those laymen basics (quarks, bosoms, etc) that are fundamental to a growing American economy?

How indeed?

Actually, I do know something about bosoms--I have two. :-)

Seriously, quantum physics aren't fundamental to our economy any more than a thousand other subspecialties are. Modern engineering allows us to *use* technologies without understanding all their component parts in detail. At some point as a practical matter you hav e to draw a conceptual line, and treat all components of whatever it is you're using that fall below that line as "black boxes", with known, defined properties, into whose inner working one does not inquire in depth, leaving that level of detail to the people at the black box factory.

In my life experience with technology, as software engineer, pilot, amateur radio operator, and fairly well-rounded geek, one of the most important things to have a sense for in understanding how tech works, is knowing when to switch from a "depth-first" to a "breadth-first" traversal of the tree of concepts and components you're currently working on.

When I use my computer, I *know* about shift registers and logic gates. I know how they work and what they do. But I *don't* use that knowlege while working at a completely different level.

The public schools have long concentrated on producing a large volume of mediocre product at low cost. Smart kids who are curious and engaged in the world around them still happen...two of them are mine. The both have a good handle on mathematics, engineering and basic science, although that's due to their parents more than to their school system.

But what really distingushes them is their ability to use language fluently and accurately....and maybe *that* isn't an upstream swim in the schools of today. For some clues as to why that is, I commend to your attention the writings of one Richard Michell,


The Underground Grammarian

[tw]

Originally posted by MaggieL
Actually, I do know something about bosoms--I have two. :-)

That small, huh....

Just learning something new - to write short posts .... and run.

[jaguar]

ANy sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic
don't ask me who said that i've forgotten.

You can't expect the layman to understand these things, thats why they're called laymen. Although i do agree to a certain degree, i tink we're going to see a kind of intelietual class structure form over the next 50 years, as intelictual property becomes more valuable it will be the haves nad the have nots, those that understands the tech that surrounds their daily life and those that do not. Revenge of the geeks

THere is simply so much tech, so much science, so many theories, formulas, theories, concpets etc that to expect most peopple, even collage studnets so understand 1/10th of them is crazy, to do somethign liek quantum physics you'd already need a very stonrg background in physics which is 2 years alone, chemisry would be useful, thats 2 subjects covering 2 years just for all the basics of atomic interaction. We all specialise, thats why some people work out hte marterials to make 100G HDs and others write desert dry semi-objective magaznies about it . Which have annoying popups asking me to give them money.

[MaggieL]

Originally posted by tw

That small, huh....

Just learning something new - to write short posts .... and run.

Hey, cut me a break; I'm a late bloomer. :-) But no implants, "one hundred percent pure, old fashioned, home-grown human, born free right here in the real world. Genuine child of Zion" like Tank said.

[Ardax]

Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." --Arthur C. Clarke

...just in case anyone was wondering.

Although with the amount of information we sling around and generate, it makes you wonder how swiftly we're spiraling towards the society from Asimov's Foundation books. Libraries of information forgotten and lost. Huge intergalactic cruisers, but what's a robot?

Weird.

[tw]

Why is quantum physics now and in the future to be part of your life?
A CNN article

[jaguar]

I'd say nano will have a bigger impact than quantum. ONe will destroy our currant concept of economy, the other will bring us.....better computers. Apart from encryption applications and the usual gigaflop hungry stuff its not going ot change the world.

That's kinda shortsighted, don't you think?

Computers have changed the world. More than you can imagine, I guarantee. Think about all the progress we make because we have computers. They're not sketching those models of nanodevices out on drawing paper, building them and hoping they'll work. They're using computers to simulate having one in the bloodstream, for example. It wouldn't be possible without computers. The faster they get, the more we can do.

I don't know what will have a bigger impact, but I would place my money on "computers" for short-term impact.

[russotto]

Originally posted by dhamsaic

I don't know what will have a bigger impact, but I would place my money on "computers" for short-term impact.

I say nano is a dead end.