<p>I have a question regarding the articulation of physics classes from community colleges to UC classes.</p>
<p>For example, there are generally three tracks for physics: General Physics, Calculus-BasedGeneral Physics, and then the physics sequence for Engineering (Mechanics, Electricity/Magnetism, Optics/Heat). Of course the official names for each of these tracks varies from college to college, these are how they vary depending on your major choices as most hard/physical science and engineering majors know.</p>
<p>My question is, will the Engineering track usually substitute for the other tracks? For example, when I look at the articulation for majoring in Biochemistry at UCSB (via Welcome</a> to ASSIST), the transferable physics courses are the two general physics tracks, but NOT the engineering track. I suppose I was under the assumption that the engineering track would complete the physics requirement for any science major. Before I went to ask a counselor or the transfer center, I wanted to see if anyone on here had experience or knowledge about this.</p>
<p>I'm trying to keep my options as open as possible for transfer in case I decide to do something like Biochemistry OR an Engineering discipline.</p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
<p>The engineering physics sequence will be accepted at any UC for any major with a physics requirement. But, there is a cache.</p>
<p>If you choose to take the more in depth physics series, which is usually a 4 semester/two year sequence, then you will have to complete the entire sequence for it to replace the general physics requirement. For example, if you take two semesters of “engineering” physics and decide you do not want to continue, this cannot replace two semesters of general physics. The reason for this is because in two semesters of general physics you will cover ALL of the topics of undergraduate physics, but in less detail than the alternative sequence. Because the engineering physics series is much more in-depth, after two semester you will have covered only half of the topics that undergraduates are required to be exposed to, but in greater detail. So, it’s pretty much like this:
- 4 engineering phys courses = 2 general phys courses
- 2 engineering phys courses does NOT equal 2 general phys courses
- And, obviously, 2 general phys courses does NOT equal 4 engineering phys courses</p>
<p>I had this same question sometime back, so I contacted matriculation officers at UCI, UCLA, and UCB, and they all gave me this same reasoning. So… unless you really like physics or know that you can see the engineering sequence through, I would strongly suggest you decide on a major so you don’t waste time. Also, keep in mind that you’ll be screwed if you take general physics and then decide you want to go into engineering.</p>
<p>Id recommend going for the full blown engineering physics. Yes its a bit harder.(significantly harder when studying electromagnetism). but you will get a greater grasp of the subject matter. you will see where equations are derived from etc. its not really going to be like oh here is an equation, i am the physics god, accept it as truth kinda thing.</p>
<p>Thanks for the info, that’s what I was thinking. I’m going to do the entire engineering sequence in case I decide to do engineering. Since I already have General Physics out of the way, I just need to do the next 3 classes.</p>
<p>Thanks again!</p>