<p>plenty of kids do it every year. it’s completely silly to discourage someone from trying. How much time problem sets take up depends entirely on the person. There are very few hass classes that have a paper assigned every week. 8.012 can take as little as 4-5 hours a week if you take advantage of office hours, on average it’s something like 8 hours. 18.02 is completely basic multivariable, especially for someone who has experience with vector calculus. he/she has great preparation. I repeat: you’ll be fine. just don’t get cocky til you’ve got the goods, and you’ll be fine.</p>
<p>
I attribute it completely to lack of preparation in high school, both in terms of academics (I had taken almost all of the science classes offered by my school, but no APs, and I hadn’t taken math-based physics) and in terms of my study habits. I also had this idea that I could talk to my high school sweetheart on the phone for 2-3 hours a night and start problem sets at midnight the night before they were due. Second semester, when I shaped up my study habits with a semester of MIT under my belt, I did much, much better in class and on tests.</p>
<p>I took the easy classes – 5.111, 8.01x (no longer offered, but a slightly easier version of 8.01, grading-wise), 18.01, and a HASS-D. I got a C in all of the technical classes, with a C- in 8.01x that was very, very close to a D, and a B+ in my HASS.</p>
<p>Yeah, being able to take the national USNCO exam is no indication of preparedness for 5.112. A good percentage of MIT students probably could have qualified, given qualification is being one of the top two chem students in your school (above a certain cutoff score).</p>
<p>And besides: “Like most MIT subjects, chemistry is oriented toward problem-solving rather than memorization. Nearly all of the problems on the [chemistry psets/exams] involve calculations or analysis of information. None involve mere memorization. For example, there are no questions like: “Name the metals that are liquids at room temperature” or “What color is lead chromate?””</p>
<p>Thesefore, as k4r3n2 said, 5.112 is nothing like what one expects from the USNCO test.</p>
<p>By the way faraday, there’s this book by a Theodore Shifrin, from the University of Georgia, which is at the level of an “honors” intro to multivariable calculus. It also contains a modest amount of linear algebra, plenty of exercises, etc. You seem like you’d find some use for such a book – it does things quite rigorously. (Note: Multivariable calculus the way it’s taught at my school and probably many others makes me cringe oh-so-badly.)</p>
<p>“national chem olympiad test had nothing on 5.112”</p>
<p>Well, I don’t find anything particularly “advanced” in 5.112, in terms of theory. From a physics point of view, some of the quantum mechanics part might even seem mushy. So, the theory will be probably the least of my worries… the problem solving part might be bigger of a problem. I just can’t find any 5.112 problem sets so I can get the idea of how hard the problems are. 8.012 psets, however, are challenging, because I believe the problems are pulled straight from Introduction to Mechanics for K&K. That class will probably be the most demanding. I don’t know how 18.02 will be though.</p>
<p>“Yeah, being able to take the national USNCO exam is no indication of preparedness for 5.112.”</p>
<p>But then, what can give an indication? All I hear from MIT students is that nothing can really tell us if we are prepared or not, that we can’t really prepare for the MIT experience except get ready to be unprepared. I don’t think that’s a really good advice, because it basically asks us to be passive and let be dominated by that MIT academic monster.</p>
<p>^ The best indicator of adequate preparation for advanced math and physics is having engaged in advanced math and physics of comparable nature. Part of the reason I recommended the book I did. Probably nothing outside of actual experience with similar work gives an indication worthy of your notice. If you’ve actually picked up the books MIT uses and done problems from them, I guarantee you won’t suddenly find it impossible to succeed once you actually get to the school and start work.</p>
<p>Thanks mathboy. I actually already have a pretty standard multivariate calc book (it’s Courant’s volume 2 integral&Differential calculus).</p>
<p>The book for introductory mechanics (8.012, the slightly more advanced version of 8.01), I already have it, and started doing problems. Some problems are tough, but most problems are very doable. If anyone out there knows Irodov problems in general physics, they are about the same difficulty, except the irodov book has 1877 problems, *with answers<a href=“Arghhh…%20why%20did%20Kleppner%20forget%20to%20put%20an%20answer%20key,%20I%20can’t%20even%20check%20my%20work!”>/I</a>. I guess I’ll just try to do as many problems as I can from that book to prepare. If I still can’t crack MIT science/math, at least I have given my best shot.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Personally, I find the non-book problems much harder than book problems :)</p>
<p>Above can be true – but some book problems are actually pretty tough! When professors write their own problems, they certainly can be somewhat harder, though they also often have nicer answers. Surviving the harder book problems still tends to mean you’re OK though.</p>
<p>And faraday – sure I imagine you have a book. My recommendation was a specifically more thorough, rigorous intro than most. Though I imagine you’re fine working from any book, since after all, in theory you can go in without preparation and do fine.</p>
<p>“in theory you can go in without preparation and do fine”</p>
<p>Ummm… I am receiving this with a little doubt: especially from a mathematician. :D</p>
<p>And why do every one say psets take so long? From MIT ocw, most psets are 10 problems long for 8.012, and if it takes 10 hrs to do those, that means an average of 1 hr/problem… That’s hardly reasonable, because from what I see, most psets have about 50-70% easy problems, which probably can be solved in less than 10 minutes each, and maybe 30 % harder problems, which you probably will get stuck and ask for some help. But if you know how to approach the problems, taking 1hr/problem, even for the harder ones, seems exaggerated. Which leads me to ask, do professors assign extra homework not given on ocw?</p>
<p>i am glad that you know exactly what to expect from MIT and do not require our assistance. this certainly bodes well for your first semester. it has been my experience that the majority of people that find the lower-level psets to be extremely simple often ASE out of the introductory classes. if you believe this is the case, perhaps you should look into scheduling yourself for these time slots.</p>
<p>i have found that problem sets are often deceptively simple at first, but often i find myself checking my answers, comparing with my friends, trying to figure out my TA’s crypic hints, or helping other people with their problem sets. i suppose i don’t spend 10 hours a week per problem set working by myself.</p>
<p>if you have a strong theoretical background in many of the subjects that you will be taking first-term freshman year, then you will have time to meet new people and join clubs and do assorted other things, and this is not a horrible situation to be in. i don’t believe there’s any reason to be so rude.</p>
<p>I can’t say much about 18.01, 18.02, 8.01, 8.02, etc since I exempted those, but I can say that certain upper level classes do require a lot of time. For example, one of my classes (Grad H) gives out 4 problems a week. This PSET requires 15-20 hours to solve. And when we turn it in, we’re not even sure if some of our answers were correct. And this grad class is primarily the people who aced the undergrad level classes.</p>
<p>So yes faraday, at some point or other, you will reach a class where you will spend 15-20 hours on a PSET and not be sure if your answers are right. It just takes longer for some than others to reach that point. Part of the preparation process can’t be learned outside of college. In order to handle failure well you have to have failed before. And I don’t mean doing poorly on some Calc BC exam or something easy. I mean real, true-hearted ego demolition that happens at MIT.</p>
<p>“i don’t believe there’s any reason to be so rude”
I don’t see how I have been rude. I was just asking questions. </p>
<p>Well, I’m sure you realize that with the hype about MIT and all, it’s pretty normal for a 18 yr old to feel apprehensive, and have lots of expectations. The biggest problem of all is I don’t know where i’ll be compared to the others in my 2013 class. AP’s don’t give good predictors, SAT’s even less. Olympiad wise, I made to semifinals on USA PhO, but am nowhere near those crazy IPhO guys going to MIT. And so, I just wondered what kind of schedule will challenge me, without making me go crazy. I’m probably will be avg at MIT, and am fully ready for some ego-deflation going on. It’s not like I try to be arrogant or anything, I realize most physics majors at MIT will probably kick my butt, the same way those IPhO kids are already doing it :D</p>
<p>As differential says it “true hearted ego demolition… happens at MIT”</p>
<p>I think MIT ocw is awesome and all, but one problem may be that it doesn’t do justice to how hard a course is, maybe to not deter prospective applicants? I mean, when I look at caltech psets, I kind of get why you would spend 4-10 hrs working on those every week.</p>
<p>Faraday, I am sure my experience coincides with that of those at MIT – some of my advanced class problem sets can be 4-5 problems long, and some will be doable, and others will literally stump me for several days. I spend many, many hours at times deciphering the complexity of some problems. Though, this is not lower division work by any means. Some of the work I do takes me several hours to write up in clear language, and often I discover that I made errors (which is very, very annoying!). </p>
<p>Note: the attitude “Nothing whatsoever can save you from MIT, so don’t try” seems to be a bad one, but the attitude of differential, which is to say that the only way to really know what it’s like to be stumped is to GET STUMPED seems accurate. By the way, sometimes the things stumping me will be pretty simple, and generally it’s just very hard to get to the point where I know everything I have done is correct…though when such a point is reached, I will know – this may be a feeling unique to writing a math proof, however, since I know what I’m trying to do, and usually can smell a rat when it’s there.</p>
<p>By “no preparation” I obviously mean that outside of class preparation isn’t necessary at times, and what’s more important is how you keep up when the time comes during the semester.</p>
<p>
Don’t forget that you’ll have plenty of time to figure this out during term – you can, if you want, start in the super crazy hard version of everything and drop down to the merely crazy hard version up to Add Date, which is several weeks into term. You can also do the converse, although as you can imagine it’s more common to do it the first way.</p>
<p>Faraday: The people who come in really strong in physics tend to take 8.022 first semester. (A much smaller group of people pass out of both 8.01 and 8.02.) So the “crazy IPHo kids” as you call them won’t be competing against you. 8.012 is a good class; I highly recommend it. It’s not too tough. I passed out of 5.11, so I don’t know anything about those classes. I don’t really know what 5.112 is; if that’s the super-hard version of intro-chem, I’m not sure that class was offered. I’m not sure how useful it is; I’ve seen classes like it at other universities and it seems like they try to make chem seem hard by putting quantum mechanics in the second lecture. It seems a little bit silly. </p>
<p>For someone of your background, your first term schedule seems entirely reasonable.</p>
<p>Look. I didn’t have any science related EC’s in high school. I’d taken single variable calc and AP chem by the time I came to MIT. I’d never even seen calc-based physics when I signed up for 8.012 and I am a physics major now and doing fine. Quit being such a nervous wreck. You are in a much better position than most kids going into MIT.</p>
<p>^ So brutal! Maybe some people just knew what they were getting into better than others. I for one was a huge nervous wreck coming into college math, because of all the hype. That’s part of why I discourage the hyping! </p>
<p>Anecdotally, my good friend (who was all the more nervous, coming in as a junior transfer!) and I met in this first class, both expecting to get B’s at the very best. I was so scared of it that I’d read literally half the textbook for the course over summer!!! Both of us ended up getting A’s and basically topped that class (probably something due to overpreparation), and it was happy, but it goes to say that it’s legitimate to be nervous, plus better safe than not!</p>
<p>I mostly agree with pebbles.</p>
<p>Lack of background sucks and it is something to consider, but what you do to yourself mentally is much more detrimental. If you walk in thinking you can’t handle the material, you’ll end up not putting full effort in. Take all the hard classes you want and put forth your best effort, don’t worry (it doesn’t help with anything), and be open to switching to the normal class. You’ll be fine.</p>
<p>
Instead of 5.11, they now offer 5.111 for students with one year of high school chemistry and 5.112 for students with two years of high school chemistry. They cover the same material for the first ~1/2 of the class, then 5.112 moves ahead faster and gets into more advanced material. (They’re pronounced “five-eleven-one” and “five-eleven-two” to note their derivation from 5.11.)</p>
<p>So 5.112 is not necessarily super-hard, given the right background and aptitude, but it’s certainly the most challenging version of the chemistry GIR.</p>