<p>How are these?</p>
<p>Physics C1601 PHYSICS I:MECHANICS/RELATIVITY
Mathematics V1102 CALCULUS II
German V1101 ELEMENTARY GERMAN I
Lit Hum
U Writing</p>
<p>Physics/Math major...
Do I need a lab, too?</p>
<p>^good to go.</p>
<p>17.5 credits? Isn’t that a lot?</p>
<p>^nope, you’ll be fine, you need to take those 5 classes. You are forced to take lit hum and u writing, you should definitely start on your foreign language as quickly as possible, you need to start the physics/math sequence, you probably don’t want to wait till sophomore year to take your first physics class, and you need to started on the calc sequence to keep up the physics. </p>
<p>Just my two cents, you’ll have freedom later on that you cherish, because you’ll be able to drop bad classes and take others pass fail. 5 classes is the average course load. You have people here who tell you to take 4 your first semester, and others who tell you that 7 is not too difficult. If you’re going to be a math or phy major, 5 classes should in no way be a problem for you.</p>
<p>Beware of the 1600 Physics sequence… it’s more difficult than one might expect. I would also say that most of the people who succeed in 1600 start in Calc 3…</p>
<p>Know that if you have difficulty in 1600 you can drop to the 1400 stream… typically the lectures are arranged at the same time.</p>
<p>if you have difficulty with 1600, which is considered a joke sequence by many physics majors, then you should probably reconsider your major. With that in mind, if you’re SERIOUS about physics (intending grad school/academia), then consider the 2800 sequence, though you might not be able to handle it if you’ve never had calc 2. 2800 will take up all of your time, but 1600 will waste of it. columbia really lacks a reasonable first-year physics sequence for physics majors, so it’s hard to decide on which to take, but given how easy your other classes are 2800 should be possible timewise.</p>
<p>imo, your courseload sets up for a nice, very easy first semester, but you will be significantly behind more aggressive students (ex: you might never take classes with physics majors your year coming out of 2800, because you’ll just never catch up).</p>
<p>I’m just curious as to the views of the repliers above… what would you (to those who “know”) say the difference in difficulty between 1600 and 1400 Physics is?</p>
<p>From what I remember, the main difference is that 1600 is more higher-level math-intensive? I’ve read other posts comparing the two, with them ranging from not much difference in the end in the finals and such to, for example in mark’s post above, that it seems that the 1400 track is indeed easier than the 1600 track and am just curious as to some more viewpoints.</p>
<p>(For myself, I’m thinking of majoring in EE, which seems to require three courses in physics - or the completion of a track - but does not require a higher level course track; if this isn’t the case, please tell me : P)</p>
<p>1600 is not a joke. End of story - most of the weekly problem sets take between 5-10 hours to complete, and you will still probably not get 100%. Exam means range between about 35% - 85%, and the textbook we used in 1600 is also used for McGill’s highest level introductory Physics class. </p>
<p>Ivilleslacker: I’m not certain if you’ve taken any of these courses, or what your high school preparation looked like, but know that not everyone at Columbia went to one of the best public/private schools in the US. First year grades are almost entirely based on the level of high school preparation people have received before arriving at Columbia. In a conversation with the head of undergraduate Chemistry at Columbia, I was told that he knows of professors of Chemistry that received C’s in freshman, standard level, Chemistry. The same reasoning applies to Physics… one can have a natural aptitude at the subject, but without enough technical background in the field, still struggle.</p>
<p>Jooter: 1600 is more math intensive than 1400, but the conceptual difficulty is also much higher in 1600. In terms of the difference in difficulty, there is a much bigger step between Physics 1400 and 1600, than between 1600 and 2800. Know that the vast majority of students take the 1400 sequence. On my first year floor in John Jay, only two people took Physics 2800 or 1600, a close friend and myself. Feel free to pm me if you have additional questions.</p>
<p>wrong. you clearly don’t know anything about 2800, if you’re saying the difference between 1400 and 1600 is bigger than that of 1600 and 2800. 2800 is the hardest undergraduate course at columbia. while its true that some ipho type people had an easier time in 2800, most of us were equally unprepared (hence a very high attrition rate). those who got raped by 2800 would just drop and rape 1600 without effort. and personally, i don’t even see how columbia justifies offering 1400 as a physics sequence for engineers. its a high school level class.</p>
<p>the real reason to take 2800 is to meet the smartest students in your year. no other class has such a ridiculous group of students.</p>
<p>geniuses will tend to self select into 2800, so the opinions you hear about these sequences will be a bit skewed. first year grades are solely dependent on whether or not you DO THE HOMEWORK AND GO TO CLASS. that’s all there is to it.</p>
<p>lvilleslacker, would you recommend 1600 over 1400 on the basis of usefulness towards an engineering degree? in other words, is 1400 not enough physics for an engineering degree in a field that has strong connections to physics (ie. EE)? on the flip side, is 1600 or 2800 too much physics than is required for someone not pursuing a degree in physics?</p>
<p>so if i was able to do well in my physics classes, including ap but got a 3 on the exam should i consider 1600 still? I love physics so it is a tough decision; where as, i dont like chem so i picked 1400 sequence. going mech eng major.</p>
<p>Drake333, I’d say go for 1600. You can drop the class later if it is too much. 1400 seemed around on par with my school’s AP class, using the same textbook but going more in-depth. 1600 seemed to be a bit harder than that.</p>
<p>NB, during first semester, the three tracks cover relatively similar material (unfortunate for 2800, it should have moved quicker). 2800 did not go into advanced mechanical topics heavily (just a bit of touching on rigid body motion and inertia tensors, no Lagrangians or calculus of variations) -> the main difference between the three tracks is just harder mechanics problems, and not a lot of conceptual difference. Second semester is a lot different, at least in 2800.</p>
<p>I got a 5 on the AP BC exam, but only took an AB course… taking calc 2 to be safe. Also, I got a 5 on Physics B… is 1600 okay?</p>
<p>everyone should consider the most advanced track possible, if only to save time on the sequence to free up classes later. you can always drop if its too much, and you will not be behind. i don’t think anyone should be taking 1400 (maybe premeds), but if you don’t care much for physics and want a very easy time, i suppose it is a viable course.</p>
<p>i agree that 2801 had surprisingly easy exams, but its possible the class has gotten more reasonable since i took it (we were quite vocal in our complaints about the problem sets, and the next year i heard some of them could be completed in < 10 hours, which we never managed.)</p>
<p>lagrangian mechanics and calc. of variations are honestly a bit too easy for 2800, imo, which might be why they aren’t included. our class went fairly deep into relativity/tensors, so again it sounds like the material/experience might vary a bit year to year.</p>
<p>^yeah I agree with Iville here, if you want to be a physics major 2801 is the way to go, it’ll bust your *****, but that what it takes to be a physics major. the others are doing it. If you can’t handle it, then you know you should shoot for math or econ or whatever.</p>
<p>lvilleslacker, did you have Professor Cole? We perpetually fell behind, less due to the students than to him. Our problem sets were sometimes shortened, because he didn’t manage to write all the problems on time. I do see your point about the two topics mentioned; I guess it’s not necessary to learn them in an introductory class, seeing that 3003 Mechanics is a major requirement. We went somewhat deep into special relativity, less so for tensors</p>
<p>toastmaster, I agree that as a prospective physics major, you might want to try 2801 for a little while. But allot time so that you can independently study some of the requisite math. And don’t feel too discouraged if you find the class too much; a lot of physical intuition gets lost if you aren’t comfortable with the math.</p>
<p>Hmm…ok! Thanks</p>
<p>sorry, bu ti just ahd a question
how difficult would it be to take physics chem and bio in freshmen year?
also if ure Bme major can u take intro bio earlier than in ure junior year?</p>
<p>Chem is a pre-req for intro bio, so you won’t be able to take the two at the same time unless you get permission from Mowshowitz. But I wouldn’t recommend taking those three sciences all at the same time. Bio isn’t as easy as it sounds.</p>
<p>did anyone see the summer advising online video they just sent us? </p>
<p>at 18:28, the adviser said something like “all students taking chemistry have to go to the placement exam, but physics you only have to do it if you want to take the accelerated track”.</p>
<p>does this sound right? we have to go for an exam even for the lowest track of chem (1403)?</p>