<p>How hard is it? with Prof. Sinha</p>
<p>It’s not as easy as chem or bio, but don’t be afraid to seek out your own resources. There’s an explanation for everything on the web, and you can ask some of your friends who’ve finished the 1 series to explain things to you. Just don’t fall behind.</p>
<p>As an engineering student who went through the whole 2 series, it really depends on your professor. In general though, what makes physics extremely challenging is that every exam really is like an IQ test. There were 2 ways to get an A in that sort of system. Either be a genius or do an extreme amount of practice problems and hope the questions on the exam are similar to at least a few of the ones you practiced. That’s what makes it so difficult, the amount of variation in physics problems is limitless. You cannot memorize to pass, you have to understand and apply - that’s where being a genius would help. Now don’t get me wrong, you most certainly don’t have to be a genius to do well. Just expect to spend a lot more time than you’re used to in doing practice problems and you should be fine (B or higher).</p>
<p>My friend had an IQ of 155-160. With minimal studying, skipping a ton of lectures, he always got an A or set the curve. My IQ is around 135-140, with at least a few good hours 2-3 days before a midterm, I could get an A. My other friend had around an IQ of 115-120. He studied everyday and spent 1-2 hours on physics, he also got As. Obviously these results are subjective, but I put them here to emphasize that physics is one of those subjects where it’s quite unfair in how much of an advantage intelligence has. Hence why so many struggle as it’s not a subject you can just tackle head on without some planning and dedication.</p>
<p>How can I check my IQ?</p>
<p>Yes I wanna check my IQ too…</p>
<p>lol I want to check it as well.</p>
<p>OT: Shibbiman is right however. It takes a lot of practice problems and time spent reading the book. I had 4-5 other suitemates who took the 2 series together and we would occasionally work together on problems and always help each other out. I had Sinha for 2B and there were weekly quizzes, so expect to study for that class a good amount if you want an A.</p>
<p>Okay… since this kind of devolved into a testimony about IQ, let me just reiterate what’s important so OP doesn’t miss the real point. The real point is: plan accordingly. If you want an A, you better either be smart enough to pull one off without much effort, or study hard enough to get one. Simple as that. Own your grade. I wouldn’t get so lathered up over this IQ business, as I can tell you from experience that the people getting good GPAs at UCSD are not merely the ones with the highest IQ. You can leverage your non-genius with hard work, focus and smart decision making. Like everyone else said, read the book early, read it more than once, practice a variety of problems (old quizzes are nice for that) more than once until you’ve mastered them, and don’t expect to get by without thinking. Thinking is good, it’s all you really need to get by on the exams. I really believe if you follow the advice you’ve been given thus far in this thread, you will do fine.</p>
<p>Good luck!</p>
<p>As someone who had never taken physics before college, I want to emphasize smart studying – learn the physics concepts but also learn how concepts are tested. I don’t know about this IQ talk, but there are different types of intelligence and the ones that get hit hard in classes like physics and ochem are those that excel at rote memorization.</p>
<p>I disagree about this infinite variation in physics though – one of my favorite TAs said there’s only so many ways you can reasonably test a physics concept at the level they’re teaching.</p>
<p>Thats true, but you’ll have to spend a lot of time studying all the possible variations in order to get an A. Those that understand the basic problems and know when to apply formulas when necessary are those who get good grades. There aren’t an infinite amount of variation, but there is a good amount where strict memorization just won’t cut it.</p>
<p>Sorry if I scared you guys about the mentioning of IQ. It was not meant to induce anxiety of an insurmountable wall but rather explain the harsh truth that there’s a reason physics is infamously known as being tougher than other subjects. Just studying as hard as you can isn’t always going to cut it for a class like this. You have to study smart, and differently than what you may be used to if you’ve only taken chemistry or biology.</p>
<p>As for momosky’s comment about not being infinite variation, that is somewhat true for phys 2A, however if you continue the series, you will be in for a shocker. Physics is just one of those subjects that ties with everything. Depending on your professor, some will reference chem, bio, and even throw in multivariable calc at you, hence why I brought up the issue of IQ. It’s not just purely physics but instead a plethora of cognitive thinking required during these exams. It’s not impossible at all, but for myself and a lot of my fellow engineering peers, physics was just a pain we all had to go through before reaching our upper division courses.</p>
<p>shibbiman,
lol. I didn’t mean it like that, the IQ approach to learning is worth examining; I just prefer a more accessible and dynamic approach to learning than “This number is your fate,” seeing as we all know from life experience highest IQ does not = greatest achievements. This is an advice forum after all, where we don’t want first-years coming in thinking their IQ determines their fate. </p>
<p>Having said that, I’m going to agree with momosky that at this level (we’re talking UCSD lower-division physics) I really don’t think students’ biggest concern is the endless permutations of problems that could be thrown at them, which after all, is the whole point of testing students. You know, to see if they actually learned the concepts soundly rather than memorizing solution mechanisms and doing them rote, like middle school math. I have yet to see test questions that required excessively sophisticated and novel solutions that would be unrealistic to expect an undergrad at UCSD to conceive. That’s all there is to physics classes, really. You just have to be able to solve that problem in the time frame given to you, using what knowledge and skills you should have acquired during your preparation for the exam. There’s an element of luck to solving novel problems as well.
Different people take different trains to get there, but the end result is the same. If someone’s intelligence can carry him/her most of the way there, then great. But for those of us who aren’t holding out for genius, we’re just gonna have to ride in on effective study habits, adequate practice and a good night’s sleep.</p>
<p>92faim, I definitely agree with you about IQ’s relation to success and overall achievement. Scientists have yet to prove any direct correlation to one’s overall success and his or her IQ. However, I’m not sure if you took the phys 2A-D (lower division physics) series, or maybe we had different professors. Most lower division 2 series professors consider their physics classes to be weeders. If anything, I found the lower division series even harder than the upper division physics courses because of the onslaught some professors brought.</p>
<p>For example, in phys 2D, lets say you have a typical problem in special relativity. Lets even have your ordinary simple plug and chug problem. Even a problem like this can easily become a nightmare. They leave out a variable, instead you have to find the variable using electrostatic forces and torque, both aspects learned in phys 2A and 2B. If you’ve only been studying the material given to you in phys 2D, you will fail that problem completely. If they simply tested you on the concepts learned in their own respective courses, the averages on midterms wouldn’t be around 20%. Now you might say that, “well it’s expected that you remember everything from 2A and 2B as well”. True, if this was something that was built upon each other consistently, but the average human brain cannot retain such information if not constantly used. Just how my mom was a math major, she doesn’t even remember calculus because she has never used it in her work. This is why I stated for phys 2A, the amount of variation is reasonable, but if you continue the series, expect these sort of scenarios all the time on exams.</p>
<p>I think I’ve been too cynical so far in these posts, but I have seen way too many people leaving the classroom in tears and dropping out from my physics courses. It’s better to be a bit scared and over-prepared instead of thinking that ‘as long as i try hard, I’ll be okay’ because physics is sometimes very unfair. Like in the example I used, what does torque and electrostatic forces have to do with understanding special relativity? Pretty much nothing. But regardless, many professors will not care, so you must expect and prepare for the worst so that you will give yourself the highest chance of success.</p>
<p>shibbiman, you and 92faim both make valid points (in regards to IQ and test problems, haha). I think my experience with problem variation differs because I took the 1 series, which is mostly conceptual and the level of math barely touches elementary calculus (if at all). The material we learn is probably more surface level than the 2 series, too. At that level you can’t throw much into a problem.</p>
<p>I guess it depends on your professor too O__O that phys2D problem sounds brutal.</p>