<p>I looked and saw that Chemistry still hasn't gotten it's own thread! That's changed, now!!!</p>
<p>So, I guess i'll start things off. What textbook do you use (if you're in the class), and what have you covered so far?</p>
<p>Wow. There is a thread for everything… I think most are just going to get washed away in all the other threads.</p>
<p>AP Chem is hell. I only started getting the hang of things in December. </p>
<p>My class uses Zumdhal “Chemistry” and is mostly crappy labs supposedly designed by our teacher. </p>
<p>First semester ends Jan 20th at my school and we will have completed chapter 11 (Properties of Solutions)</p>
<p>Did you go straight through 1-11? Our teacher skips around. We are also using Zumdahl (4th edition >.<)</p>
<p>We’ve done nine chapters (as of ~Dec 15).</p>
<p>And yes, it is a hell of a class. My teacher is a freaking genius, though =P</p>
<p>We’re using Zumdahl as well. It’s a terrible book, really. I bought another book on my own (Brown, Lemay, Bursten) and I KNOW that I’m grasping the concepts better.</p>
<p>I’m freaking out about the AP test. Our class uses Silberberg’s Chemistry, 3rd edition. We’re barely on bonding! 
but the chapter combines ch. 9-11 in the book. our semester doesnt end until jan 28</p>
<p>If that seems to be the case, then it looks like you have to self-study the rest of the chapters. You shouldn’t worry if you have a strong motivation to get a good score on teh ap exam. Last year for me, my AP Chem class finished up to acid-base equilibrium. Ionic equilibrium, thermodynamics (entropy, free energy), electrochemistry, and organic (this subject I skimmed over), I have to self-study on my own. I did well on the exam, but for the other ap chem students who took the exam, they failed because they didn’t study.</p>
<p>I hate this class. Luckily, my class is a really tight knit group, so we all kind of help each other. I think we’re in chapter 5 or something in Zumdal, the one about particles and stuff. I use that Study Guide that comes along with it to study for tests. Which somewhat helps. But I hate that book. I want to burn it if we get to keep thjem at the end of the year, since I think it might be time for new books.</p>
<p>You get to keep your old texts when you get new ones? That’s pretty cool 
(well, maybe not 
).</p>
<p>But wow, I’m surprised at the contempt for Zuhmdal’s text. I’ve heard such good things about it.</p>
<p>The only problem I have with Zumdahl is that some of the practice problems are a bit… shaky. Our instructor (who actually knows Zumdahl) has pointed out various errors in the practice questions on several occasions. What it lacks in practice problems, however, it makes up for in text.</p>
<p>My math textbook was the opposite of that last year. Good problems, bad text. </p>
<p>So anyway, for future reference you’d say Zumdahl’s is worth it?</p>
<p>Definitely.</p>
<p>Okay, thanks for the advice! I hope to take chem next year, but my school alternates from AP bio one year to AP chem the next (which I just found out). I might have to take AP Chem senior year, as I definitely want bio junior year.</p>
<p>My personal experience with Zumdahl? It’s really unnecessarily theoretical. It tends to assume knowledge where there may not be any, and it skips steps in practice problems sometimes. On some of the more abstract concepts, it fails to delve into deep enough explanation to reach the majority of people so that it leaves most behind. </p>
<p>In my opinion, MOST concepts aren’t covered in enough detail. I’m looking back on the text now and just realizing how much I don’t understand. Or how shallowly. And that’s not what you need from a textbook. Brown, Bursten, Lemay is doing wonders for me. I’m grasping the theoretical, I’m retaining it, I understand how and WHY I’m doing what I’m doing during the practice problems, and everything just ties together much easier.</p>
<p>Maybe I’m just not smart enough for Zumdahl. That’s entirely possible haha, and I don’t wanna rule that out! XD But for me, and from a LOT of what I’ve heard and read, it’s geared towards surprisingly few readers - and to me, that’s not what a textbook should be.</p>
<p>Were using Brown’s Chemistry: Central Science textbook. We are on kinetics… it’s simple and complicated all at the same time!!! Any tips for kinetics?</p>
<p>I didn’t understand kinetics back then until I analyzed the steps in the example.</p>
<p>I would give you advice… but i’m not really sure what you’re looking for. If you have an example problem, I could help walk you through it if that would help.</p>
<p>How does one determine the ‘rate-determining’ step? Lets say we have this set up:</p>
<p><a href=“http://i48.■■■■■■■.com/dwq69g.jpg[/url]”>http://i48.■■■■■■■.com/dwq69g.jpg</a></p>
![http://i48.■■■■■■■.com/dwq69g.jpg[/url]](http://i48.tinypic.com/dwq69g.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
<p>Which of the two middle rxns (both which supposedly run together in a pair) is the slow step? I understand rxn mechanisms (steps by which rxn occurs… such a complicated name for such a simple idea!), but I don’t get how to find the slow one…</p>
<p>I can’t really see that… could you type it out?</p>
<p>NO2 + CO –> NO + CO2 </p>
<p>Steps:
NO2 + NO –> NO3 + NO
NO3 + CO –> NO2 + CO2</p>
<p>Rate Law: k[NO2]^2 –> Given too us, but I doubt how I will be able to find it w/o it being given…</p>
<p>Example taken from [YouTube</a> - AP Chemistry: Kinetics 5](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbwoD_njUlE&feature=related]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbwoD_njUlE&feature=related)</p>