<p>What is the main difference between Physics B and Physics C?</p>
<p>Do you have to know Physics B to do Physics C? Or do you only need to know some basic physics properties?</p>
<p>Currently, I am a sophomore and I am taking Calculus BC. Im getting As in that class and I know some basic Physics (although Ive never taken the class before). Do you think I can skip Physics B and go into Physics C in my junior year? </p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>my school only offers AP PHYS C.. and we take both tests.. something like colleges more often take C credit than B?? DON'T QUOTE ME!</p>
<p>But, we have like 15 in the Phys Class, 12 of which are in my BC class.. and my BC class is like 16 kids? Ya, we're small school.. and BC and AP PHYS are considered the hardest classes my school offers..</p>
<p>I've never taken physics (will next year), so I'm not positive, but at my school you can take AP Physics C without having taken ANY physics before, AP or regular. So if they let us do that, it seems like you wouldn't need B before C...? Just a guess.</p>
<p>The difference is that C uses calculus, and only covers mechanics and electricity and magnetism, whereas B uses algebra, but covers mechanics, electricity and magnetism, optics and waves, modern physics, and thermal physics. I wouldn't recommend taking C before having any sort of physics experience. At least taking a normal physics class would be ok, but ask people at your school if taking it without having any physics before is do-able. You probably can, but it'll be really hard to grasp all of the concepts and go at an AP Physics C pace.</p>
<p>If you take Physics B before Physics C, C will be ridiculously easy. It's basically you learn like one-third of what you learn in Physics B, except you use calculus. And if you know calculus already, having to do it with calculus shouldn't make much of a difference. In fact, a lot of times physics is actually easier to understand with calculus.</p>
<p>In my experience, Physics B was more for people who wanted to do physics for a science credit in college, not for physics or engineering majors. B is a ton of plug and chug using algebra.</p>
<p>In C, you cover less material, but it goes a lot deeper. Also, on the AP, often times (especially on free responses), you'll need to derive somewhat obscure formulas using the information they give. THe more important aspect of C, IMO is to learn how what ever system you're looking at works. In B, they tell you how it works, you just multiply the numbers together. </p>
<p>I took C before taking B, and I only took a semester of basic mechanical (ie velocity-accleration-PE-KE type stuff) physics, and I did fine.</p>
<p>Also, the curve on Physics C is much much better than on B.</p>
<p>I took Physics C without having taken any prior physics classes and while taking Calc BC at the same time (only science I had taken was AP Chem). Most of my friends and myself got 5s with a few 4s.</p>
<p>I am in B this year (junior) and am taking C next year. I can't imagine what i would do if i had to go right into C. B is good at teaching the ideas and it gives you a greater scope of physics topics. C is much more problem based. I don't know about other schools but I would never want to take C without having taken B first.</p>
<p>I second what Myrmidon73 has to say. </p>
<p>If you already have calc experience, B would be almost useless to you. WAY too easy. I'm taking C with AB Calc this year- my only problems seem to be learning the calculus in Physics, and then a bit later learning it in Calc (I learned how to integrate in Physics, not in Calc).</p>
<p>C after taking B would be weird... You'd sort of know everything but you wouldn't be able to do C easily because it's a completely different way of thinking- you have to 'reason it out' in C more than B, I think. I took an Honors Physics (algebra based) in ninth grade (it's required), and C is so different that I don't think the algebra-based physics helped me much at all except with projectile motion. In algebra based, you think of x and y as sort of independent, but in C, they're vectors and you use trig to get the components and all that jazz. Changes a lot of stuff completely, in my opinion.</p>
<p>Physics B and C differ in terms of calculus and the amount of material covered and the scope. I went straight to Physics C, as did all the people in my class. But that's because I took a regents physics (Normal physics) before taking Physics C. There is no reason to take Physics B and Physics C and the vast majority of people don't. Take an introductory course to physics and then, if you know calculus or are learning it, take Physics C. If you haven't learned calculus, take physics B. If you plan on being a doctor or something go for physics B. If you plan on being an engineer or physicist, definitely take physics C.</p>
<p>I took C without any prior physics experience. I was familiar with all the calc concepts already, so that helped... but I still would recommend having at least some sort of physics before you take C. Not necessarily B... that might be a little redundant. You say you do know some physics already... you'll probably be fine.</p>
<p>at my school, phys C (either or both) is easier than phys B. everyone (who tries even a little bit) gets 5s on the APs for C, but that is not the case for phys B.</p>
<p>I took C (mech and E+M) last year (along with ap chem) without any prior knowledge of physics and whatnot, only minor chemistry and biology knowledge. I got 5s on both phys tests.</p>
<p>Had I taken B, I would have been really really really confused. No calculus = no physics = retarded for a physics class. I highly recommend taking C if the math is high enough (i would say >=BC), otherwise try not to take B and opt for other sciences. chem is a great option btw.</p>