<p>
Making up for the SAT I prep I didn't waste my life on. ;]</p>
<p>I would never admit to anyone I knew IRL that I actually studied for this, though. Hmm... how can I avoid telling them without lying? "Oh, I looked through a prep book the night before." HehehEHHEHE.</p>
<p>
<em>angry face</em></p>
<p>Also, didja take the WH test? If so, I can say that I'm equal to you in one history-related way, hehehe.</p>
<p>That's true. Its commendable, too. And yeah, I think an euphemism would be best, or "strategic ambiguity", as I usually like to case such purposefully nebulous statements. How about, "I brushed up on a few concepts by gazing through a prep book and memorized some formulas"?</p>
<p>Disclaimer: Since everyone knows your base knowledge wasn't good, if you get 700+, they are going to suspect you put work into it beyond what you told them earlier.</p>
<p>True. UGH I just really want to prove them wrong. I don't care how much effort went into it. fdjslkfjdslkfjsdf</p>
<p>(Obligatory get off CC post)</p>
<p>Seriously: Don't worry, you can pretend that you either a) got lucky with the questions, or b) remembered more than they had given you credit for. I think you know which course is preferable (and more honest). :)</p>
<p>IT GIVES ME ENERGY. Srsly!</p>
<p>I know. But it needed to be said. Hence why I said obligatory, implying I would do it regardless of the futility.</p>
<p>And yeah, you need to decide which order to go with. I would personally try Physics before Chemistry, especially if you pull the all-nighter. The formulas will be fresher in your head, which is always good for physics.</p>
<p>Yeah, I think I'll do that. </p>
<p>Almost done with my superinclusive formula sheet, about 1/20th of which I'll actually need to know! Then I'll review Chem 'til I've gone through everything at least briefly... then (new plan) go through a Chem practice 1 page at a time (checking answers as I go, that is, and reading explanations.) Then I'll do the same for Phys.</p>
<p>Again, if I have time.</p>
<p>Sounds good. Enjoy prepping...</p>
<p>What was the purpose of the formula sheet? Just get the information ingrained into your head through the repetition of writing it?</p>
<p>are there really going to be general relativity problems! ahhh i hate formulas. they should seriously just give them to us. i don't learn by rote.</p>
<p>There shouldn't be more than two general relativity problems.</p>
<p>
IKNOWRIGHT!!! AAAGHHH!</p>
<p>Sounds good. It helps me too.</p>
<p>Seriously, though, you guys need to be worrying about the electricity and magnetism problems, which are the worst. The circuits are okay; charges and magnetic fields were invariably the worst questions I had (aside from when I forgot the really really simple formula for work and tried to contrive the answer from something else using acceleration and mass values, F=MA, and my knowledge of calculus, which failed miserably.) I can go more into depth on the parenthetical story, but the point is that I had the most difficulty with those problems. The relativity problems are much more general than the electricity and magnetism ones, which I found tended to be the determining factor in difficulty.</p>
<p>Mmkay, thanks. Ugh, magnetism. :(</p>
<p>Did the, erm, right-hand rule help?</p>
<p>Yeah, it did. I used it on one problem, or maybe two. I can remember one vividly; the other, it may have served a tertiary role. I don't think I would have got either right without it, so its useful to know.</p>
<p>What's as useful is to remember that on a series circuit, the current is the same regardless of the location on the wire, and thus each resistor has the same current flowing through it. That trick question almost got me on the October test.</p>
<p>Edit: Major lols at what this thread has done to our posts per day. I moved above 4 again, and you probably gained a similar amount.</p>
<p>Hmm. Yeah, I just remember that series = same current and split voltage drop; parallel = same voltage drop and split current.</p>
<p>Lolz,
[quote]
Poseur 20
amciw 19
spideyunlimited 8
UnleashedFury 3
hookem168 3
Bamboozler 1
INVENIAMVIAM 1
[/quote]
</p>
<p>EDIT ~ crappy</a> cell phone pic of formulas</p>
<p>Yes, I know how much of that I won't need to know. But going back through it all was good review (conceptually), and I might look over it once or twice. I'll be studying from the shorter list, however, in my last-minute cramming (in other words, the car ride. Lol. A benefit of not driving...)</p>
<p>And yeah, I DID waste three minutes that could have been spent studying by taking that pic on my phone, emailing it to myself, and uploading it. Hahaha. </p>
<p>CHEM TIME.</p>
<p>Yep, sounds right. And lol, that's sort of funny. That is, very funny. Btw, we're tied now. :)</p>
<p>definitely become pro at the right hand rule. it's really helpful.</p>
<p>according to the sparknotes test i just took, here are my best to worst subjects:</p>
<p>thermal, mechanics, e & m, optics, waves, modern physics</p>
<p>Oooh, nice! Did SN give you a score (or score range)?</p>
<p>@ amciw: I'm winning.</p>
<p>590, i did it really quickly (like 30 min) though and only did easy looking ones. i didn't really feel like thinking too hard. </p>
<p>when are you gonna tkae a test? lol</p>
<p>edit - seeing that camera phone pic gives me comfort now that i know im not the only one who does pointless stuff like that.</p>
<p>After Chem! And yeah, 590 on SN even WITH trying, from what I've seen, would yield a higher score on the real thing, since SN is supposedly harder. Although, lolz @ 590. (And I'm allowed to lolz; I'm the only person in here who's gotten a 590 on an actual administration of a subject test. :D)</p>
<p>Are you all-nighting this, too?</p>
<p>@ amciw: +2!</p>
