<p>Question just popped in my mind when D called after her Physics II final (with the amazing hard grading prof) this afternoon. </p>
<p>What's so different about physics that a true science nerd like my D would just flat-out not like it? I thought it was all math and she usually loves math. It seems odd to me that she likes the (highly paraphrased by history major) "chemistry and biology relevant parts of physics but not the out there stuff". She went on to say to her simpleton dad that she liked density and pressure and things like that (used blood flow in her example that I can't quote) but that some other areas just aren't her thing.</p>
<p>Can someone translate 20 year old pre-med speak to me? </p>
<p>Is she talking interest level, difficulty, abstractness or is this just a pre-med way of looking at Physics? Or a little bit of all that. She denied grade stressors (any greater then that she faces in being a pre-med in general). She has said that if she had a better incoming background she might have enjoyed it more and gotten more out of it. Not that any of this matters because the final has been turned in and that's it for Physics for her , but still. I'd like a better glimpse.</p>
<p>Physics II is usually things like magnetism, electricity, and light, all of which are rather abstract. Physics I is generally Newtonian and MUCH easier to visualize. In my experience most people tend to only like one semester but not the other.</p>
<p>Agreed with both of the above posters (fried rice and BDM).</p>
<p>Physics I actually stimulated some interest for me, and I didn't mind learning about all of the concepts.</p>
<p>Physics II (which I'm currently in), I absolutely hate. The material is hard to visualize, and a lot of it just has no relevance to what I'm interested in. Additionally, it seems to just be getting in the way of more important classes (organic chem, organic chem lab), more interesting classes (endocrinology), and more fun classes (english+american lit) that I'm taking this semester.</p>
<p>At this point, I'm just mindlessly memorizing formulas for physics II (my final is next monday), without any regard for what they really mean or how to derive them. Thank god I'm great at algebra and math, because otherwise I'd have to learn what they actually mean to manipulate them or use them properly. In physics I, I didn't mind learning about the derivations and whatnot, but physics II has just been mind numbingly dull and boring because I don't care about the stuff and I don't care to learn all about the equations and formulas. I just don't want to put the time into it.</p>
<p>I actually really liked E&M. It does require a bit of abstract reasoning but once you get past that, it all makes sense. Every equation has a meaning and needs to be studied in the context of its derivation. With the concepts and theory well grounded, who needs pictures? Plus, the problems are much cooler than in newtonian mechanics. For example, you get to find the amount of energy needed to build a ball of charge( a really awesome application of calculus) or what it means to have momentum conservation of an force field( yes a field, not a mass) . Whereas in mechanics, you just calculate trivial stuff, eg.accleration, velocity, forces, angular momentum etc. That is, mechanics is more calculations and less theory.</p>
<p>I think peoples brains are either wired to 'get' physics or not to. I was a very good student (many many years ago) - good at science and math - and it was the first subject I ran into where I just sat there going 'huh?' My daughter had to do 3 semesters of it at her high school (a math and science school) and she hated it. She is dreading having to do it again in college for premed.</p>
<p>As far as I can tell, a lot of why the second semester is there is to make fewer people apply to med school. Mechanics has applications for people that may be interested in orthopedic surgery (I've heard), but light and magnetism don't really apply much to people that are going to be mechanics of the body.</p>
<p>Surprisingly, besides the obvious stuff in biology, physics has the most direct application of concepts to medicine during the first two years - in particular fluid pressure and flow mechanics, circuitry and electrical conduction. But you really don't have to know the math (and certainly don't have to know the calculus).</p>
<p>Oh stupid. Stupid me. Thanks for the comment, BRM. Yes, potentials and electrical fields and all that are actually very important in first year physiology. We actually did need to know some of the math, although not calculus, for it.</p>
<p>Curm, did she have a lab with this Physics II course?</p>
<p>I agree w/above posters - most people have a preference for mechanics vrs. electricity/magnetism/light/modern physics, and the later (Physics II) is more abstract. But I also view it as the marriage of math and science, and as such the great reward for studying math for so many years - finally, one can see math as a language and not as a separate entity - so what's not to like?? ;)</p>
<p>Wow, how can someone not LOVE physics? :) I'm definitely biased. It's so elegant, concise, flexible, powerful, enlightning... Oh well, the important thing to enjoy physics is to really delve into the concepts, and be able to extract unity out of diversity. I know, it sounds a lot like evolutionary biology. But for example, consider Lens' Law: it's very similar to Newton's 3rd law. Or Ampere's law: analog to Gauss' law. The more important thing is to derive yourself the equation, or form an intuitive picture (and DRAW it) in your head (actually DRAW the fields lines). Finally, practice makes perfect. And if the professor is hard to understand, she can use ocw from MIT and listen to Walter Levin. I also find the EM lectures from Indian Institute of Technology very concise and helpful (It's on youtube).</p>
<p>Actually, I personally prefer electromagnetism more than mechanics, because Mechanics makes it seem too much like math and calculus, while EM makes it seem more like actual physics.</p>
<p>I don't know why I have such affinity to physics. Maybe Crick had a degree in physics before doing his DNA research( or is it the other famous guy at Cambridge)? :)</p>
<p>Frankly, you actually can SAVE time by fully understanding a concept before lecture-time. Instead of spending 3 hrs. being confused, you spend 3 hrs gaining additional insight on a difficult subject (while everyone else is scratching his or her head). Physics is not a subject to learn by osmosis.</p>
<p>I apply that logic to most other classes, but I didn't apply it to physics; I preferred to save time by waiting until the last minute to study and then letting my mathematability (yes, I just made up that word) get me through the rest of it.</p>
<p>But you're definitely right that physics is not something learned by osmosis; I got virtually nothing out of going to lecture without reading the textbook.</p>
<p>As a physicist, it is only with E & M that things get interesting - the concept of fields is fundamental to everything in physics that has been done in the last 100 years! Without understanding this stuff, you can have no comprehension of the physical sciences in the 20th century from relativity to quantum mechanics.</p>