<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I got accepted into CMU without ever taking a calc course. How far behind am I, and is it possible to catch up without insane learning over the summer?</p>
<p>Specifically I got accepted into CMU college of Science where I applied for computational bio. </p>
<p>Also, if you're not genius caliber how much effort / time do you have to put in to get decent grades?</p>
<p>You are not behind. Most people start off at 21-120. </p>
<p>I took math before but that didn't really help me (besides knowing how to differentiate things). Learn how to differentiate things over the summer and you'll be as good as people who have taken a full year of math in high school.</p>
<p>As for difficulty, I did 2 hours of real work every week for math and had a 98 or so as an avg for my exams. Needless to say, I got an A.</p>
<p>Hm did you have to take calc based phyiscs at the same time as taking calc? </p>
<p>I'm taking AP Physics B this year and found it to be easy, except I'm just a bit nervous about the calc, cause at CMU first year Science students have to take calc based</p>
<p>No. I don't need to take science classes since I got a 5 on AP Environmental in high school. Seriously CMU is not that hard. I like the reputation though since it helps with employers/recruiters :)</p>
<p>CMU first year science students take Physics for Scientists unless they really like physics and take Matter and Interactions. (There's also Physics for Engineers and I think some course geared at H&SS majors.) The first semester of Physics for Scientists has essentially NO calculus (I think I integrated one thing the whole semester, and it was very easy). It's a very odd class, as it takes a microscopic view of matter and focuses more on general concepts than particular formulas. The second semester of Physics for Scientists (Electricity and Magnetism) does involve calculus, but you would have taken it by then. It also takes an obsessively microscopic view of circuits that makes me wonder why I willingly enrolled in the class, because as a CS major I could have taken any other science/engineering course. Too late now, though.</p>
<p>Physics for Engineers is calc based, I think.</p>
<p>KrazyKow, do you use (or did you use) the book "Physics for Scientists and Engineers with Modern Physics" by Serway and Beichner?</p>
<p>No, physics for scientists uses "Matter and Interactions" by Chabay and Sherwood (there's two volumens, one for mechanics, and one for electicity and magnetism). I don't know what book physics for engineers uses, but it's quite thick and it's white.</p>
<p>Physics for Engineers uses "Physics for Scientists & Engineers" (3rd ed) by Douglas C. Giancoli</p>