Is it really that difficult?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

almo88

double frick
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Messages
416
Reaction score
0
One of my physics classmates just took the MCAT about 3 weeks ago and said that it really wasn't as hard as everyone had told her. She said that she didn't study at all for it!! So, I'm trying to decide if she was telling the truth, or if she is just another gunner trying to knock out the competition. Now, keep in mind, she isn't a "genius" or anything!!!

So what do you think? Is she a gunner, or do I have weird ideas about the MCAT? 😕
 
I think we are giving Newton too much credit. I think people were a lot less intelligent back then, so the genius of Newton was over exaggerated because compared to everyone else he was phenomenal. The intelligence level of the human race has risen steadily since the days of Newton and I'm sure someone on this board could invent the contemporary equivalent of calc or classical physics. There are certainly many people in this country right now right up there with Newton, it's just that revolutionary advances are much harder to accomplish nowadays. There are many great scientists working in the life science field today, and what they are working on will blow your mind (those of you in the life sciences will understand me there).

C'mon people, give yourself some credit.
That's obsurd and ridiculous, listen to yourself, "I'm sure someone on this board could invent the contemporary equivalent of calc or classical physics"
sounds to me like you have no clue and never taken a calc or physics class,:laugh::laugh:,
I am in "life science" as you call it, I see physicians, researchers, and attend scientific seminars where Harvard and Stanford send their best scientists, and they are all great, but attempting to place them at the same level as Newton or even close by, is insane and preposterous.
 
Haha, no. You are confusing knowledge with intelligence. Newton's time had more knowledge than Archimedes, but Archimedes wasn't any less intelligent. Einstein had more knowledge to work with, but doesn't mean he was any more intelligent. Even newton himself said:

"If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."

And I'll say something else, if anyone on this board is smart enough to invent calculus and physics, they need to change their major and go into physics. I am a bit bitter as I am not intelligent to do a phD in physics 😛. I have so much respect for guys who can contribute something new to that field. But Newton was, well, Newton.


Very few people in history could actually do things like Newton. Feynman probably could have (he actually did "invent" parts of calc).

Guys like him don't come along that much:




And finally, on Newton, here is what Alexander Pope said about him:

”Nature and nature's laws lay hid in night;
God said "Let Newton be" and all was light."

No one is going to say that about any of us.

Columbus, Magellan, and Heineken were giants. Newton cannot compete with those guys.
 
The knowledge of humans in increasing on average simply through the accumulation of discoveries from days past, new advancements, and the ability to efficiently store and cataloge knowledge. That's called scientific progress. Or whatever similar equivalent you wish to use as a label.

But humans in our time have no more intellectual capacity than did those in Newton's time, or Kepler's, or Plato's'. Growth over the last many hundreds of years has likely been immesurably slow. That's called evolution, and without some staggering upset to the environment it procedes at a snail's pace. Certainly not fast enough for Newton to be any less of a genious if he were born in this time than is the case for his own time.

But I don't know if he's ace the MCAT. He's likely infer the correct answers for a lot of problems that others without knowledge in those specific disciplines would not, but a language barrier would keep him from rocking the organic chemistry questions. A little studying before hand, however... and bye bye MCAT.
 
There are interesting points that you make and miss. According to our texts, populations evolve not individuals. This is a misleading statement, because individuals are the constituency of the population. Intelligence is certainly selected for at a greater magnitude than centuries ago (ignorance is too, i.e. people of the indigent South Pacific Archipelagos). This is why I believe that in today's world the range of the intelligence gap and intellecutal capacity between the smartest and dumbest is wider than at any other time in history.

But humans in our time have no more intellectual capacity than did those in Newton's time, or Kepler's, or Plato's'. Growth over the last many hundreds of years has likely been immesurably slow. That's called evolution, and without some staggering upset to the environment it procedes at a snail's pace. Certainly not fast enough for Newton to be any less of a genious if he were born in this time than is the case for his own time.
 
That's obsurd and ridiculous, listen to yourself, "I'm sure someone on this board could invent the contemporary equivalent of calc or classical physics"
sounds to me like you have no clue and never taken a calc or physics class,:laugh::laugh:,
I am in "life science" as you call it, I see physicians, researchers, and attend scientific seminars where Harvard and Stanford send their best scientists, and they are all great, but attempting to place them at the same level as Newton or even close by, is insane and preposterous.

Right, I have no clue. Gimme a break. I guess I fooled the University that gave me my degree in Biochemistry and Physics then.....shhh....don't tell them I haven't taken any physics classes.

As I call it? You mean how everyone in the field calls it right?

Harvard and Stanford are overrated.
 
One of my physics classmates just took the MCAT about 3 weeks ago and said that it really wasn't as hard as everyone had told her. She said that she didn't study at all for it!! So, I'm trying to decide if she was telling the truth, or if she is just another gunner trying to knock out the competition. Now, keep in mind, she isn't a "genius" or anything!!!

So what do you think? Is she a gunner, or do I have weird ideas about the MCAT? 😕

It is not as hard as people on this board make it out to be. However, I would not take this test unprepared.

Certain people have more aptitude and naturally do better on this test with less preparation. However, even these people need to know all of the background information before attempting the test.

The average studying time is about 1 month of intensive studying, or 3 months of light studying.

Don't let others scare you, but do not take the test lightly either.
 
It is not as hard as people on this board make it out to be. However, I would not take this test unprepared.

Certain people have more aptitude and naturally do better on this test with less preparation. However, even these people need to know all of the background information before attempting the test.

The average studying time is about 1 month of intensive studying, or 3 months of light studying.

Don't let others scare you, but do not take the test lightly either.

Thanks for the advice! 🙂
 
my 2 cents:

i do not doubt that any intelligent person, such as newton, will score well on the MCAT. however, i feel that he, like everyone else, needs to invest a lot of time into understanding the material and deciphering the Q's in order to score high.

newton may be a genius, but he still has to invest time into studyin.
 
Ah, I doubt that. I hadn't taken half of the pre-reqs and studied very lightly, and did "fine." I think it really depends on the person. Some people are just much better are reading these standardized passages and getting to the correct answer. Ask me a question face to face and I'll probably seem like an idiot. :laugh:
 
Top