is it still competitive to take physics w/o calculus? or would i really need to take calculus. also, should i add on to my pre-reqs by taking psychology and statistics or do those two classes not really matter?
physics w/ or w/o calculus
- Thread starter B23
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2004
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 0
On the one hand, Harvard med requires pretty stringent calc experience.
On the other hand, physics without calculus is just fine for pretty much all other schools. (I took such a course.) I do suggest you take a calc course of some kind even if it's only a calc for bio sci or something (which I also did). Stats is usually a requirement anyway, so I would take that, too. 👍
On the other hand, physics without calculus is just fine for pretty much all other schools. (I took such a course.) I do suggest you take a calc course of some kind even if it's only a calc for bio sci or something (which I also did). Stats is usually a requirement anyway, so I would take that, too. 👍
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2004
- Messages
- 80
- Reaction score
- 0
If you know you're getting an A either way, take the calc based because you'll actually learn some physics. As far as being competitive, it doesn't matter, because adcoms dont know the difference. For instance: at Purdue you can take PHYS 149, 152, 162, 218, or 220 for your 1st semester physics. Since you prob. don't go to purdue, can you tell which is hardest? The order of difficulty actually goes like this: 218 (tech majors), 220 (bio and other premed), 149 (engineering w/o good math bg), 152 (engr & physics), and 162 (honors physics). 152 & 162 are calc based. So my honors calc based physics almost appears to be lower than algebra based school of tech. physics. On the flipside, if your school has a med school they prob. WILL know the diff, just as Indiana U. knows the diff between PU courses, but UCLA doesn't.
Take stat, its an easy A in a BCPM class, take psych if you don't have much humanities, behavioral science, its a + for a lot of med schools, and it isnt a - at any (plus another gpa booster).
Take stat, its an easy A in a BCPM class, take psych if you don't have much humanities, behavioral science, its a + for a lot of med schools, and it isnt a - at any (plus another gpa booster).
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2003
- Messages
- 790
- Reaction score
- 0
Screw calculus, take the easy root.
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2003
- Messages
- 920
- Reaction score
- 1
But physics with calc is easier. I took the one without calc as a bio major, later as a cs major I took the one with calc. Calculus was invented with good purpose, it simplifies long boring algebra problems. So if you love 1-2 page calculations help yourself to physics with no calc, I'd rather do it in a couple of lines with an integral or derivative.B23 said:
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2004
- Messages
- 270
- Reaction score
- 1
rgporter said:
i gotta agree with rgporter. i took physics w/o calc and regret it to this day. tedious calculation and a boring class made physics a pain. if i could do it again i would go the calculus route.
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2003
- Messages
- 175
- Reaction score
- 0
Take it without. I took it with for the first semester...I thought it would be more interesting/help in the future. I knew I was in trouble when all of my friends were in the one without with all of the other pre-meds and mine had every engineering major in the school (exageration I know). These guys were using terms I had never heard of, and solving in ways that were foreign to me. I had to work my a** off for the B+. Switched next semester, a little easier time, and none the worse for the wear in retrospect.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2004
- Messages
- 776
- Reaction score
- 2
One interesting aspect of this debate is that the MCAT physics is purely non-calc based. While this shouldn't be a problem for those who take calc-based physics, calculators are not allowed on the MCAT and calc-based physics relies on calculators. It might be better to have to practice the kind of physics that will be on the MCAT...
Personally, I took non-calc based and I never regretted it for a second.
Personally, I took non-calc based and I never regretted it for a second.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2003
- Messages
- 394
- Reaction score
- 2
I'd say that both calc and non-calc based physics are reliant on calculators.
As I've said in a previous post, I think that calc-based physics goes into more depth on fewer topics, which is great for engineers and physics majors, but bad for those looking at the MCAT.
As I've said in a previous post, I think that calc-based physics goes into more depth on fewer topics, which is great for engineers and physics majors, but bad for those looking at the MCAT.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2004
- Messages
- 776
- Reaction score
- 2
As BubbleBobble said, you def. rely on a calculator for both types of physics, but as the MCAT can attest to, calculators are not required for non-calc based. Though I can imagine it is in the realm of possibility to do calc baesd physics in your head...I think it's not likely 🙂
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2003
- Messages
- 394
- Reaction score
- 2
Mini-rant. I'm not sure what most schools consider "calc-based" physics. From what I've seen, calc-based physics either takes two forms:
1) Only some discussion behind the calculus, hardly any application
2) Ridiculous amount of calculus
The first is what I had. Almost none of the problems we were given involved any use of calculus. It was all trig, and anything that did involve calculus as a theory was reduced to non-calculus by the end (ex: Gauss' Law).
The second, which I could imagine at some wicked hard physics programs, would have students using multivariable calculus for basic F=ma problems (variable force, variable mass, etc.) and PDEs for electricity problems.
If your school does the first, then it probably doesn't matter whether you take calc or non-calc physics.
If it's the second, then I salute you for taking calc-based physics if you didn't have to do it. 👍
1) Only some discussion behind the calculus, hardly any application
2) Ridiculous amount of calculus
The first is what I had. Almost none of the problems we were given involved any use of calculus. It was all trig, and anything that did involve calculus as a theory was reduced to non-calculus by the end (ex: Gauss' Law).
The second, which I could imagine at some wicked hard physics programs, would have students using multivariable calculus for basic F=ma problems (variable force, variable mass, etc.) and PDEs for electricity problems.
If your school does the first, then it probably doesn't matter whether you take calc or non-calc physics.
If it's the second, then I salute you for taking calc-based physics if you didn't have to do it. 👍
