Question to those having used the Nova Physics book by Biehle

[TryingOnceMore]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hello All,

It's been, well...quite some time since I took physics, and it wasn't my best subject then (B+'s).

I've started by working in the Nova physics book by Biehle. This is the first and only review or text used so far.

When I do the questions and passages, I take them as I would a test, without looking back into the text for hints or help. I'm getting 85-90% correct on the section questions, and 65-80% correct answers on the passages.

For those of you who've used this to prepare for the MCAT, is this performance adequate for a first time through?

I'm just trying to gauge if I'm on track, or if these percentages should be better at this point.

Thank you all for any help and insight!

 

[optopia]

I used the first half of the Biehle book, up until the optics part. In general, I find Biehle's presentation was more rigorous than was needed for the MCAT. His questions can be quite difficult too. I switched to using Berkeley Review which I think is more tailored to the current MCAT topics, and asks in a style that is probably closer to the real thing.

For instance, Biehle is big on saying that torque = rFsin@. Well, rarely on the MCAT will the torque be at angle besides 90, so you really only need to know the equation as rF.

Also, he makes the kinematics more complicated than is necessary. Berkeley Review is better at teaching you the tricks to solve questions quickly, for example, a body in freefall on Earth falls a distance equal to 5t^2. So 5m in the 1st sec, 20m after the 2nd, 45m after the 3rd... If you launch an object vertically, it travels for v/g seconds, reaching a maximum height of v^2/2g. These tricks help you pick the right answer quickly. Biehle wants you to write out the whole kinematics equation and solve, and that's too time consuming on the MCAT.

That being said, his book is great to learn physics, period, for physics sake.

Keep in mind, I've never taken physics beyond 9th grade, so my innate understanding of physics was very rudimentary, although I'm good at math and I'm willing to stare at something for as long as necessary until I understand it.

I just did the MCAT on 9/7 so I don't know how it turned out in the end, but I did not have to guess on ANY physics question (and people were saying 9/7 was especially brutal and calculation intensive), and I was averaging 12-14 on the PS section of the AAMC practice tests.

So I guess what I'm saying is, if you are good at learning on your own, then other resources like TBR might be better since they're more efficiently tailored to teach you just what you need to know for the MCAT, but Biehle is intrinsically better for just learning the physics itself for physics sake.

 

[TryingOnceMore]

A superb answer, optopia, and very much appreciated - thank you!

I wish you the best on your scores!

 

[justalittlestar]

I used the first half of the Biehle book, up until the optics part. In general, I find Biehle's presentation was more rigorous than was needed for the MCAT. His questions can be quite difficult too. I switched to using Berkeley Review which I think is more tailored to the current MCAT topics, and asks in a style that is probably closer to the real thing.

For instance, Biehle is big on saying that torque = rFsin@. Well, rarely on the MCAT will the torque be at angle besides 90, so you really only need to know the equation as rF.

Also, he makes the kinematics more complicated than is necessary. Berkeley Review is better at teaching you the tricks to solve questions quickly, for example, a body in freefall on Earth falls a distance equal to 5t^2. So 5m in the 1st sec, 20m after the 2nd, 45m after the 3rd... If you launch an object vertically, it travels for v/g seconds, reaching a maximum height of v^2/2g. These tricks help you pick the right answer quickly. Biehle wants you to write out the whole kinematics equation and solve, and that's too time consuming on the MCAT.

That being said, his book is great to learn physics, period, for physics sake.

Keep in mind, I've never taken physics beyond 9th grade, so my innate understanding of physics was very rudimentary, although I'm good at math and I'm willing to stare at something for as long as necessary until I understand it.

I just did the MCAT on 9/7 so I don't know how it turned out in the end, but I did not have to guess on ANY physics question (and people were saying 9/7 was especially brutal and calculation intensive), and I was averaging 12-14 on the PS section of the AAMC practice tests.

So I guess what I'm saying is, if you are good at learning on your own, then other resources like TBR might be better since they're more efficiently tailored to teach you just what you need to know for the MCAT, but Biehle is intrinsically better for just learning the physics itself for physics sake.

What you said about torque is good to hear-- I'm using Nova Physics right now just finished up with the torque chapter and I found it incredible difficult to visualize and understand I pretty much gave up halfway through a passage.

Kinematics was my toughest topic so I was grateful for the detail. You definitely don't learn the tips and tricks in Nova Physics but it is good for providing a breakdown of the concepts. I've found myself grasping material that has normally been pretty difficult for me to understand.

Nova is good fr the intial phases of studying but I have TBR for practicing the MCAT style passages and strategies.

 

[inycepoo]

Nova Physics is top-notch for knowing the stuff. Which is important. More important than thinking in passage style for physics, imo, because to be able to apply it in the way the MCAT wants requires you to be solid on concepts.