- #1

James M

- 11

- 1

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter James M
- Start date

- #1

James M

- 11

- 1

- #2

CalcNerd

Education Advisor

Gold Member

- 417

- 169

Most of the material is the same, except you will derive the physics formulas (calc based) vs being given the formulas in the algebra/trig physics course.

- #3

symbolipoint

Homework Helper

Education Advisor

Gold Member

- 6,820

- 1,534

NO! You may not learn very much from something called "introductory physics" or "elementary physics" if the prerequisites are Algebra 2 and just basic Trigonometry. You will learn much more from the real Physics series intended for the Math/Science/Engineering students. All of that "NO!" depends on actual course content, instruction length, and how deeply the topics are actually treated.

- #4

James M

- 11

- 1

Okay, haha. Thank you, didn't know that. :)NO! You may not learn very much from something called "introductory physics" or "elementary physics" if the prerequisites are Algebra 2 and just basic Trigonometry. You will learn much more from the real Physics series intended for the Math/Science/Engineering students. All of that "NO!" depends on actual course content, instruction length, and how deeply the topics are actually treated.

- #5

symbolipoint

Homework Helper

Education Advisor

Gold Member

- 6,820

- 1,534

It is not, in fact, required. Applying algebra-based Physics on your own as a prerequisite may give you no realistic advantage; may not hurt, but not likely to be a boost either.

Some members could have experiences which are contrary to what I have said. I myself have my own awareness which is limited in this case according to my own insights and experiences.

- #6

Kyle Thomas

- 1

- 0

NO! You may not learn very much from something called "introductory physics" or "elementary physics" if the prerequisites are Algebra 2 and just basic Trigonometry. You will learn much more from the real Physics series intended for the Math/Science/Engineering students. All of that "NO!" depends on actual course content, instruction length, and how deeply the topics are actually treated.

Thank you! This was just what i wanted to know.

- #7

MidgetDwarf

- 1,324

- 490

I never regretted my decision.

To response to Symbol. The problems from a trig/algebra based book to not differ from standard introductory calculus based books, such as Serway, Halliday, and Giancolli. They were the exact same problems.

- #8

- 154

- 59

- #9

symbolipoint

Homework Helper

Education Advisor

Gold Member

- 6,820

- 1,534

NOT true in general. I took an intro/elementary Physics course which was simple Algebra2/Trig based, and a few years later took the regular Calculus-based Physics 1 for science & engineering majors. Very different courses. The algebra-based course did not need much analytical thinking. The calculus based course was much tougher, deeper, required great use of analytical thinking, everything much more detailed, and making intricate vector diagrams for forces and velocities. Having had the simpler algebra-trig based course meant nearly nothing for any kind of preparation for taking the regular Physics 1, calc based course....

To response to Symbol. The problems from a trig/algebra based book to not differ from standard introductory calculus based books, such as Serway, Halliday, and Giancolli. They were the exact same problems.

- #10

MidgetDwarf

- 1,324

- 490

NOT true in general. I took an intro/elementary Physics course which was simple Algebra2/Trig based, and a few years later took the regular Calculus-based Physics 1 for science & engineering majors. Very different courses. The algebra-based course did not need much analytical thinking. The calculus based course was much tougher, deeper, required great use of analytical thinking, everything much more detailed, and making intricate vector diagrams for forces and velocities. Having had the simpler algebra-trig based course meant nearly nothing for any kind of preparation for taking the regular Physics 1, calc based course.

Maybe a difference in instructors? Our teacher never gave us problems to do from our assigned textbook. She made the problems herself. You could not google search the problems, she made sure of this. And no the problems from a typical intro Calculus based Physics book are the same as the ones in the Algebra based book. I should know, I took both courses.

- #11

symbolipoint

Homework Helper

Education Advisor

Gold Member

- 6,820

- 1,534

Maybe a difference in instructors. Still, the exercise problems were absolutely not the same. Nearly all the exercises from the Physics 1 course were a much higher level of advancement than the exercises from the intro/elementary algebra-trig based course. The two courses were way too much a contrast.Maybe a difference in instructors? Our teacher never gave us problems to do from our assigned textbook. She made the problems herself. You could not google search the problems, she made sure of this. And no the problems from a typical intro Calculus based Physics book are the same as the ones in the Algebra based book. I should know, I took both courses.

YOU were lucky to have who taught you.

Do you know what it is like to study a demanding but not complicated course and earn an easy grade of A?

Do you know what it is like to struggle hard for a far tougher course and never be sure if you will earn an F, D, or by some slim chance, a C ?

Maybe a few decades ago makes a difference. Maybe the different type of institutions makes a difference. The two courses in particular did not compare.

- #12

MidgetDwarf

- 1,324

- 490

Maybe a difference in instructors. Still, the exercise problems were absolutely not the same. Nearly all the exercises from the Physics 1 course were a much higher level of advancement than the exercises from the intro/elementary algebra-trig based course. The two courses were way too much a contrast.

YOU were lucky to have who taught you.

Do you know what it is like to study a demanding but not complicated course and earn an easy grade of A?

Do you know what it is like to struggle hard for a far tougher course and never be sure if you will earn an F, D, or by some slim chance, a C ?

Maybe a few decades ago makes a difference. Maybe the different type of institutions makes a difference. The two courses in particular did not compare.

Yes, I chose to travel 1 hour and half to another college, which required me to ride a train and 2 busses to get there. The reason being, was that the linear algebra course i needed at my main college, did not emphasize proof writing. I went to the other school, I knew the teacher who taught this course was rigorous, was good mathematician in the mathematical circles, and who also taught at one of the most prestigious schools for 20 years. I struggled hard with the course, 2 hours of sleep for 3 months, only to receive a B. I am well aware of how it is to struggle with a course, and not know the outcome. I took calculus 1 with a professor who teaches grad school at UCLA and received a B, when i could have taken an easier teacher and got an A.

The problems are the exact same. There is no thinking required for problems out of Giancoli: Physics for Scientist and Engineers, Serway: Physics for Scientist and Engineers, and Halliday/Resnick: Physics for Scientist and Engineers. I stand by my previous comments. There is no calculus in introductory mechanics from these book, they go over both algebraic and calculus derivations for the formulas. If the problems require calculus, it is usually simple integrals and derivatives. Ie find the acceleration of a particle given the equation of its position.

Maybe you had problems grasping the material and in your mind, the problems were different because of the "mysticism" of the phrase CALCULUS that scares students. The problems are the same. I still see the block sliding from a plane problem, and the elevator problem in both books.

- #13

symbolipoint

Homework Helper

Education Advisor

Gold Member

- 6,820

- 1,534

No. the level of the two courses were far too different. You were still lucky and had the right choices of instructors and textbooks. We each know our experiences and course content. Mine were different than yours.Yes, I chose to travel 1 hour and half to another college, which required me to ride a train and 2 busses to get there. The reason being, was that the linear algebra course i needed at my main college, did not emphasize proof writing. I went to the other school, I knew the teacher who taught this course was rigorous, was good mathematician in the mathematical circles, and who also taught at one of the most prestigious schools for 20 years. I struggled hard with the course, 2 hours of sleep for 3 months, only to receive a B. I am well aware of how it is to struggle with a course, and not know the outcome. I took calculus 1 with a professor who teaches grad school at UCLA and received a B, when i could have taken an easier teacher and got an A.

The problems are the exact same. There is no thinking required for problems out of Giancoli: Physics for Scientist and Engineers, Serway: Physics for Scientist and Engineers, and Halliday/Resnick: Physics for Scientist and Engineers. I stand by my previous comments. There is no calculus in introductory mechanics from these book, they go over both algebraic and calculus derivations for the formulas. If the problems require calculus, it is usually simple integrals and derivatives. Ie find the acceleration of a particle given the equation of its position.

Maybe you had problems grasping the material and in your mind, the problems were different because of the "mysticism" of the phrase CALCULUS that scares students. The problems are the same. I still see the block sliding from a plane problem, and the elevator problem in both books.

- #14

atyy

Science Advisor

- 14,780

- 3,299

- #15

Drakkith

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

- 21,987

- 6,049

I started with a Calculus-based physics course personally. That doesn't really mean too much though, as we didn't actually use calculus to solve any of the problems. Not sure if that's normal, or if it's just because of where I'm going to school at. I remember that the problems were challenging for me and I found myself struggling to get through them much of the time.

- #16

Student100

Education Advisor

Gold Member

- 1,652

- 417

I started with a Calculus-based physics course personally. That doesn't really mean too much though, as we didn't actually use calculus to solve any of the problems. Not sure if that's normal, or if it's just because of where I'm going to school at. I remember that the problems were challenging for me and I found myself struggling to get through them much of the time.

It's all going to be pretty much subjective. You can have a course that has you re-derive every result using calculus, or one that simply covers it and focuses on the problem solving. The course I took for intro mechanics used calculus to show the derivations, and then simply focused on solving problems. The most calculus intense sections we studied were moments of inertia and fluid dynamics if I remember right. That said, to really understand mechanics and many of the derivations you need to know more than basic calculus integrals/derivatives anyway (think simple harmonics and DiffQ's), however most universities assume you're taking calculus 1 or 2 concurrently and aren't really focusing on the math.

Even the error analysis in the lab sections really depends on things like partial derivatives, but most students don't even know what that is when they take the first course in the sequence.

Maybe this is backwards, maybe the introductory courses for physics majors go into more detail (I didn't take them, so I don't know, you would assume), or maybe focusing on the art of problem solving and applying the math is the right way to go. I think every professor/TA runs their intro courses a bit differently.

The only benefit I see doing the Algebra based sequence first, is to gain some physical intuition and problem solving ability, but the majority of students will be fine jumping directly into the calculus based sequence. The delta between the two is small.

Share:

- Last Post

- Replies
- 6

- Views
- 2K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 3K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 2K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 20

- Views
- 500

- Last Post

- Replies
- 18

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 265

- Last Post

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 910

- Last Post

- Replies
- 12

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 8

- Views
- 367