Can a mathematician solve high school physics tasks without physics knowledge?

[user079622]

I find lots of my friends that are excellent at math but dont know physics , cant solve physics tasks.
I think for physics is not enough to know math, you must understand concepts.

Sometimes is harder tool(math), sometimes is harder concept.



Here is video where Oxford mathematician solve high school physics, he solved.. He has some physics knowledge.

​

 

[A.T.]

Here is video where Oxford mathematician solve high school physics, he solved.. He has some physics knowledge.

Some physics knowledge? He has the Navier-Stokes Equations literally tattooed on his ribs:

 

[user079622]

Some physics knowledge? He has the Navier-Stokes Equations literally tattooed on his ribs:

Then why he even solve high school tasks, and say that he didnt do A level physics?

 

[pasmith]

Then why he even solve high school tasks, and say that he didnt do A level physics?

Perhaps because he didn't do A-Level physics? It is not listed as a requirement for admission to study Mathematics at Oxford (see https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/courses/course-listing/mathematics).

But that doesn't mean that he would have zero knowledge of physics.

For context, basic Newtonian mechanics is a core component of the A-Level Mathematics syllabus, and also of the first year of an undergraduate mathematics course in the UK (that would be the Dynamics course listed under Year 1 on the 'Structure' tab at the above link), and applied mathematics, such as fluid dynamics, is also often an option on an undergraduate mathematics course (and is listed as such in Year 2 at the above reference).

By way of comparison, the Oxford Physics course (which requires both A-level Physics and Mathematics) can be found here.

 

[Motore]

For context, basic Newtonian mechanics is a core component of the A-Level Mathematics syllabus, and also of the first year of an undergraduate mathematics course in the UK

Isn't basic Newtonian mechanics and other physics topics taught in most high schools by default?

 

[Vanadium 50]

While there might be a serious question buried in here struggling to get out, as it is, this thread is very clickbait-y: an absurd and untestable premise, a video (of course), a single example that doesn't fit the premise, and plenty of assumed facts not in evidence.

 

[fresh_42]

Isn't basic Newtonian mechanics and other physics topics taught in most high schools by default?

Hopefully. I tend to say: "Basic physical knowledge keeps me on the road while driving!" and think: "... all others are in the newspapers on Monday mornings."

 

[user079622]

While there might be a serious question buried in here struggling to get out, as it is, this thread is very clickbait-y: an absurd and untestable premise, a video (of course), a single example that doesn't fit the premise, and plenty of assumed facts not in evidence.

In general do you consider harder to most of people, work with tools(math) or understanding physics concept(correctly set these tools)?

 

[f95toli]

Isn't basic Newtonian mechanics and other physics topics taught in most high schools by default?

Depend on what you mean by "high school". In the UK there is no direct equivalent to an american "high school degree".
Most people only study 3-4 subjects for their A-level. Physics is a fairly common subject (probably in the top ten), but far from all study physics (or even a STEM subject) for their A-levels.
Moreover, not everyone in the UK does an A-level; there are also other options (BTecs etc).

 

[user079622]

Depend on what you mean by "high school". In the UK there is no direct equivalent to an american "high school degree".
Most people only study 3-4 subjects for their A-level. Physics is a fairly common subject (probably in the top ten), but far from all study physics (or even a STEM subject) for their A-levels.
Moreover, not everyone in the UK does an A-level; there are also other options (BTecs etc).

Is high school in UK harder than in USA?
Only 3-4 subjects in school, what school is that?

 

[fresh_42]

Is high school in UK harder than in USA?
Only 3-4 subjects in school, what school is that?

Let me put it this way: you will not be allowed to study in Europe with a US high school degree without further qualifications. I looked it up for my American nephews, no chance.

 

[danielhaish]

Once you describe the forces I guess it oure math. Every set of axioms can be considered math system

 

[user079622]

Once you describe the forces I guess it oure math. Every set of axioms can be considered math system

If you dont know how to set the problem then math is useless.

 

[danielhaish]

If you dont know how to set the problem then math is useless.

In high school usually most questions are based on newton movement laws, which can be considered as mathematical system, a math explorer shouldn't have problem with learning this system and solve problems

 

[user079622]

In high school usually most questions are based on newton movement laws, which can be considered as mathematical system, a math explorer shouldn't have problem with learning this system and solve problems

High school physics has only simple math tools than even kids know: addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. But key is set/use this tools correctly, that's where they get stuck.
Set task correctly is 99% of job, 1% is solve the math.

 

[danielhaish]

High school physics has only simple math tools than even kids know: addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. But key is set/use this tools correctly, that's where they get stuck.
Set task correctly is 99% of job, 1% is solve math.

But what i am saying is that mathematiian job is not only to do calculations is also to develop method and system to solve those problems. So mathematiian may see simole highschool physics as new system he need the explore onc onc he know the foundation rules(or axioms)

 

[Steve4Physics]

Only 3-4 subjects in school, what school is that?

For information, UK students typically study 8-10 subjects up to the age 16. Then many students, (between ages 16-18) specialise, studying 3 or 4 specialist subjects.

Some then go on to university. to study (generally one) subject.

There are several alternatives, but the above is the 'mainstream' route.

 

[user079622]

For information, UK students typically study 8-10 subjects up to the age 16. Then many students, (between ages 16-18) specialise, studying 3 or 4 specialist subjects.

Some then go on to university. to study (generally one) subject.

There are several alternatives, but the above is the 'mainstream' route.

Math, physics and english are 3 subjects, do you mean on this when you write subject?

 

[Steve4Physics]

Math, physics and english are 3 subjects, do you mean on this when you write subject?

It depends to what age-range you are referring.

For a student age ~14 to ~16, maths, English and science are compulsory GCSE subjects. These are studied alongside other subjects which the student can choose.

For post-16 students, many study 3 or 4 'A-levels'. There are no restrictions on the wide choice of A-level subjects.

 

[DrJohn]

He may not have studied A-level Physics, but there is a lower level of physics (GCSE), and students typically taken six, seven or eight of these, so basic physics could easily have been covered before he specialised towards maths.

 

[user079622]

For information, UK students typically study 8-10 subjects up to the age 16. Then many students, (between ages 16-18) specialise, studying 3 or 4 specialist subjects.

Some then go on to university. to study (generally one) subject.

There are several alternatives, but the above is the 'mainstream' route.

Does students learn calculus in A-level?

 

[Orodruin]

I should try a high school math test and see if I can get 180k followers

I did do a Swedish university entrance math exam some years ago and found several errors in the grading template …

 

[fresh_42]

I did do a Swedish university entrance math exam some years ago and found several errors in the grading template …

I told you that true mathematicians cannot calculate. Nobody believes me.
$$
\mathbb{Z}=\{-2,-1,0,1,2,i,j,k,p,q,n,m\}
$$

 

[Orodruin]

I told you that true mathematicians cannot calculate. Nobody believes me.
$$
\mathbb{Z}=\{-2,-1,0,1,2,i,j,k,p,q,n,m\}
$$

Neither can true physicists. A colleague of mine usually tells how he can't seem to add up prices in the grocery store and how the cashier probably thinks "poor soul, so bad at math".

 

[user079622]

 

[Orodruin]

View attachment 340891

That really has nothing to do with things here. There may be some correlation or another, but trust me, I have seen individual variations.

 

[user079622]

That really has nothing to do with things here. There may be some correlation or another, but trust me, I have seen individual variations.

Can someone with IQ 100 be professor of physics /math at universtiy?

 

[berkeman]

Thread closed for Moderation...

 

[berkeman]

Can someone with IQ 100 be professor of physics /math at universtiy?

After a Mentor discussion, this thread has run its course and will remain closed.

@user079622 -- We have noticed that you seem a bit obsessed with IQ numbers. Please keep in mind that IQ testing and numbers have limited validity in many applications. Please don't regard them as an absolute indicator of potential success.

From the Wikipedia article on IQ:

Validity as a measure of intelligence

Reliability and validity are very different concepts. While reliability reflects reproducibility, validity refers to whether the test measures what it purports to measure.[85] While IQ tests are generally considered to measure some forms of intelligence, they may fail to serve as an accurate measure of broader definitions of human intelligence inclusive of, for example, creativity and social intelligence. For this reason, psychologist Wayne Weiten argues that their construct validity must be carefully qualified, and not be overstated.[85] According to Weiten, "IQ tests are valid measures of the kind of intelligence necessary to do well in academic work. But if the purpose is to assess intelligence in a broader sense, the validity of IQ tests is questionable."[85]

Some scientists have disputed the value of IQ as a measure of intelligence altogether. In The Mismeasure of Man (1981, expanded edition 1996), evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould compared IQ testing with the now-discredited practice of determining intelligence via craniometry, arguing that both are based on the fallacy of reification, "our tendency to convert abstract concepts into entities".[91] Gould's argument sparked a great deal of debate,[92][93] and the book is listed as one of Discover Magazine's "25 Greatest Science Books of All Time".[94]

Along these same lines, critics such as Keith Stanovich do not dispute the capacity of IQ test scores to predict some kinds of achievement, but argue that basing a concept of intelligence on IQ test scores alone neglects other important aspects of mental ability.[15][95] Robert Sternberg, another significant critic of IQ as the main measure of human cognitive abilities, argued that reducing the concept of intelligence to the measure of g does not fully account for the different skills and knowledge types that produce success in human society.[96]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient