Have I Covered the Basic Maths Needed for MIT Physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kerol9904
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Idea Topics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the readiness of a student studying at Kumon to tackle MIT's introductory physics course, 8.01. The student seeks clarity on the math levels covered in Kumon, particularly from level G onwards, and how they align with the prerequisites for 8.01. It is established that level G is insufficient for 8.01, which requires a solid understanding of mathematics, specifically around level N to start and level O for completion. The course expects students to be proficient in applying mathematical concepts rather than just being able to solve problems. The conversation emphasizes the need for mastery of the material, as MIT's physics students are typically highly capable and motivated, making the course particularly challenging. Tips for mastering the necessary math skills are sought, highlighting the student's eagerness to begin studying physics.
kerol9904
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Hi all. This is my first post, so I hope this is the correct place to post.

I have been studying maths at Kumon for the past years. I just want to see if I have covered the basic maths needed for studying physics (start with MIT 8.01 maybe?). When I browse through this forum, I have no idea if I have studied the subject. So, I would like someone to help me knowing the topics (i.e. Precalc, Calc.1, Calc.2 etc.) of each of the levels. (Not all. Just from level G maybe?)
Here's the link to the general description of the levels covered in Kumon Maths.
http://www.kumon.com/miscellaneous/kumon_math_levels.pdf

Thanks in advance!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I am not 100% sure what you are asking, but if you are asking whether G is enough to study 8.01, the answer is no. 8.01 expects pretty much that whole sheet. More importantly, it expects the student to be facile with mathematics at that level: the student needs to be good enough with the material that a mathematical explanation will be enlightening and not more confuising.
 
No. That's not what I mean. I meant that can I get a rough idea of what the levels are covering?
For example, level XX is covering Precalculus or level YY is covering Calculus. I would like to know the level's standard in terms of US(?) system.
Another thing I want to ask is that what is the minimum level to start 8.01? Certainly it's not all of the levels, right?

I certainly wasn't expecting G to be enough for 8.01.
 
It doesn't map cleanly onto the US system.

8.01 would require roughly Level N to start and roughly completion of Level O before finishing. 8.01 has 18.01 as a co-requisite, and 18.01 is a fairly fast-paced calculus class. But as I said, the real issue is that it assumes facility with the mathematics. Being able to eventually grind out a problem at Level O is not enough.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
But as I said, the real issue is that it assumes facility with the mathematics. Being able to eventually grind out a problem at Level O is not enough.

So, you mean that I have to fully master the maths so that I can apply it to the physics? If that's what you mean, then any tips that you can provide? I would really like to start with physics early since it's my passion.
 
Keep in mind that this is an MIT course. Students in intro physics at MIT are not like students in intro physics at most other universities. Most or all of them are probably very bright, very well prepared, and very strongly motivated.
 
Hey, I am Andreas from Germany. I am currently 35 years old and I want to relearn math and physics. This is not one of these regular questions when it comes to this matter. So... I am very realistic about it. I know that there are severe contraints when it comes to selfstudy compared to a regular school and/or university (structure, peers, teachers, learning groups, tests, access to papers and so on) . I will never get a job in this field and I will never be taken serious by "real"...
Yesterday, 9/5/2025, when I was surfing, I found an article The Schwarzschild solution contains three problems, which can be easily solved - Journal of King Saud University - Science ABUNDANCE ESTIMATION IN AN ARID ENVIRONMENT https://jksus.org/the-schwarzschild-solution-contains-three-problems-which-can-be-easily-solved/ that has the derivation of a line element as a corrected version of the Schwarzschild solution to Einstein’s field equation. This article's date received is 2022-11-15...

Similar threads

Back
Top