I hate chemistry! Hate it! Hate it! Hate it!

either? both? its an ugly circle.

 

What ? You don't make a C with 78...is that out of 100 or 5000 ?

 

You may be a "victim" of the textbook companies --- your age group vs. what's currently fashionable for introductory chem texts? Try the library for some nice, dull, unillustrated texts from the 50s or early 60s --- Dull, Metcalfe, and Williams comes to mind --- give you a different viewpoint or slant on the thinking. Won't get you up to speed on the biotech revolution, but you aren't committed to a doctoral program in biochem at this point.

 

Along these lines...for me it's cooking : I hate it (the act, not the idea) and I suck at it. :grumpy:

Haven't yet figured out the cause and effect, either :uhh:

 

Me too. Me too. Me too!!!!! :grumpy:

Nice party, MIH. Where's the chocolate? :rofl:

 

Calm down, Math is Hard. Is Chemistry your main subject? If not, just take it easy.

What a coincidence it is though...I just had my GCE Cambridge O-Level Practical Chemistry exam a few hours ago. I think I blew it. I did not test positive for oxygen gas after adding Hydrogen Peroxide to an unknown solution (it was green in colour) with Sodium Hydroxide.

Some of you will recall from a [URL [Broken] thread[/URL] that I'm scared of Bunsen Burners. I'm glad to say that I managed to light the Bunsen Burner without hurting myself or anyone in the vicinity, and without screaming too! I'm also very happy with my luck because no heating was required and I only needed the Bunsen Burner to light a splint to test for Oxygen gas.

 

well i hate chemistry too,
reason: every chemistry teacher i know sucks!! they are all stuped and doesn't accept arguments .. all you have to do is taking chemistry and memorize it by heart! i didn't go to a chemistry lab ever!

 

I don't like Chemistry too. As opposed to Mathematics and Physics, Chemistry is a big mystery to beginners like me. For example, I don't yet understand what causes the colour changes when you perform Qualitative Analysis. There is no logical explanation to it, so I actually have to memorise everything in Chemistry. Fe²⁺ ions causes green precipitate to form in Sodium Hydroxide, Fe³⁺ ions produces brown precipitate, and so forth...

 

I'm really sorry you're so unhappy with your grade, MIH. I wish I knew how I could help you get your mind into the proper 'mode' to think about chemistry, ya know?
If you think about it, tho - chemistry is really pretty easy. See, if it doesn't move, and it's supposed to, mix up some epoxy! TA DA!!!! Fixed! Conversely, if it doesn't move, and it should, give it some WD40! TA DA!!! Same thing!!! Cool, huh? That's Chemistry!!!

 

Actually thats Applied Super-Glue vs Apllied Super-Lube Theory. :rofl:

 

I realy liked chamistry last year. But this year it sucks new teacher new style of work a lot more homework .

 

I agree. Chemistry sucks.

 

Honestly all you physicists should take a course on physical chemistry, i.e. chemical physics, you would reallly like it. Its funny that I majored in math and chemistry, instead of math and physics. Chem doesn't get interesting until you get past all the introductory stuff. The other good thing about chemistry is that it really is the only science that pays a decent amount of money if you choose a career in it as opposed to physics, biology, and mathematics.

 

Ha ha. I'd like to see how students react when the book gets to the chapter on Synthetic Organic Chemistry :uhh:

For a second there, I thought your book was titled "Project for the New American Century" ...but eventually, I recovered...yes, upon reading of the promise of chocolate.

 

Yeah! And those maple truffles are KILLER.

 

I hated chemistry, too. I liked the laboratory part ok, but the classroom part was absolutely maddening. It didn't even seem like we were doing science, what with there being more exceptions than rules ("Silicon only bonds with 4 partners, except when it doesn't, like in these 143 cases. Memorize them.") At least that's how I remember it.

But, ever being the optimist, I decided to leave chemistry on a "high note", so my last course in it was a grad course called Quantum Chemistry. The professor was a theoretical chemist and kept saying that the Schrodinger equation is one of the most important equations in chemistry. I resisted the urge to raise my hand and tell him that it's the Schrodinger equation that makes chemistry a branch of physics.

 

:yuck: Chemistry, ahhhhhh!! :yuck:
I never really liked the labs that much except for where we made things burn! But the thing I actually found intresting were also the things the teacher never wanted to discuss except possibly after class, but I had other things to do. I always found it intresting trying to figure out what happens when you hit an undefined spot in the equation and all the other ways equations didn't really work and were just an approximation.
But it was an introductory course and every so often I'ld go in and ask a question, like what would actually happen if you got a super conductor down to absolute zero, would it actually heat up again. In the normal class I slept :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: or finished up my homework for another class. I actually had fun with some parts but the calculations of moles over and over and over again really got to me.

 

It reminds me of when I was learning about the multiple exceptions in different oxidation states and also the funky orbital notations for the transition metals :yuck:. At least I didn't have to remember the electronegativity and ionic radius for all elements.

It also doesn't help when the donation/acceptance definitions of acids and bases tend to conflict (such as Bronsted Lowry and Arrheneus versus the odd Lewis acids/bases).

 

Ah-hah --- "PC Chemistry," Woodsy Owl and Ralph Nader --- that explains a lot. The ACS as a professional organization has a pretty mixed record; done some good things, done some bad things, and hosted a lot of meetings, schmooze sessions, and what-not. Getting involved in instruction beyond the establishment of criteria for accrediting curricula is one of the bad things.

The number of people who do a good job teaching general chem to non-majors is orders of magnitude less than the number of chemists in the world; the more common categories of instruction follow the "pearls before swine" style, the everyone should be a chemist approach (better than a kick in the teeth --- at least they're interested), the "I'm so much more intelligent than you, you couldn't possibly understand this material," and the "I hate being stuck with a non-major service course(I really don't give a sh!t if they learn anything or not). Unfortunately, textbook authorship has shifted into the same sort of distribution of qualities. Chemists don't really know what chemistry is, what it has done for the world, what it hasn't, what it can, and what it can't --- the five things that should be emphasized for non-majors. God knows I'm sorry.

and, one of the most useless. Chemistry is all about interactions of a minimum of three bodies. C'mon, Tom, you're the QM guru, give us the first ionization of He from first principles. The "143 exceptions" are part of the working vocabulary that serves to bridge the gap between Schrodinger and the real world. They aren't exceptions to physical laws, just exceptions to the rules of thumb that have to serve as substitutes --- the physicists haven't worked out any useful approach to the three-body problem for us.

or, maybe it subordinates physics to chemistry ---- hmmmm. Let's see --- do more physicists hate chemistry than chemists hate physics, or do a larger percentage of physicists have difficulty with chem courses than chemists with physics courses. Maybe this needs a poll --- nah.

 

Books are not comics to have a plenty of photos. I love books physics books like Jackson's Classical Electrodynamics, or Goldstein's Classical Mechanics... because they explains the things, with words, with concepts, with math. Not with MSPAINT images.

Ah, I don't like chemistry, its very... (I can't find the correct word to describe it in english)