Is Reviewing Intro Physics During Winter Break Worth It?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lubuntu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Break
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether to review material from Intro Physics I & II during winter break or to begin studying for the upcoming semester. Participants express mixed feelings about the value of reviewing, with some suggesting that many concepts will be revisited at a deeper level in future courses. The importance of understanding fundamental concepts like energy and momentum is emphasized over solving basic problems from introductory courses, which some participants find unhelpful for deeper learning. There is a consensus that while reviewing can be beneficial, it may be more effective to focus on key concepts rather than traditional problem-solving approaches from introductory physics. The conversation also highlights that the rigor of the introductory course can influence how much it prepares students for advanced physics, with some noting that mathematical modeling skills gained in intro courses remain valuable.
lubuntu
Messages
464
Reaction score
2
Would it better on winter break to take the time review stuff from Intro Physics I & II or to start reading ahead into next semesters work?

I had thought of doing an intensive review of Intro Physics I & II since it has been a year since I took that sequence and will now be resuming physics but at the same time I was glad to move beyond those class and start learning at a bit higher of a level. Won't almost everything we learned there be touched on again at a deeper level? Is it worth it taking time to review?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
lubuntu said:
Would it better on winter break to take the time review stuff from Intro Physics I & II or to start reading ahead into next semesters work?

How are we supposed to know? What does "next semesters work" entail for you?

Won't almost everything we learned there be touched on again at a deeper level? Is it worth it taking time to review?

Again, it's impossible to answer this question without more information. If you are continuing a standard physics sequence, you'll need to be strong more on concepts of energy, momentum, etc. than on how to solve problems involving bullets hitting blocks or roller coasters.

Review is usually not a bad thing, though.
 
fss said:
How are we supposed to know? What does "next semesters work" entail for you?


Modern Physics is my primary physics class. Also a Math methods class..

fss said:
Again, it's impossible to answer this question without more information. If you are continuing a standard physics sequence, you'll need to be strong more on concepts of energy, momentum, etc. than on how to solve problems involving bullets hitting blocks or roller coasters.

Review is usually not a bad thing, though.

This is helpful I did feel like Intro Physics has a lot of fluff and advanced concepts covered at such an elementary level as to be nearly useless for anyone who will be studying this stuff more deeply.

Might it make sense to read through key chapters and derive some basic results but not really working about reviewing how to working through the typically inane Intro Physics style problems? I sort of dread doing those sorts of problems-not because of difficulty but because most don't really help develop an understanding of the physics.

Let me put it this way.

How much does higher level physics resemble the sort of work and thinking required to do Intro Physics problems?
 
lubuntu said:
How much does higher level physics resemble the sort of work and thinking required to do Intro Physics problems?

In my opinion, not very much at all. Mostly because you have to think in order to solve a problem instead of looking up the equation and plugging and chugging.
 
fss said:
In my opinion, not very much at all. Mostly because you have to think in order to solve a problem instead of looking up the equation and plugging and chugging.
Well, I think that depends on the rigor of your intro. course. I found that my 3rd year mechanics and thermodynamics courses had questions of a similar nature to those of my intro. physics work, except that the more advanced courses used much more calculus and required knowledge of how to solve basic differential equations. I think the mathematical modeling and problem solving skills you pick up in an intro. course will always be useful.
 
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
43
Views
7K
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top