What is the first topic I should learn

  • Thread starter Thread starter uperkurk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Topic
AI Thread Summary
In high school A-Level physics courses, the initial topics typically include the SI unit system and dimensional analysis, followed by Newtonian mechanics. A suggestion is made for beginners to start with conceptual introductory texts. However, a contrasting viewpoint emphasizes the importance of a strong mathematical foundation before diving into physics. It is argued that physics heavily relies on math, and lacking proficiency in math can lead to confusion and discouragement. The discussion highlights the challenges faced by individuals who initially approached physics conceptually, suggesting that a solid grasp of math is essential for success in understanding physics concepts. The conversation also critiques college curricula for not aligning math and physics instruction effectively, advocating for a more structured approach to learning math prior to engaging with physics.
uperkurk
Messages
167
Reaction score
0
When you take a high school (A-Level) physics course at school, what are the first couple of topics you learn? I want to begin with the most straight forward basic stuff. I've looked around but can't seem to find a high school syllabus.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I guess you have some basic knowledge in algebra, geometry, pre-calculus and calculus.

I suggest the very first topic is SI unit system, and densional analysis.

Then, you may start to work with Newtonian mechanics.

By the way, if you are green in physics, you may start with some conceptual introductory text.
 
kiwakwok said:
By the way, if you are green in physics, you may start with some conceptual introductory text.

I disagree, respectfully of course. The conceptual route was the route I took 20 years ago, which resulted in my getting a BA in biology. A BA means you went the conceptual route and stayed there because you thought you already learned it and, well, I've got my degree, right, doesn’t that prove I know the material?

The problem is that it's a red herring. I'm now studying to reenter academia in an engineering-informatics area and my “conceptual” background is haunting me like a Halloween hangover. I’m having to start from the beginning doing the real math and science and I’m finding out that physics looks entirely different from the calculus point of view.

In any case, I would recommend going all-in with math first perhaps even a year or so you before get into physics. The reason is that physics IS math, and if you’re weak on the math you won’t get the physics and you’ll be wasting your time. Not only that, but you might get discouraged and dump science altogether. That is the real danger with being weak on math, because, believe it or not, math is really easier than physics. Math is a bunch of straightforward rules. Physics is a bunch of confusing word problems. Don’t go into that battle with a Halloween costume sword and a coat of arms with a BA plastered on it.

This is a problem with many college curriculums where they try to match the level of math classes being taught concurrently with the level-physics being taught. I personally think you should learn the math required well before you tackle the physics. But that is just me, the hard lesson I learned.
 
Last edited:
Guess I need to learn pre-calc and calc then :D and thanks Dirac :)
 
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

Back
Top