Can we discuss Chemistry and Physics? I need to register for classes for next semester and either need to take Chemistry 107 (Gen Chem for Engineers) or Physics 218 (Mechanics)
So which is harder and which should I take first? A little background is I am taking MATH 151 next semester as well which is Calculus 1 and i've heard it is not wise to take Cal 1 with physics because you need to know Cal 1 prior not simultaneously. Can anyone shed some insight please.
>>7721037
OP, you better edit that picture. The intersection between biology, chemistry and physics is of course mechatronics engineering :^)
>>7721054
But memes are supposed to be on /s4s/
I'd go for the chemistry.
You heard more or less correctly, IMO. A lot of physics does make more sense if you know basic calculus. For example, something as basic as the relationship between position, velocity, and acceleration is most easily expressed in terms of derivatives and integrals.
>>7721037
>gen Chem for engineers
Is that a dumbed down class? Take the most rigorous requirement regardless, that way if you decide to change majors you already have the credit and don't need to retake a higher level.
>>7721077
I have an IQ of 100 so I'm fucked in life anyway. I need to take the most basic class anyway. Just fuck my life up family.
Not OP, but how bad is biochemistry and, more broadly, pharmacology?
>>7721077
>>gen Chem for engineers
>Is that a dumbed down class? Take the most rigorous requirement regardless, that way if you decide to change majors you already have the credit and don't need to retake a higher level.
As an engineer:
-Times I've had to use physics on the job: About a year working on a vehicle simulator for a project
-Times I've had to use chemistry on the job: Zero. Zip. Zilch. Absolutely none.
Unless you're a Chem.E / Mat. Sci. guy or planning on cooking meth as a side hobby, I wouldn't bother with anything more that the minimum chemistry you can get away with.
>>7721081
It's only as bad as you make it.
>>7721116
I meant bad in a career sense, although from my understanding it's pretty rigorous academically.
>>7721120
Like I said; It's only as bad as you make
If you have a positive attitude going into work you will not have a bad time. As they say, if you love what you do you never work a day in your life. :)
>>7721037
>Physics 218 (Mechanics)
>calling Intro Physics I "Mechanics"
All my hate.
>[I]'ve heard it is not wise to take Cal 1 with physics because you need to know Cal 1 prior not simultaneously
You've heard wrong. They use Young and Freedman which assumes you're doing it simultaneously.
>either ... or
Do them both.
If you want to work in biochemical stuff then you take Chemistry. Same goes for drug delivery, or tissue engineering. Engineering, Math, and Science doesn't matter where you get your degree as long you have an accredited degree, research experience, and common sense you'll thrive in the industry.
>>7721674
I don't want to over burden myself this semester. I also want a firm base with Cal 1 before I use it in physics.
>>7721696
University Physics Vol 1 (Chapters 1-20) (12th Edition)
>>7721690
You'll know what you'll need by the time you see it in physics
>>7721696
>Some schools don't use Young and Freedman. Some use the professor version.
Texas A&M U does (I googled the course numbers).
