Physics for Engineers 1

stereoroid

I have a little advice for anyone taking this course: download the previous exam papers, from SIS Personal Information pages, and have a look.

I've slowly arrived at a fairly alarming conclusion: the material covered by both lecturers, so far, is not what you need to know to answer the questions in the exam. The previous exam questions are in line with what I expect from this course i.e. physics that is useful to student engineers. The upshot: I have a big friendly textbook from the library, spent half of last weekend with my nose in it, and there will be more of that in weeks to come. :rolleyes:

I don't want to say too much about the course here: I just wish the lecturers would focus on real-world physics, and not spend too much time on the theoretical aspects e.g. I don't need to know how to derive every formula, especially if it requires advanced calculus that we won't even start looking at until next semester. (We do Indefinite Integrals in Maths for Engineers III.)

remus808

I don't do Engineering, and I hate both Maths & Physics BUT..

Logical reasoning gives the suggestion that this years exam paper will be different to previous years. Courses change.

breadmonkey

What are you saying? Learn things off by heart and to hell with actually understanding the material? Seems like a harder way to do it imo.

gubbie

Well at least he's making the effort now!
I am doing an engineer and I can tell you most people will be in the library the night before the exam having doing very little work and learning off the exam. They give you a very good basis of what to go by

stereoroid

breadmonkey wrote: »

What are you saying? Learn things off by heart and to hell with actually understanding the material? Seems like a harder way to do it imo.

Was that aimed at me? No, that's not what I said.

Oh, and I know that the same questions will not come up again, and that the course can change. Did you skip over what I wrote about going back to the text books? Karmabass - did you read what I actually wrote?

Physicists care about classical mechanics and the velocities of individual molecules of gases. Mathematicians need to know how to manipulate calculus to a high degree of difficulty. But an engineer needs knowledge (s)he can use in the real world. I want to study "Physics For Engineers", like the course description says, and understand how to use these principles in the real world. The lectures we've had have IMHO spent far too much time and effort on a tiny subset of that.

If the course really has changed in to that, and previous years' exams are no guide whatsoever, then (a) I'm probably screwed, but (b) the course contents would be of no use to a working structural engineer anyway, so (c) this course should not be part of a Structural Engineering & Architecture programme. But based on on the course description, and the exam papers, there will be questions in the exam from subject areas that are completely untouched by the lecturers. Are they assuming that everyone came straight from Leaving Cert Physics, and did it all last year?

breadmonkey

Look, first engineering is basically a broad science course so I wouldn't get caught up in the "real world applications". They're giving you a base that's all.

EDIT: No lecturer is going to give you questions on material they haven't covered. I suggest you ask the lecturer(s) to tell the class which questions from previous years are relevant.

DirkVoodoo

gubbie wrote: »

Well at least he's making the effort now!
I am doing an engineer

Lucky guy!:D

remus808

stereoroid wrote: »

Karmabass - did you read what I actually wrote?

Yes.

the material covered by both lecturers, so far, is not what you need to know to answer the questions in the exam....The previous exam questions

..Led me to suggest that this years exam could be different in scope.

imp

Personally I don't think this is the place to be talking about this, the lecturer is the one you should be speaking to. Incidentally who is it?

breadmonkey

Oh and if you think this is bad, just wait until you see some of the crap they have lined up for you next year:p!

stereoroid

imp wrote: »

Personally I don't think this is the place to be talking about this, the lecturer is the one you should be speaking to. Incidentally who is it?

I have spoken to one of the lecturers already (weeks ago), before I looked at the exam papers, asking "why are we doing this?", but the answer was basically "this is what I'm doing". Let's keep names out of this - it wouldn't do any good.

All you people suggesting I ask the lecturer "what's in the exam?" or anything remotely along those lines... what do you think will happen if I do that? Think it through. I can imagine several possibilities, none of which would result in a useful answer. :rolleyes:

tywy

You'd be surprised how helpful lecturers can be. If you ask them about what will be on the paper they'll probably tell you. Some will be vague, some will be specific but it's always worth a try.

One thing my friend does in these situations is, he looks at the exam papers finds all the questions that look even slightly relevent, works through them the best he can and then goes to the lecturer. That's where you get the answer, 'oh I didn't cover that, I don't expect you to know how to do that'

You have to do the best with what you have. Have you looked at the paper? Are the same lecturers delivering the course as did in previous years, look at the exam papers and see. You'll find that your lecturer might not have given the course last year but may have in previous years. So you can have example questions.

Hope this helps!

stereoroid

Well, I spoke to a lecturer today, and he says that the best way to prepare for the exam is to do the problem sheets. We're on sheet 3 now, which is due in next Friday (16/11), and it looks to me like we have enough info to do Q3 at this time.

While Blackboard is down, you can get this assignment on the temporary P: drive, as well as the lecture notes: <P:\Classes\PHYC10150 - Physics for Engineers 1>

tywy wrote: »

One thing my friend does in these situations is, he looks at the exam papers finds all the questions that look even slightly relevent, works through them the best he can and then goes to the lecturer. That's where you get the answer, 'oh I didn't cover that, I don't expect you to know how to do that'

If it was that simple, I wouldn't have started this thread. This is not "my" problem only, it's something potentially affecting everyone. I wasn't asking for personal advice - I know you make the best with what you have, but in this course we have nothing to go on, from the first 6 weeks in particular.

I have the exam papers, and they are totally different from the material the lecturers are presenting. Instead of "Physics for Engineers", both of them have gone in to specialist fields, in far greater depth than necessary. I can say this because 5 of my 6 courses "fit" the programme I'm doing. To pass this exam, I'll be studying orbital mechanics and ideal gas behaviour to a depth that I will never use again. Great use of my time, isn't it?

I still have no idea why we are going on to the behaviour of gases in such excrutiating detail, or what was behind the first half of the course (orbital mechanics). IMHO this is not "Physics for Engineers" any more - too narrow a focus on subjects we won't be using as engineers. I hardly care how fast a H2 molecule is going when it's captured by Jupiter. :rolleyes:

cfingers

From my understanding of things, the module descriptor and thus content was changed last year.

Therefor the old exam papers are of very little revelant with regard to sample exam questions. I am not 100% certain of this but fairly sure.

Just tell the lecturer that you need more sample questions. If he wont give them to you, just learn how to do the questions in the problem sheet perfectly and you should be grand.

As for learning stuff that you might never use again. Welcome to Enginnering. There is lots of stuff that you more than likely will never use again but you still have to learn it.

tywy

stereoroid wrote: »

Well, I spoke to a lecturer today, and he says that the best way to prepare for the exam is to do the problem sheets. We're on sheet 3 now, which is due in next Friday (16/11), and it looks to me like we have enough info to do Q3 at this time.

While Blackboard is down, you can get this assignment on the temporary P: drive, as well as the lecture notes: <P:\Classes\PHYC10150 - Physics for Engineers 1>

If it was that simple, I wouldn't have started this thread. This is not "my" problem only, it's something potentially affecting everyone. I wasn't asking for personal advice - I know you make the best with what you have, but in this course we have nothing to go on, from the first 6 weeks in particular.

I have the exam papers, and they are totally different from the material the lecturers are presenting. Instead of "Physics for Engineers", both of them have gone in to specialist fields, in far greater depth than necessary. I can say this because 5 of my 6 courses "fit" the programme I'm doing. To pass this exam, I'll be studying orbital mechanics and ideal gas behaviour to a depth that I will never use again. Great use of my time, isn't it?

I still have no idea why we are going on to the behaviour of gases in such excrutiating detail, or what was behind the first half of the course (orbital mechanics). IMHO this is not "Physics for Engineers" any more - too narrow a focus on subjects we won't be using as engineers. I hardly care how fast a H2 molecule is going when it's captured by Jupiter. :rolleyes:

I assume if you do Chem or Mech you'd need the ideal gas behaviour for proofs etc.

I'm an elec and they keep mentioning things from 1st and 2nd year physics. If it was useless you wouldn't be doing it.

My advice to you is just to do you're best, you said it yourself, everyone is in the same boat. If you want an edge on other people, go ask the lecturer specific questions, go with an exam question you have tried but couldn't get out. No point going to them saying, I dunno what I'm supposed to know... they figure (although you might think they're wrong) that they've indicated that in lectures.

breadmonkey

Please stop whinging ffs

gubbie

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Lucky guy!:D

Ha ha oops!!

Professors usually give you the old "You'll get what we cover in class"

And I agree completely with what twny says. Everything comes up again. And you think as you go through it "Ah this is tough, I won't bother" AHA thats the stuff that comes up again**

**matrices are the exception. I love matrices

stereoroid

tywy wrote: »

I'm an elec and they keep mentioning things from 1st and 2nd year physics. If it was useless you wouldn't be doing it.

My advice to you is just to do you're best, you said it yourself, everyone is in the same boat. If you want an edge on other people, go ask the lecturer specific questions, go with an exam question you have tried but couldn't get out.

I don't think you quite grasp the situation. They have completely changed the course since last year. Previous exam papers are no use whatsoever - questions like those will not be coming up this year. I got that straight from the lecturer yesterday. Those things you mention that might come in handy in future years - they are gone from this course. It's no longer a "Physics for Engineers" course as it used to be, it's something else now, something narrower in scope and less useful.

The huge difference between the old papers and the current course is why I started this thread. If this was just me with a problem, I wouldn't post about it here - I know where to go for advice. This is not just another "I'm having trouble" thread, so please stop talking like this is my problem. If you are doing this course, this is your problem too.

Cipriana

What book do you have for interests sake? I have the Schaum's vector analysis one, but that's no good for the ideal gas stuff.

tywy

stereoroid wrote: »

I don't think you quite grasp the situation. They have completely changed the course since last year. Previous exam papers are no use whatsoever - questions like those will not be coming up this year. I got that straight from the lecturer yesterday. Those things you mention that might come in handy in future years - they are gone from this course. It's no longer a "Physics for Engineers" course as it used to be, it's something else now, something narrower in scope and less useful.

The huge difference between the old papers and the current course is why I started this thread. If this was just me with a problem, I wouldn't post about it here - I know where to go for advice. This is not just another "I'm having trouble" thread, so please stop talking like this is my problem. If you are doing this course, this is your problem too.

I suppose if this is the problem, you just have to put your head down and thank god for the bell curve. Remember everyone is in the same boat. You aren't getting marked against previous years. You are getting marked against your peers.

We had a subject called Maths 6 last year, it was ODEs and PDEs. I think so many of the class failed that they had to bump everyone up a grade and still something like 30% failed. But if you'd put in a bit of work you passed. A friend of mine said that he didn't write enough to get 40% but he still came out with a D+ or something because of this bumping everyone up.

What type of eng you in? If you're in Mech or Civil, go whine at your head of dept. It worked for them last year.

stereoroid

Cipriana wrote: »

What book do you have for interests sake? I have the Schaum's vector analysis one, but that's no good for the ideal gas stuff.

I took out "Physics" by James S Walker, which has lots of worked examples, Imperial and SI calculation, and diagrams everywhere. it would have been great last year: this year, however, I've since found out that it's no good, because it's designed to teach undergraduate Physics.

It doesn't go in to the kind of detail we're expected to know this year: I haven't found a book or other resource that does. At least the slides are on Blackboard now, for the 2nd half of the course at least. The first half, we're on our own.

Cipriana

Fantastic, my notes are terrible for Physics! Why why did they make it a 9 o'clock lecture, do they want us all to fail? That problem sheet looks pretty tough too, I spent ages looking at one of the questions yesterday trying to figure out if we have actually covered the material yet or I'm just stupid! Still not sure!

ozt9vdujny3srf

It'll be easy. Trust me.

stereoroid

I've only been able to do Q3 so far. Q2 is on Diffusion, which we started today. Q1 is on the Radiometer, which we have not touched - and it explicitly says "the radiometer discussed in the lecture... I dunno.