Scioly.org

How valuable is AP Physics 1 or AP Physics C in preparing for this event? Is there much overlap?

Alex-RCHS wrote:How valuable is AP Physics 1 or AP Physics C in preparing for this event? Is there much overlap?

Almost no overlap that I have encountered so far (having won two golds this year and written a test, I can now speak from experience). There's use in being able to manipulate units well, but that's about it - most of the actual engineering properties and such are significantly outside the scope of those classes from what I can tell.

Unome wrote:

Alex-RCHS wrote:How valuable is AP Physics 1 or AP Physics C in preparing for this event? Is there much overlap?

Almost no overlap that I have encountered so far (having won two golds this year and written a test, I can now speak from experience). There's use in being able to manipulate units well, but that's about it - most of the actual engineering properties and such are significantly outside the scope of those classes from what I can tell.

Thank you for your response.

This is interesting and I'm surprised. What about any basic background that those classes provide? Like the knowledge of what energy is, what work is, how forces work and how they relate to acceleration and velocity, etc.?

Alex-RCHS wrote:

Unome wrote:

Alex-RCHS wrote:How valuable is AP Physics 1 or AP Physics C in preparing for this event? Is there much overlap?

Almost no overlap that I have encountered so far (having won two golds this year and written a test, I can now speak from experience). There's use in being able to manipulate units well, but that's about it - most of the actual engineering properties and such are significantly outside the scope of those classes from what I can tell.

Thank you for your response.

This is interesting and I'm surprised. What about any basic background that those classes provide? Like the knowledge of what energy is, what work is, how forces work and how they relate to acceleration and velocity, etc.?

Most of that I knew from either doing Simple Machines for two years in Div B (and being really good at it) or from following the discussion on Towers (guesstimated the Young's modulus formula today from all that "light reading" lol). It may be useful to have some Physics 1 conceptual knowledge, but not much more than that.

Unome wrote:

Alex-RCHS wrote:

Unome wrote: Almost no overlap that I have encountered so far (having won two golds this year and written a test, I can now speak from experience). There's use in being able to manipulate units well, but that's about it - most of the actual engineering properties and such are significantly outside the scope of those classes from what I can tell.

Thank you for your response.

This is interesting and I'm surprised. What about any basic background that those classes provide? Like the knowledge of what energy is, what work is, how forces work and how they relate to acceleration and velocity, etc.?

Most of that I knew from either doing Simple Machines for two years in Div B (and being really good at it) or from following the discussion on Towers (guesstimated the Young's modulus formula today from all that "light reading" lol). It may be useful to have some Physics 1 conceptual knowledge, but not much more than that.

Adding to this, but just in general matsci has hardly anything in common with AP or freshman level mechanics. Most of it, especially in the scope of polymers, draws from chemistry, modern physics, and emag.

samlan16 wrote:

Unome wrote:

Alex-RCHS wrote: Thank you for your response.

This is interesting and I'm surprised. What about any basic background that those classes provide? Like the knowledge of what energy is, what work is, how forces work and how they relate to acceleration and velocity, etc.?

Most of that I knew from either doing Simple Machines for two years in Div B (and being really good at it) or from following the discussion on Towers (guesstimated the Young's modulus formula today from all that "light reading" lol). It may be useful to have some Physics 1 conceptual knowledge, but not much more than that.

Adding to this, but just in general matsci has hardly anything in common with AP or freshman level mechanics. Most of it, especially in the scope of polymers, draws from chemistry, modern physics, and emag.

Thank you both for your help!

Does Zumdahl cover all the bases of this event? I don't want to buy or comb through a materials science textbook for bits of information..

wethose wrote:Does Zumdahl cover all the bases of this event? I don't want to buy or comb through a materials science textbook for bits of information..

It doesn't, but you don't really need a Mat Sci textbook. There's plenty of information online.

nvm, found good stuff.

wethose wrote:Does Zumdahl cover all the bases of this event? I don't want to buy or comb through a materials science textbook for bits of information..

Hey, Zumdahl covers the basics of nomenclature if you have the second edition. It is in chapter 22... I used it to learn all the basics..
Hope this helps