Events 2017-2018

[syo_astro]

Keep looking, and we'll see what we get. Yes, solely working with a hodgepodge of equations is not good ESPECIALLY in thermo. But lots of tests will probably be copy+paste/overly basic stat mech >.<. I was mostly trying to bring up the "build your own" to solidify an ORDER to how you study (eg. Start from the 0th Law of thermo, and add in some Ideal Gas Law, etc where needed).

Stat mech is...something tough. Honestly, in various ways I've found thermo and ESPECIALLY E&M to be tougher. The issue is it's a case where the math is hard and you have little physical intuition "crutch". On the other hand, I would have far more pain with a chem/bio/math class. But statistical mechanics is also beyond the scope of the event (unless rules change). Many seem to feel the need to ALWAYS bring up stat mech with thermo with a "look, temperature is like kinetic energy and formulas!!" and no context. Thermo of course stands alone fine. Lots of people just don't know how to teach these things sadly:/.

[MIScioly1]

Stat mech is...something tough. Honestly, in various ways I've found thermo and ESPECIALLY E&M to be tougher.

Seconded on E&M being tough. That AP Physics class must be the hardest AP class in existence. I found Mechanics to be very easy and E&M to be very hard (then again, my school didn't have E&M so I had to take it online - I have no idea how I came out of that with a 5 on the AP exam, I walked out thinking I got a 2 at best).

ON the physics events, Optics and especially Thermodynamics, unless you are really interested and willing to put in the time, its not going to work.

In my Science Olympiad experience, at least in my state, the physics events are the ones where the greatest number of teams struggle. Having a good binder is not enough to do well in physics events - you must actually understand the process of solving the problems. I remember MagLev pretty well, and those E&M questions were extremely difficult. It was probably a good choice to switch to Hovercraft and have a mechanics test, although I've found all the Hovercraft tests I've taken to be too easy. Then again, I'm not really sure how to make mechanics more difficult. Rotation would probably be the only way without using calculus.

[WhatScience?]

In physics including thermo, one must truly understand the laws and conversions and everything else for it to work, agreed. Honestly speaking the only way you are ever going to succeed is if a.) you have superhuman reasoning skills OR b.) you have a good mentor to explain it to you.

For example, if you take a thermo practice test on the test exchange, there will be some problems that if you search up on the internet, you will get no answers. But you will get the laws behind them. There are very few resources that actually explain the laws of thermodynamics. This why you need a mentor.

I have my father a spent a few years as a lecturer at an engineering college and personally loved thermodynamics. You need to get people a similar resource.

Does anyone on your team have engineer parents? Are there any physics teachers at your school that can help your team out because they have a background in thermodynamics. Some volunteers may need a quick refresher on the material but they will be helpful. In physics, reading a textbook is not going to cut it. You have to understand what the words in it mean for the world

Physics are the laws that govern the world. There are many theoretical aspects but the problems in the event are not.

I am sorry to say that there is no textbook that can replace someone who will explain the material to students.

A TEXTBOOK WILL NOT CUT IT!

Hope this helps and sorry for the long post.

[syo_astro]

Problems get harder if you're willing to be creative/spend more time. Unfortunately, many can't/don't know how to do this. Also, not all problems that are like that are answerable anyway. I also suspect a lot of tests work in extremes (either really easy or really hard). Lastly, probably you got a 5 in E&M for the same reason I did back when I took it. The curve is quite in our favor, I even had a class and still found it very hard. What's great is that there are another sometimes 3-5 levels of E&M, and they get even more impossible...

As for what you say WhatScience, I agree and disagree, but I don't want to a huge back and forth. Hopefully a focused, smaller one (apologies if I misinterpret, but I try to add nuance):
-Textbooks aren't perfect, indeed having a mentor helps
-Not everyone can get a local expert teacher, but that's the point of the forums and/or online videos
-A mix of resources available for different needs is usually best, and luckily the internet exists! Thus not everyone needs such teachers (not saying professors b/c profs don't need to learn how to teach)
-You may not know this (I see you're Div B), but Skink is a coach. Skink has a perspective that WOULD find textbooks useful (and I'd wager he knows to take advantage of various resources) as he explains in his posts

So it's not that textbooks alone would be used, but it's not like textbooks are a useless investment. Might not be what you mean, but you seem to imply all textbooks are inferior, which overgeneralizes. This depends on age, background, motivation, etc, but some really do find textbooks more helpful than people. Some learn better with written material than by say listening. Heck, if I had to study from difficult biology or English tests and googling terms I didn't know, I would find it impossible too. Practice problems + googling is not the best source of studying at first.

I don't see the case that a select few can either do physics or transfer physics knowledge. It's not like there's secret thermo clubs throughout the states, and you can only learn thermo from them. I do see many who do physics and don't learn teaching (though, various textbooks also don't do well when they're written by people who don't know how to teach/write well). Lots of things are hard, but one way scioly is great is because self-teaching and many learning methods are explored (eg. From a textbook). I personally found a mix (textbooks, online material, trying to find peers/mentors) was best, but people are different. When learning things for the first time, I agree I had some absolutely terrible textbooks, but I also found some good ones for various topics.

[WhatScience?]

Sorry for any confusion and we can end the discussion here but I was not implying anything about textbooks being inferior. I recommend have a real guide with a textbook. Because while textbooks are definitely a good resource which I too use, it becomes much easier to have a person help you as well. You definitely should also read at least one textbook but I am just providing what I believe the easiest way to succeed.

[whythelongface]

Sorry for any confusion and we can end the discussion here but I was not implying anything about textbooks being inferior. I recommend have a real guide with a textbook. Because while textbooks are definitely a good resource which I too use, it becomes much easier to have a person help you as well. You definitely should also read at least one textbook but I am just providing what I believe the easiest way to succeed.

Well, yes, that's why people get tutors or mentors instead of just hunching over arcane books of E&M equations.

There are some fields, though, where a textbook will probably be all you need (and all that you'll be able to get). I'm thinking of Earth Science events, where online and textbook resources are generally from really official sources, such as college-level classes or from the USGS or something. In these fields, you would also be hard-pressed to find some kind of tutor. You could arguably contact a professor, or if you have connections in the field, a professional, but you won't be able to contact a local tutoring service and expect them to teach you plate tectonics.

It also depends on your personality. Some people like textbooks, some people don't. All in all, though, I think textbook studying is an important skill that we should strive to learn, because not in all situations would you have the time/resources to be able to get a real person to explain the concepts.

Edit: this applies to any high-level branch of a field, even those that people commonly study (Earth Sciences is a bad example here because as far as I can tell that's more niche). Your standard AP Biology tutor probably can't even begin to teach out of Lehninger's Principles of Biochemistry, for example...

[jackway]

Tfw your regionals/states schedule comes out and all 3 of the events you did last year are the same block. RIP

[Unome]

Tfw your regionals/states schedule comes out and all 3 of the events you did last year are the same block. RIP

NC and their 4-slot schedules...

Do more events and you'll have less conflicts

[Froggie]

Tfw your regionals/states schedule comes out and all 3 of the events you did last year are the same block. RIP

NC and their 4-slot schedules...

Do more events and you'll have less conflicts

And I thought SW PA with 5 slots was bad...
Someone should make it illegal for a tornament to have less than 6 time slots.

[Unome]

Per this and this, Solar System seems to be focused on various rocky planets and moons this year. Since there's not an explicit topic name, I'm thinking just calling it something like "Terrestrial Bodies" on the wiki.