Dropping subject: Chemistry or Physics ? (2 Viewers)

[muzeikchun852]

so which subject should i drop, since i enjoy both subjects equally. and why.

go for interest (Physics) or equality (Chemistry)?

thx in advanced.

 

[tamarazhere]

I do both chemistry and physics and I just find physics to be easier. The concepts in chemistry are just too numerous, there is so much to learn. Physics is more fun too.

 

[WEMG]

Which one are you better at?

 

[Riproot]

Physics.
Because it's horrible and I hate it.
Also, because fuckin' you need chem if you want to be a rich doctor husband.

 

[muzeikchun852]

Which one are you better at?

for prelim, chemistry. but prelim chem course is much easier than physics. and now, i think they are in the same level for hsc.

 

[muzeikchun852]

Physics.
Because it's horrible and I hate it.
Also, because fuckin' you need chem if you want to be a rich doctor husband.

i dont think i will be studying medicine in uni ..

 

[4025808]

well just see how you go up till half yearly and then decide from there if you can't decide
that's what my friend did

 

[deterministic]

Given you do 4unit maths, you should keep physics cos:
- a good physics intuition in terms of vectors and direction which forces are applied is important for the topic mechanics in 4 unit.
- projectile motions in physics is a sinch once you do it in 3 unit. Once again, a good physics intuition also helps when studying it in 3unit.

 

[muzeikchun852]

Given you do 4unit maths, you should keep physics cos:
- a good physics intuition in terms of vectors and direction which forces are applied is important for the topic mechanics in 4 unit.
- projectile motions in physics is a sinch once you do it in 3 unit. Once again, a good physics intuition also helps when studying it in 3unit.

you're sort of right ..

 

[Aquawhite]

I found that neither Physics or Chemistry was useful to any other subjects, rather English Advanced was to the betterment of both. Personally, I loved the Chemistry course and found myself stimulated by the material on a regular basis, both challenging and even at times, fun. Physics on the other hand, despite being a good course to learn and can be very interested with an enthusiastic teacher, is a very laborious subject in respect that its concentration and foundation on historical happenings and their significance are overpowering. I tended to find that the history in the Physics course overbore the actual physics itself and I occasionally found myself bored with it.

That said, Physics is much easier. Chemistry, I spent more time on to achieve the same understanding and level of competence in completing questions because there is (arguably) more work involved in them.

Whichever you choose, I'm sure you'll be satisfied. Better yet, drop neither? I enjoyed 15 units in the preliminary year (accelerated student) and then 13 in the HSC year, so both are very manageable and go hand-in-hand perfectly - there is a certain unspoken symmetry and alliance between the two HSC subjects.

 

[WEMG]

you're sort of right ..

I know this is off-topic but why do you need 96+ Atar for BCommerce and BArts, I thought for USyd it is 94.5. Unless you are aiming for 96 regardless of course? I'm just wondering because I'm also aiming for the same course in Uni.

 

[kaz1]

I know this is off-topic but why do you need 96+ Atar for BCommerce and BArts, I thought for USyd it is 94.5. Unless you are aiming for 96 regardless of course? I'm just wondering because I'm also aiming for the same course in Uni.

96 for unsw and unsw > usyd

 

[Aquawhite]

96 for unsw and unsw > usyd

Let's not get into that.

 

[muzeikchun852]

96 for unsw and unsw > usyd

^ wat he said.

 

[susanpowell]

drop physics
look at the past papers they've got some stupid questions

 

[Official]

Just do both l

 

[Ishynooshy]

Here's what I think:
Physics isn't that much more helpful for 3/4U maths. Sure it introduces you to the concept of vectors, but they are treated in physics and mathematics is slightly different. Also, I found there to be a lot more of the historical developments/social implications in physics. This was my main reason for dropping it in the middle of year 12- I wasn't learning a whole lot of practical physics. I won't mention a few gaping holes in the syllabus that I have figured out after going to uni for a year.

Chemistry is probably just as tough. It requires you to have a very strong foundation in what you have learnt in the preliminary course because everything will come back to haunt you. People may say that because it's revisited in year 12 you shouldn't worry about x,y,z concept. TBH, by that time its just too late to be relearning basic concepts and having to build on top of it. The concepts in the syllabus aren't very well unified and so there isn't much you can relate to particular concepts. If you look at the Motors and Generators module in physics, there is a clear connection between almost all of the dotpoints-magnets, motor,emf, back emf, eddy currents etc. This is harder to see in some of the chemistry module such as Chemical Monitoring and Management.

 

[Omnipotence]

drop physics
look at the past papers they've got some stupid questions

Define, stupid, because its pretty vague in your statement.

 

[susanpowell]

Define, stupid, because its pretty vague in your statement.

Physics is a fascinating course, no doubt about it, but the exams don't do justice. Questions like "we put Newton in the seat" or "damage from high charged solar particles" or "contradict Kepler's law of periods" are barely covered in the syllabus and the ordinary student would stumble or BS in it. The calculations are quite difficult (compared to chemistry) and require the integration of two or more equations. As well, there is confusion as to whether the function of a PNP/NPN transistor or forward/reverse bias diode needs to be learnt (apparently its a waste of space in the textbook). My teacher himself almost vomited when he saw the paper - he loves teaching physics but despises the exam for providing a poor reflection of what students have learnt. In addition the scaling of physics is worse than chemistry. Quantum and Quarks is a ridiculously large elective topic, much larger than industrial chemistry.

Chemistry on the other hand, though insipid at times, is more fairer. The exams nicely reflects the syllabus and the calculations (e.g. titration) are decent for the ordinary student. Though some in my cohort may complain about the course's difficulty, everyone agrees that there were little tricks in the exam paper. The extended responses (e.g. CFCs, monitoring the Haber process) are well chosen and a lot can be written.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[muzeikchun852]

Physics is a fascinating course, no doubt about it, but the exams don't do justice. Questions like "we put Newton in the seat" or "damage from high charged solar particles" or "contradict Kepler's law of periods" are barely covered in the syllabus and the ordinary student would stumble or BS in it. The calculations are quite difficult (compared to chemistry) and require the integration of two or more equations. As well, there is confusion as to whether the function of a PNP/NPN transistor or forward/reverse bias diode needs to be learnt (apparently its a waste of space in the textbook). My teacher himself almost vomited when he saw the paper - he loves teaching physics but despises the exam for providing a poor reflection of what students have learnt. In addition the scaling of physics is worse than chemistry. Quantum and Quarks is a ridiculously large elective topic, much larger than industrial chemistry.

Chemistry on the other hand, though insipid at times, is more fairer. The exams nicely reflects the syllabus and the calculations (e.g. titration) are decent for the ordinary student. Though some in my cohort may complain about the course's difficulty, everyone agrees that there were little tricks in the exam paper. The extended responses (e.g. CFCs, monitoring the Haber process) are well chosen and a lot can be written.

Just my 2 cents.

thats exactly wat the '10ers said.