Statistics:
161
people took it. High =
105! Low = 22! Using the grade scale in the
syllabus, the Final Exam distribution is: 100+>"A">88, 28 people. 87>"B">76, 45
people. 75>"C">64,
69 people. 63>"D">54,
13 people. 53>"F">0, 6 people. 7 people are
still on the roll who didn't bother to take the Final! They
aren't included in these statistics. If you want your graded Final,
drop by my office sometime & I'll give it to you. As usual, I was
liberal with partial credit! It's clear that a significant minority do NOT understand (or didn't study!) some of the fluids material covered
since Exam III! Fluid dynamics may be difficult, but it needs to be
understood by someone who has finished Physics I! If you want to
see comments about the common physics mistakes on the Final, if I have time, I'll send a
separate email about this. If you don't care about this, of course you
don't have to read it!
The average score in the course was about 76.
The high score was 104.5
(because of extra points!) & the low
score (not counting those who skipped the Final)
was about 34. The letter
grade given for the
final grade numerical score was given EXACTLY
according to the cut offs in the syllabus: 100>A>88>B>76>C>64>D>54>F>0.
168 students are still
on
the roll. There are 29 A's, 41
B's, 69 C's, 18 D's, & 11
F's. If you received a B or better, you should be proud of
yourself! This is extremely fast paced (remember the
"firehose physics" analogy?) & the material is
extremely difficult for many (most?) people.
3.
Physics II: (Physics
1404): Many of you need to take
Physics II (Physics 1404). I strongly suggest
that you do this SOON,
while Physics I is still fresh in your mind! It's very unlikely that
I'll teach Physics II soon. It's not part of my assignment for Fall,
2008. I appreciate, though, some of you wanting me to do this. My
teaching assignments for the near future are in upper level
undergraduate (Physics majors) courses,
graduate
Physics courses, & this same Physics I course again. The usual
people who teach Physics II are Drs. Quade, Thacker, Glab, Sanati,
& Huang. Each is a good instructor. Each though, has their own
style, which is likely (very?) different from
mine. Physics II for Fall, 2008 has many openings left!
4. Final Comments: In addition to the
grade you EARNED,
I sincerely hope that you LEARNED
SOMETHING in this course! You've now been
exposed to most of the ways we have for analyzing the (MACROSCOPIC)
mechanical world & you should now (hopefully!)
have a better understanding than when you started about the way things
work in this world (the WHY & the HOW!). You also should
now be equipped with the tools to understand related topics which we
didn't have time to discuss (say, Chs. 11 & 12!).
I also hope that I've been
able to convince you that Physics is NOT a bunch of formulas to
memorize! Instead, it is a set of unified PHYSICAL CONCEPTS! The
performance on the Final tells me that many have gotten this
message. That's good! However, a FRUSTRATION
for me is that, again based on the Final, many of you NEVER DID get this
message! Since I have repeatedly "preached" about this for the entire
semester, maybe you can understand my frustration. I also really hope
that you have learned some of these PHYSICAL
CONCEPTS. I hope that you have also STOPPED thinking about the
physical world the (WRONG!!)
way Aristotle & the ancient Greeks did. Instead, I hope that
you are now thinking about it like Galileo & Newton did (WHICH IS
mostly CORRECT!!!).
Even though their work & discoveries are about 350-400 years old,
their view of the physical world is still (mostly)
correct today.
Newtonian concepts (like his 3 Laws covered in this course, which some of you
didn't know on the Final! These are the THEME
of the course!) are correct for the MACROSCOPIC world and as long as
an object's speed is very small compared to the speed of light (3 x 10^(8) m/s!). They form the basic
foundation of MUCH
of Engineering & Architecture. For objects moving at
a significant fraction of the speed of light, Newton's Laws break
down & we have to use Einstein's Relativity (Special
Relativity or, sometimes General Relativity). Yes, Relativity
and all its "weirdness" (much of which you likely know
from science fiction & the movies) IS correct, according to MANY EXPERIMENTS! For objects the
size of atoms or smaller (smaller than about 10^(-10)
m!), Newton's Laws also break down & we have to use
Quantum Mechanics (invented on the early 20th Century
by people named Heisenberg and Schrodinger). Quantum Mechanics
is, in some ways, even "weirder" than Relativity! Yet, it IS correct, as MANY EXPERIMENTS have also
shown. Even though Physics is mathematical, it is an EXPERIMENTAL SCIENCE!!
In Physics I, we have ONLY studied the Physics of
the 1600's & 1700's. In Physics II, you'll first study
electromagnetism & optics, the Physics of the 1700's and 1800's (Newton also did many things in optics!). Near the end
of that course, you'll get a quick & rapid exposure to (in my opinion) the REALLY
INTERESTING material: the Physics of the 1900's ("Modern Physics": Quantum Mechanics & Relativity).
It's too bad that this brief exposure to 20th Century physics is ALL that most of you will ever see
of it. It is this Physics (mainly Quantum Mechanics!)
which forms the FOUNDATION
for the majority of the modern technology on which we all rely (computer chips, lasers, various medical diagnostic
techniques like MRI, CT-scan, nuclear medicine, etc.).
Unfortunately, we live in a society that makes great use of technology (much of which is a NECESSITY!)
that most people in the society have very little, if any, understanding
about. Do you wonder how a laser works? To understand lasers, you first
have to understand Quantum Mechanics!