03222018, 05:29 AM



171 posts, read 121,915 times
Reputation: 103


Would you say that a course in Statics requires any previous exposure to physics in general?
I am asking this because I know a few people who are interested in starting physics, and they have enough math skills to be able to calculate integrals, which seems to be the highest level of math necessary for Statics.
Also, I sometimes plow through Statics every now and then just to refresh my own memories of that course, and it seems to me like there isn't really any physics requirements for that  it also seems to be based on math.
The Statics book that I am personally using (R.C. Hibbeler's "Engineering Mechanics: Statics") starts with defining Newton's laws, then it talks a bit about unit conversions and rounding of decimals before introducing position vectors and force vectors, and then it uses those things to define moment  and most other Statics books seem to follow the same structure.
So is there really any need for someone to already know physics when they start Statics?
Or am I so used with math and physics that I take several aspects for granted and fail to notice how new and unfamiliar it would "actually" be to someone who has never studied physics at all?

03222018, 08:18 AM



11,249 posts, read 7,313,687 times
Reputation: 32084


Are you asking whether someone who has no previous understanding of concepts like force, work, momentum, velocity, acceleration, etc., and how those relate to calculus, would be adequately prepared for a course in engineering statics?
Since most people who take engineering statics and dynamics have already had 2 semesters of high school physics and 2 semesters of university physics, it seems like there would be a great deal of preknowledge assumed.

03222018, 10:58 AM



171 posts, read 121,915 times
Reputation: 103


Quote:
Originally Posted by turf3
Are you asking whether someone who has no previous understanding of concepts like force, work, momentum, velocity, acceleration, etc., and how those relate to calculus, would be adequately prepared for a course in engineering statics?
Since most people who take engineering statics and dynamics have already had 2 semesters of high school physics and 2 semesters of university physics, it seems like there would be a great deal of preknowledge assumed.

Yes, but it seems to me like Statics only assumes knowledge in mathematics.
Statics seems to only require math knowledge up to single integrals, and Dynamics might be manageable for those who know Statics and are familiar with vector calculus.
I don't know, I just kinda felt that Statics seemed to go through everything that the reader needs to know, and that it was only firstyear university math that was expected.
But then again, I might be so used to that course that I don't realise what those who are new to physics will find confusing.
But it does seem like a typical Statics book starts with things like position vectors and force vectors, and those things should be understandable for those who have studied vector calculus, and then the rest of the chapters seem to build upon that.
Of course, different Statics books have different levels of difficulty;
I feel like Hibbeler's book is easier to use and more basic, whereas the book by Meriam/Kraige is somewhat harder and more demanding.

03222018, 01:46 PM



Location: Heart of Dixie
12,442 posts, read 13,548,768 times
Reputation: 28374


I found Statics to be a relatively easy course that relied more on math skills than knowledge of physics. Now, when I took the next courses, like Dynamics (F=ma) and Thermodynamics (pV = nRT), things got a bit tougher, and physics definitely comes into play.

03222018, 03:52 PM



Location: Pacific 🌉 Â°N, 🌄Â°W
11,757 posts, read 6,533,251 times
Reputation: 7528


Physics was not a prerequisite for Statistics when I took it in college.

03232018, 11:47 AM



11,249 posts, read 7,313,687 times
Reputation: 32084


Quote:
Originally Posted by Matadora
Physics was not a prerequisite for Statistics when I took it in college.

Read again. You inserted an "ist" where none existed.

03232018, 01:43 PM



Location: Pacific 🌉 Â°N, 🌄Â°W
11,757 posts, read 6,533,251 times
Reputation: 7528


Quote:
Originally Posted by turf3
Read again. You inserted an "ist" where none existed.

I have no ideal what you're referring to.
I simply answered the OP.

03232018, 02:39 PM



11,249 posts, read 7,313,687 times
Reputation: 32084


The OP is asking about STATICS not STATISTICS.
Do you understand the difference?

03232018, 02:47 PM



Location: Pacific 🌉 Â°N, 🌄Â°W
11,757 posts, read 6,533,251 times
Reputation: 7528


Quote:
Originally Posted by turf3
The OP is asking about STATICS not STATISTICS.

Ah I see now. I read this post on a tiny screen without my reading glasses.
In that case I don't think it would hurt to take Physics (I) as a prerequisite to statics as it covers Mechanics.

04052018, 05:51 AM



171 posts, read 121,915 times
Reputation: 103


Thanks for your answers.
I finished my refresher on Statics a while ago and right now I am going through Dynamics, and I would say that while Statics is probably at least manageable for those who have finished a Calculus 1 course, the Dynamics book seems very much too heavy and demanding for those who have no background in basic dynamics.
For example, in an introductory physics book you would get a fairly basic definition of momentum  just enough to be able to use it for certain special cases  but Dynamics is fairly hardcore right from the beginning and gives a formal definition that has been derived by integrating the vector form of Newton's Second Law in terms of v and t, and then uses it for examples such as dependent motion and things like that and expects that the reader has clearly understood everything up to that point.
Also, Dynamics has a funny habit of starting with very general cases and then showing simplified special cases where some term is 0, rather than the other way round, which is an interesting take on things.
This isn't too overwhelming if you are already familiar with fundamental dynamics, but it's probably too much to swallow for a beginner, and it's probably safer to finish Physics 1 before starting with Statics and Dynamics, like a "stepping stone";
kind of like how it's generally better to start with examples in 1 dimension before trying examples in 3 dimensions.
Anyway, both Statics and Dynamics are very rewarding courses, and should definitely be taken by anyone who likes Mechanics.
Last edited by Markus86; 04052018 at 06:08 AM..

Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: Citydata.com.

