Steve Peterson

Reflections Mechanics Kinematics: I feel fine with kinematics. We spent plenty of time last year learning the fundamentals and plenty of time this year reviewing. I suppose the thing I have had the most trouble with regarding kinematics is just fully understanding the concepts of vectors and scalars. I do understand it now, but it always seemed a little weird that we have to categorize measurements into these two very different things. I have never had any trouble understanding displacement, velocity, and acceleration, and recognizing how they are related; taking calculus certainly helped there. The Big 5 equations made things pretty easy to work with and I have never had much trouble using them. I feel I have mastered as much as is needed regarding the topic of kinematics.

Motion in two dimensions: Another concept that we spent plenty of time on last year, I feel very good about 2-D motion. Its really one of those things where once you are exposed to enough of it, its pretty impossible not to be totally comfortable with. Like I mentioned though, the concept of vectors and determining the components of vectors was a little tricky to me at first. But like I said, having so much practice over the past two years, that sort of thing is a walk in the park now. There are still some projectile problems that can be difficult to be sure, but even if I have trouble with velocity and acceleration, I have many other concepts on my physics toolbelt that I can use, such as energy.

Static equilibrium: If an object is at rest or has constant velocity, then its acceleration is zero and the sum of forces acting on it is zero. I cant imagine this idea ever gave me any problems; but if it did, I have triumphantly overcome those problems because Newtons first law is a cakewalk now.

Dynamics of a single particle: I really enjoyed everything we did both this year and last year involving Newtons second law. Its a relatively simple concept that can be applied to everything; the free body diagrams make situations very easy to understand; and in my opinion, we did the best labs during this unit. When we first addressed this topic, I had trouble with scenarios in which a force was being

Steve Peterson

exerted in a direction other than horizontal or vertical, but Im fine with it now. The hardest part of Newtons second law for me, and Im assuming many others, was drag forces. It seemed like while we were learning this, every time we did a practice problem I understood things pretty well, but once we went off to do it ourselves, I hit a brick wall. I feel good about it now though, because its just calculus, which simplifies things for me, and differential equations is something I have done well with in calculus class. Plus, we have seen differential equations and exponential decay functions so many times this year so I have had plenty of practice.

Systems of two or more objects: Another concept I feel like I have conquered due to plenty of practice over the past two years. A lot of problems that involve tension, mainly the Atwood Machine problems, used to make me tense. I guess I had a hard time looking at things as a whole. But now I have no problem looking at an Atwood Machine as a system. I could still probably use some practice though, just because its been a while, and we really werent exposed to this concept much after we finished this unit.

Work and the work-energy theorem: Work for me has been one of those topics where the early examples are so simple that they give you a false sense of security, and then blindside you with the harder problems. What I mean is that I never had any trouble with W=Fd. Using integration was a little tricky for me because I always made things too complicated. Once I started thinking in terms of graphs and area under the curve, things really started working out for me. I also hurt myself by trying to use W=Fd when problems asked for the change in energy. But once I realized I just had to use kinetic energy, it didnt take much practice to move forward.

Forces and potential energy: Conservative forces were something I never fully understood, but I never really tried to learn because we didnt spend much time on them and I didnt need this knowledge to finish Webassign. I still sort of feel this way because I cant imagine the AP test will ask about this, but I do know the basic ideas, such as conservative forces being path-independent. But I will admit that if this is an area worth improving, I need improvement. Potential energy on the other hand, is potentially one of my strongest areas. I am familiar with the potential energy functions and I feel comfortable using them however necessary. I think this is why I enjoyed everything we did with springs, pendulums, and other energy-related items.

Steve Peterson

Conservation of energy: Conservation of energy was a topic that I dont think I cared how well I understood, because it immediately made everything so much easier, no matter how difficult the problem. I think the reason I understand it very well is that I used it so many times in place of other (and often intended) concepts, such as the lab report about torque and Newtons second law. Like I already mentioned, conservation of energy made things like springs and pendulums much less intimidating. This is one of the few things that I think I can honestly say I dont need much more practice with, just some refreshers. I also feel very good about power. It was never very difficult to calculate power, just relate some basic formulas. But when power was required in order to find some other value, I always felt clever because I always remembered that power is the change in energy over time. Im no genius, but I feel pretty confident about power, and confidence is often more powerful than actual knowledge.

Center of mass: Center of mass was another one of those topics where I felt fine with the simple examples, in this case being symmetrical objects. As a result, I just sort of turned to symmetry to solve any problem involving center of mass, which was okay in some cases, but I never fully grasped how to deal with various other situations. After some review, I can use and apply the formula for center of mass well enough to get by, but I think I still need to improve my understanding of center of mass and how it relates to velocity and momentum.

Impulse and momentum: I feel very comfortable with linear momentum in any form. I think momentum is sort of an easier topic to learn because it is a term and a concept that we all use in real life; there is nothing extremely new to understand. It took me a little while to realize what impulse even was, but of course now I know it is just the change in linear momentum. This means that I am also very comfortable using force versus time graphs, and one important lesson Ive learned recently is that being able to deal with graphs earns you many points on free response problems. I already mentioned my issues with center of mass; Im not too clear on the relations between linear momentum and center of mass motion. This is the area I need some improvement with, but I feel very good overall about momentum and impulse.

Conservation of linear momentum, collisions:

Steve Peterson

I feel fine with conservation of momentum. I think its worth noting that the qualitative lab we did at the start of this unit was extremely helpful. Being able to recognize each type of collision in a certain scenario is so valuable, and seeing these collisions in a hands-on experiment really developed this skill. And once you have learned each type of collision, conservation of momentum is very simple after learning conservation of energy; you just have to look at the system before and after the collision. I would be pretty excited to see conservation of momentum on the AP test. The toughest part of momentum is probably 2-D momentum. These problems used to intimidate me but I quickly realized I already knew what to do, I was just dealing with different measurements; you just need to determine the vector components.

Uniform circular motion: I really didnt like UCM when we first started it because it was totally new; I didnt really have any prior knowledge to help with this. But once I stopped thinking too hard, UCM became pretty simple. I quickly realized that centripetal acceleration always points inward; and once you master centripetal acceleration, you can do anything involving UCM. I feel very good about determining acceleration, velocity, revolutions, or anything else that comes from an object undergoing UCM. I also like how UCM pops up in many different scenarios, even for just a small part of an objects motion. So I think its probably likely well have something involving this topic on our AP test, and thats just fine with me.

Torque and rotational statics: Now that finding these artifacts is behind me, Im extremely glad that I was assigned this topic. I dont think Im alone when I say that torque was one of the toughest concepts for me. Quite honestly, everything we did this year involving rotation was confusing for me. It took me a long time to figure out exactly what torque was. Im still not very confident with it, and I would not be happy to see a torque question on our test, but I do know much more now than I used to. I have finally grasped how Newtons second law is used to determine torque, and I can relate torque to moment of inertia, which is something I have done okay with, probably because we went very in depth with it. Inertia was something else that I didnt understand at all when we started, but now I am actually pretty confident, even if I may not be able to derive it for all shapes. I could definitely use more practice with torque and probably with inertia, but for now I am very happy that I have finally grasped the fundamentals of each.

Rotational kinematics and dynamics:

Steve Peterson

In this dark place that was rotation, I was happy to see a major reference back to the first week of school. The analogy between translational and rotational kinematics was pretty easy for me to understand and really helped me start to understand other rotational concepts, like rotational momentum. Something I didnt really do well that I absolutely should have was remembering to account for rotational motion of a rolling object. It was something that I understood just fine, but for some reason I made so many mistakes on free response problems when it came to applying conservation of energy and momentum to an object undergoing both translational and rotational motion. However, it was easy to learn from these mistakes so I feel pretty confident now about rolling without slipping.

Angular momentum and its conservation: It was good to have another reference back to an earlier unit that didnt involve rotation, especially something I understood well like momentum. So this was something that came to me a little easier than other rotational concepts, and I did pretty well in applying the conservation of momentum because it was something I already knew. But once again I had a lot of trouble with torque. And not that I was still having issues with velocity vectors at this point, but combing two things that Im not exactly a fan of made torque even worse for me. Ive already mentioned that I could use more practice with torque, but this is a good time to say that the torque practice should be as diverse as possible. Rotation was probably the worst unit for me this year, so it feels pretty good to now be saying that I feel pretty good about several rotational topics like moment of inertia and angular momentum.

Simple harmonic motion: We probably could have started doing multivariable calculus after rotation and I would have enjoyed it. I did pretty well with SHM right off the bat because I already knew what period, frequency, and amplitude were, and I was already familiar with how springs and pendulums behave. The tough part of this chapter was utilizing differential equations because I never even realized that they were relevant to the topic; but like I said, I feel pretty comfortable with differential equations because they are a main focus in calculus class. One of the biggest aspects of SHM is energy considerations, so I felt very comfortable with most of the calculations that we made, and I think this is why my lab partner and I did very well with the labs during this chapter. I am also glad that we spent plenty of time working with graphs, because SHM can pretty much be summarized by looking at a certain graph, and it gives me confidence that I understand this.

Steve Peterson

Mass on a spring: Like I mentioned before, it was very beneficial that I was already familiar with springs. I had no trouble finding period or displacement of a spring, and spring-block problems sort of became a favorite of mine. In fact, every time we have had to design our own experiment as part of a free response problem this year, I have gone to a spring-block system, and it has always been valid. The one thing I did have some trouble with was when a mass was placed on top of a vertical spring. I was a little confused about when to set the spring force equal to the force of gravity. Knowing myself, thats probably the sort of thing I would continue to mix up, but I have it figured out right now and thats the important thing.

Pendulum and other oscillations: Similar to springs, I was already familiar with pendulums and how they relate to SHM, so I did pretty well with this topic. It was during this lesson though that I realized that I didnt really know what damping was. Now I understand the concept of a damped oscillator, but Im still not sure how to apply it or how to deal with one if it was presented. But overall I feel very good about pendulums, and especially physical pendulums, mostly because I made several, which probably gives me an unfair advantage over everyone else.

Newtons law of gravity/Orbits of planets and satellites: If we get an orbit free response question on our AP test, I will probably start cheering right in the testing room. Not that universal gravitation makes a lot of sense to me, but every practice problem we have done has basically just required the use of Newtons second law, with gravitational force and centripetal acceleration, which is something that I know I can do. The only wrinkle in my confidence of orbits would be Keplers laws. Not that they are difficult, but since we have not had much practice with Keplers third law, it seems like something I could potentially forget in a pressure situation. But all in all, I feel great about orbits and I am hoping for an orbit question on the AP test.

E&M

Charge and Coulombs law: I would hope that I am pretty comfortable with basic charge principles, as we are introduced to this sort of thing at a young age. I guess the only thing involving charges that I had

Steve Peterson

trouble with was first trying to figure out how to induce a certain charge on an object with some other object and then being able to explain it. I am fine with it now, but it took me a little while to comprehend how charges move and how to charge certain things. Coulombs law was pretty simple though and I feel fine with charges now.

Electric field and electric potential: Electric field and electric potential were the first two of many things in E & M that when we first started I didnt understand at all. I didnt have much trouble with the calculations we did in class, but I couldnt explain these things (mainly potential) to save my life. And Im not exactly sure when it was that I experienced my awakening. I think I just started to grasp these concepts because all the work we have done with electric fields and potential over the past few months. Whatever the reason, Im fine now and I feel very confident when asked about electric field or electric potential. My biggest worry now is mixing up the two when it comes to analyzing a field diagram.

Gausss law: Electric flux was another thing I didnt understand at all when we first started, but once again, constant use of flux has helped me understand what it is. I guess it just took awhile for me to see enough different examples of flux to finally understand its properties. Gausss law though, was a life saver right from the beginning. Compared with the brute force method of finding electric field that we had learned, Gausss law was simple. I wasnt great with using Gausss law with cylinders because of the symmetry considerations, but we have done plenty of practice with lots of different charge distributions, so I feel pretty confident.

Fields and potentials of other charge distributions: This is another example of the sort of thing that was difficult for me this year. I was already familiar with electric field and potential, but the various charge distributions that we looked at were all new, so I had nothing to compare them to. I felt like I took pretty good notes during class, but when I went to look at them later, I couldnt follow the logic that we discussed in class. Ive gotten lots of practice so I feel pretty good, but the biggest issue I have now is remembering what to do in some situations, like coaxial cylinders. I am very comfortable with highly symmetric charge distributions, but its things like the cylinders that could give me problems, so I need to review those more.

Steve Peterson

Electrostatics with conductors: Since I was already at least somewhat familiar with the properties of conductors, this was not too bad for me. I quickly learned that the electric field inside a conductor is zero, and that excess charge on a conductor resides on its surface, and these things have stuck with me. The situations I had trouble with though were the ones with a conductor surrounding by a conducting shell of some sort. I could figure out electric field just fine, but I was never sure about the charge distributions and often times that would throw me off completely. I think that by now I should be able to just look at it and think carefully about whats going on and I should be alright.

Capacitors/Dielectrics: I had some previous knowledge of capacitors from 11th grade, but all I really knew was how they behave in a circuit, I really had no idea what they were. We have done so much practice with capacitors this year with labs, AP questions, Webassign, and more that I feel extremely comfortable with capacitors. I can determine capacitance given some information; I can use capacitance to analyze some other parts of a circuit; and I really liked the lab we did with capacitors in a charging and discharging loop. The only thing I could probably use some more practice with is cylindrical capacitors. There is just something about cylinders that gives me a hard time. Im pretty comfortable with dielectrics as well. I know the properties and Im fine with questions that have a dielectric placed between plates of a capacitor. But like I said before, I still sometimes have a hard time with conductors or dielectrics surrounded by conducting or non-conducting shells. But once again, I just need to think about whats going on and I should be fine.

Current, resistance, power: I am always happy when a question says to find current, because I know so many ways to do so. The most common way weve done this is with resistors and voltage, so Ive developed a very good understanding of the relationships between components of a circuit. I feel very comfortable with resistors; I know how they behave, I know what affects resistance, and I know how resistance affects other things. The one thing I have had trouble with though, has been the internal resistance of a battery. It has come so many times and every time I have simply forgotten the formula, so I need to learn what causes internal resistance so that I wont need a single formula anymore.

Steady-state direct current circuits with batteries and resistors only:

Steve Peterson

Circuits and I have had a very strange relationship this year. I get excited when we get some sort of circuit problem on a test or quiz, and although I often get frustrated, I sort of enjoy building circuits. When we started circuit problems and advanced our way to Ohms law and Kirchhoffs rules problems, I always felt comfortable. And still, I always manage to screw up circuit problems in some way. I would get a bad grade on a quiz with a circuit, then look back at the problem, and fully understand it. I need to film myself doing our next circuit question, because I have no idea how I always mess up. But it does feel good that I know how to use the loop rule and junction rule, and I know how to find voltage, current, or resistance given certain information. I think the best thing I can do for myself is to just do as many different looking circuit problems as I can so that I hopefully wont be baffled by anything on the AP test, even though I never am, I just mess up.

Capacitors in circuits: Once again, I like circuits and I like capacitors, but circuits dont seem to like me. I also mentioned that one of my favorite labs was the capacitor charging and discharging loop. Perhaps the only thing I have been able to consistently get right has been charging and discharging capacitors. I am a big fan of the exponential decay functions that involve this phenomena; I usually go right to them in AP questions even if they arent needed. But I also understand the exponential decay because all the graph work we have done with circuits has all made sense to me. It would be typical of me to make some silly mistake with a circuit that has lots of components, but I think a charging capacitor circuit question is the best chance I have of getting a circuit question right.

Forces on moving charges in magnetic fields: For the opposite reason I was happy to find torque artifacts, I was pretty happy to get this topic; its simple and I understand it. Once I mastered the right hand rule, I was good to go with directions of magnetic fields. And we learned a few different ways to find magnetic force and/or magnetic field. Plus, having already learned about one type of field really eased me into this new topic. I didnt fully grasp right away that magnetic fields can do no work, but thats the sort of thing you only have to make one mistake with before it sticks with you. I could use a little help with crossed electric and magnetic fields, because I have had trouble finding evidence of us doing that this year. I know that mass spectrometer problems involve both fields, but not crossed. Im not too worried about this one concept, but I need to resolve that issue before the AP test.

Steve Peterson

Forces on current-carrying wires in magnetic fields: It seemed like everything involving wires and magnetic fields was just some sort of right hand rule problem, so I feel like Ive had plenty of RHR practice and Im very comfortable with it. I also feel pretty good about finding the magnetic force in this situation, but once again, Im not so sure about torque. Im still pretty shaky with torque in mechanics situations, so torque in this context really throws me off. Im going to have to find some practice with that because I would not have a shot at a problem like that. But I do feel good about the relationship between two long wires carrying currents; I know how to relate them, and the flowing river analogy has been much more helpful than I thought it would be when I first heard it.

Biot-Savart law and Amperes law: I am certainly glad we learned Amperes law because it simplifies many different problems so much, and the Biot-Savart law was pretty complicated. But the weird thing for me was, I understood the Biot-Savart law pretty welluntil we learned Amperes law, then it sort of faded away. So its encouraging that I did well with Biot-Savart at one point; I think I just need to do some reviewing with it because I havent done so yet. At the same time though, its discouraging that I forgot something I understood so suddenly, but Im not going to worry about that right now. The one part of Biot-Savart that did confuse me was the r-hat quantity in the definition. I never really understood why there or how there was both an r and r-hat quantity, but it never really had an effect on my problems so I never pursued this explanation. But all in all, I feel fine with Amperes law and I feel surprisingly confident with Biot-Savart.

Electromagnetic induction: After not really understanding but being able to use electric flux for so long, learning magnetic flux seemed much easier. It was also fairly easy to understand that only a changing magnetic flux can cause an induced current or emf. And after using integration for far messier things all year, simply integrating flux was a breeze for most problems. Im also glad that weve had more Faradays law quizzes than expected because Faradays law is one of those things that I want to have on the AP test and I want to get all the points because I know I can. The only trouble I have right now with Amperes law is dealing with various scenarios such as a wire next to a loop or something similar. I am never quite sure how to relate each thing to each other, but I have been pretty good with it so far.

Steve Peterson

Inductance: I have already mentioned that I like all circuit problems, and that I have been very good with exponential decay functions, so adding a component to a circuit that takes an exponential decay form was fine with me. I guess Im still not totally sure exactly what an inductor is, but Im very comfortable with how they behave, and how they relate to voltage, resistance, and current. I think the lab we did with inductors was necessary because they were a new thing to us and we didnt even know what they looked like, but the results that we got and the shapes of our graphs almost threw me off. I think we discussed this, but my opinion would be to go over inductors and their properties before the lab. But overall, that was the only thing that confused me with inductors; I feel very good with these differential equations and exponential decay functions.

Maxwells equations: I am pretty sure that I am just fine with Maxwells equations. When we did this lesson during class, I was a little confused because I kept thinking there was something new to learn. But once I realized we were just learning the relations between various famous laws, I was fine with everything. Although, Im still not sure whether there are problems that specifically ask about Maxwells equations, or we just have to have this knowledge for many different problems. Either way, I feel comfortable with this material.

Laboratory and experimental situations: When it comes to designing experiments, Ive already explained my strategy. I always go with a spring block system and its always valid; unless of course it is an E&M problem. But with all the different labs weve done this year, I feel comfortable designing lots of experiments. Actually observing and measuring data in experiments has been a weakness for my lab partner and me this year. We always knew what we were trying to do and what we needed to accomplish, we just always had lots of trouble figuring out how. And a couple times our results were greatly distorted by bad equipment that no one could have done anything about. The good news about this is that we have always been able to identify and analyze our error, which is often more important than the results of the experiment. And I cant speak for Mr. Smith, but I feel that I have done a good job this year of communicating and explaining our results and error through informal lab questions and formal lab reports.