Biochemscientist
Harmless
Posts: 13
Registered: 18-8-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Calculus: utility in chemistry
Hi all,
I am currently studying as a biochemistry major as an undergrad, and I am currently working on completing my second semester of calculus (integrals).
I am wondering whether I should bother taking third semester (multivariable) calculus or not. After taking so many previous classes like precalculus,
trigonometry, algebra and so on to get up to this level, I am starting to get tired of all this math and am wondering if it is really worth it or not
to continue. I understand that calculus has a few important applications in chemistry such as in chemical kinetics calculations, but are there many
more applications beyond that?
Will all of this math study pay off? How useful do you think calculus is for a chemist, particularly an organic chemist or biochemist?
|
|
|
Mr. Wizard
International Hazard
Posts: 1042
Registered: 30-3-2003
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Knowledge is like a box full of tools, or a lab full of equipment. Who knows what may prove to be an asset? Just understanding the concepts involved
may give you an insight into some new field or discovery.
Yes it's hard. You pick the tools you need for later.
Good luck.
|
|
|
ldanielrosa
Hazard to Others
Posts: 124
Registered: 25-4-2007
Member Is Offline
Mood: transparent
|
|
I'll be blunt. If you don't already have an application, and you don't enjoy it, and it doesn't satisfy any prerequisites, then stop.
Decision matrix:
want? need? how much?
yes, yes, as much as you can
yes, no, as much as you like
no, yes, as much as you need
no, no, don't
With no application and no reward, you'll work twice as hard and understand less only to lose it by the time you need it. Then you'll have more to
take all over again.
|
|
|
bbartlog
International Hazard
Posts: 1139
Registered: 27-8-2009
Location: Unmoored in time
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Differential equations are probably more useful for chemistry than advanced calculus, though I'm sure that some academic career paths need lots of
calculus (in silico reaction or molecular simulations, bring all the math you can...).
|
|
|
DDTea
National Hazard
Posts: 940
Registered: 25-2-2003
Location: Freedomland
Member Is Offline
Mood: Degenerate
|
|
"I advise my students to listen carefully the moment they decide to take no more mathematics course. They might be able to hear the sound of closing
doors." - James Caballero, CAIP Quarterly 2 (Fall, 1989)
That's how Donald McQuarrie opens his book, "Mathematics for Physical Chemistry." I share that view to an extent: I see no benefit in taking a course
in writing rigorous mathematical proofs, but at a minimum I would encourage you to study multivariable calculus, linear algebra, and calculus-based
statistics. If they aren't requirements for your degree program, see if you can take them as a pass-fail option.
As a scientist, you will never escape mathematics. It's better to get a strong understanding of it early on so that you can have some fluency in it
later. Nothing is more frustrating than checking out a library book on a new technique you'll be working on in your lab and finding that the
mathematics is outside of your comfort zone. So instead of trying to cut corners with math, I think you'll benefit much more from going both feet in
and making math your bitch.
[Edited on 8-19-11 by DDTea]
"In the end the proud scientist or philosopher who cannot be bothered to make his thought accessible has no choice but to retire to the heights in
which dwell the Great Misunderstood and the Great Ignored, there to rail in Olympic superiority at the folly of mankind." - Reginald Kapp.
|
|
|
watson.fawkes
International Hazard
Posts: 2793
Registered: 16-8-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by DDTea  | "I advise my students to listen carefully the moment they decide to take no more mathematics course. They might be able to hear the sound of closing
doors." - James Caballero, CAIP Quarterly 2 (Fall, 1989)
That's how Donald McQuarrie opens his book, "Mathematics for Physical Chemistry." I share that view to an extent: I see no benefit in taking a course
in writing rigorous mathematical proofs, but at a minimum I would encourage you to study multivariable calculus, linear algebra, and calculus-based
statistics. |
I heartily concur, but then again, I know a lot of mathematics.
I disagree with the "no benefit" characterization of rigorous proof. The benefit of learning mathematical rigor is that you are learning how to not
deceive yourself. I've done a lot of science and technology, and I assure you that there is nothing I've ever come across that works nearly as well.
It's a non-trivial amount of work to learn to avoid self-deceit, so don't expect some kind of self-empowerment seminar that can do the like. It's some
hard work, but once the mindset takes hold, it sticks. So once you get a top grade in any rigorous mathematics course, you've reached a plateau from
which you can expand outward.
For physical chemists, I have a specific recommendation. Take a mathematically-rigorous linear algebra course before taking quantum mechanics. By
rigorous, I mean one where linear operators are primary, and matrices are representations of linear operators in finite dimensions. There are cheesy
linear algebra courses that just focus on matrices without getting at the principles; avoid these. Learning QM with a solid grounding in linear
algebra is easy, because almost everything in an undergraduate QM class is evaluating inner products. If you can recognize this, it's all very
straightforward, even if some of the integrals can be a grind.
|
|
|
MeSynth
Hazard to Others
Posts: 107
Registered: 29-7-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZltqlVuDIo
|
|
If your smart enough to do it then you should do it. im sure it will come in hand if you decide to become a chemical engineer.
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
