![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elwenDid you know that lectures actually make more sense when you stay awake the whole time? Go figure.
Actually, my previous impression of lectures were that they were a long listing of various regressed formulas and tables of data, all found perfectly well explained in the book, combined with a few illustrative plots, also found in the book. That's still my impression of lectures, but when I was dozing half the time, all I managed to do was copy down each new equation, missing the cryptic scrawls the professor makes while saying some additional point. (Like he'll say that something is generally less than RT, but all he'll write on the board is "< RT = 2.5kJ/mol" and not what is.) That's probably also still in the book, but I suppose there is some partial effort to highlight things in class.
I'd probably reconsider attending class, though, if it weren't for the fact that my previous class is in the same room, and that's what motivated me to try the class in the first place.
I was reading the book last night and it occurred to me that "Environmental Organic Chemistry" is a crappy way of describing it. At least the part we're going through now, which seems to continue for quite a while on, I would call something along the lines of "applied thermodynamics". There's a lot of ChE63 -- but better, considering three pages from this book about fugacity explained more than anything in 63b ever did -- but then it focuses more on liquids and aqueous solutions and less on gases. (Hurrah for assuming everything's an ideal gas. Suck that, Peng-Robinson.)
So yeah, as much as I hate the thermo and was caught off-guard by the amount of math in this class, I can see how it's probably beneficial for me to take it. Even more so for chem majors that don't get as much thermo, but for me it's kind of the link between thermo -- in which we were overjoyed at the relevance of actually dealing, for a week or two, with chemical reactions -- and a more microscopic look at things.
Supposedly 175b is more interesting, so I may or may not stick with it. But the goal is to not make second term suck, given I'm automatically adding another ChE class and seriously considering taking EE51, without putting off any of the ab/c classes I'm taking right now.
At least the book is good, and since the lectures follow the book more closely than I'd like even, well.
Actually, my previous impression of lectures were that they were a long listing of various regressed formulas and tables of data, all found perfectly well explained in the book, combined with a few illustrative plots, also found in the book. That's still my impression of lectures, but when I was dozing half the time, all I managed to do was copy down each new equation, missing the cryptic scrawls the professor makes while saying some additional point. (Like he'll say that something is generally less than RT, but all he'll write on the board is "< RT = 2.5kJ/mol" and not what is.) That's probably also still in the book, but I suppose there is some partial effort to highlight things in class.
I'd probably reconsider attending class, though, if it weren't for the fact that my previous class is in the same room, and that's what motivated me to try the class in the first place.
I was reading the book last night and it occurred to me that "Environmental Organic Chemistry" is a crappy way of describing it. At least the part we're going through now, which seems to continue for quite a while on, I would call something along the lines of "applied thermodynamics". There's a lot of ChE63 -- but better, considering three pages from this book about fugacity explained more than anything in 63b ever did -- but then it focuses more on liquids and aqueous solutions and less on gases. (Hurrah for assuming everything's an ideal gas. Suck that, Peng-Robinson.)
So yeah, as much as I hate the thermo and was caught off-guard by the amount of math in this class, I can see how it's probably beneficial for me to take it. Even more so for chem majors that don't get as much thermo, but for me it's kind of the link between thermo -- in which we were overjoyed at the relevance of actually dealing, for a week or two, with chemical reactions -- and a more microscopic look at things.
Supposedly 175b is more interesting, so I may or may not stick with it. But the goal is to not make second term suck, given I'm automatically adding another ChE class and seriously considering taking EE51, without putting off any of the ab/c classes I'm taking right now.
At least the book is good, and since the lectures follow the book more closely than I'd like even, well.
no subject
Date: 2004-10-12 03:30 am (UTC)Lol!!