What kind of strengths do these science subjects require?

Are you just talking about performing well in school, or making a career in these fields?

If the former, some research has shown that grades in all three subjects are correlated with time spent doing homework. And listening to your teacher. (Okay, I might have made that one up.)

Basic algebra will be useful to you in all three classes; math through calculus could be necessary for physics depending on what level you take. (I slid through college with algebra-based physics and never looked back.)

If you’re talking about careers, being analytical, creative, and a glutton for punishment will be critical.

Physics is so math-intensive that you’ll end up with a minor in math if you intend to make physics your major. Newton developed differential and integral calculus as a means of describing the nature of mechanics.

Chemistry is a little less math-intensive, but it requires the same kind of reasoning. You have to be able to understand instructions and work quickly to get through the labs, which can be both interesting and tedious.

Biology requires the ability to absorb a lot of facts, and to be able to observe and describe precisely. Living organisms are very complicated; just being able to enumerate and describe the functioning of the organelles of a living cell takes an awful lot of studying, and you don’t have much in the way of a theoretical framework to guide you. It’s the least theoretical and most practical of the three disciplines you mention. Not to mention that you have to cut up dead things.

I’d agree with @IchtheosaurusRex , but add that statistics is probably useful for biology.

I think a lot of people get caught out with chemistry, regarding how “math-intensive” it is.

Sure, it is less so than physics, but people only ever do physics if they love that shit.

People do chemistry, often thinking they’ll be ok because it’s less “math-intensive”, and then really, really struggle with the maths.

I, along with the top universities of my country, wouldn’t recommend taking Chemistry, without taking A-level Maths (which is about equivalent to first year of university level maths in the States), in fact most universities will force students to take extra maths classes during the week, if they don’t have A level Maths. They have to do another two modules of maths, in addition to the one module of Maths for Chemists, which everyone takes.

That said, the chemistry courses, well all the courses, in the UK are much more pure and so more in-depth, than in other places. For example, if you’re doing Chemistry, that is what you’ll be doing for 90% of the time, so it might be a bit more mathematically & conceptually intense, at least for the first couple of years, than a similarly named course elsewhere. That’s what the exchange students have all said, anyway.

you need to learn delayed gratification….very delayed gratification for these subjects… while you do all of the practice questions… over and over…physics is counter intuitive, biology is remembering the names for every facet of life, and chemistry needs the same, and math needs all of them including turning off your bullshit detector.

@Aesthetic_Mess I don’t want to be rude, but I think your question is much too broad. Any given approach (physics, chemistry, biology, etc) can be broken up over and over again, where two “biologists” could be two completely different types of scientist, and each perform admirably at their job.

For example: A biologist working in agriculture, designing bug resistant food or something, would be very different from a biologist working in neurology. The type of thinking needed to solve any given problem that one or the other might face would require a different type of thinking.

Biology can very easily be just as math intensive as physics, or so far removed that you’ll never need to pick up a calculator again. I would first try and define a narrower subject before trying to really tackle this question.

I totally agree that you should be prepared to embrace (I would say you must embrace) logic, reason, patience, and diligence, regardless of the field. And math will always be your friend.

@talljasperman I totally disagree with your interpretation of what biology is, by the way. I hope you don’t think that’s really what the entire field boils down to.

@notdan most of my biology textbooks contain obscure vocabulary and drawings…maybe I’m reading an un-diverse set of textbooks… but then I was only talking about the class component… not the career part… which t.v. has shown me is walking through mud and grasslands looking for something specific, but I’m sure their is more to it than that

Yes yes, as @notdan said, these disciplines are broad and different specialisations within them can demand very different skills and “strengths”

I was approaching the subject from an undergrad academic perspective

Physics – God help you. I don’t understand how anyone can comprehend physics but if you can, well, good for you! I certainly get tired of thinking after about 20 minutes of it. I’d say this requires all math, logic and analytical skills you can find.

Chemistry – Chem really isn’t too bad/actually quite interesting with patience and a real nag for chemicals and their atomic structure. Slight math, logic, etc.

Biology – Biology wins my heart the most. It really isn’t too difficult as far as numbers go or any “thinking” is involved, though, conceptually nature is really comprehensive. A lot of memorization, but it comes easy if you find the subject material interesting.

What it all boils down to is what subject you’re interested in. There are people with PhD’s that won’t go anywhere near a Math book. Anything is really as easy/difficult as your heart makes it out to be.

@talljasperman There is certainly more to the world of biology than collecting samples of grass. :) If you like, I might be able to point you to some resources that can show you some of those avenues.

The under-grad perspective doesn’t seem to have a good direction, though. Of course we can generalize and paint a picture of what first and second year courses could look like, but I would say a talented scientist would be thinking about the direction and purpose of his education down the road, while being taught the basics. I think the purpose of the first year classes is to help a student define that direction.

I will concede that first year biology courses are probably more memorization driven than others. But that doesn’t speak to the skills needed to be a successful biologist.

@notdan sure Private Message me