Are probable cause and reasonable suspicion the same?

Answer 1

They are two different standards which contain different elements you will have to satisfy. I found a memo which briefly explains them...
"...This is in response to your request for a brief description of the Fourth Amendment's probable cause, reasonable suspicion, and reasonableness standards. In over simplified terms, probable cause "exist[s] where the known facts and circumstances are sufficient to warrant a man of reasonable prudence in the belief that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found," Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690, 696 (1996); Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238 (1983).
Under a similar gloss, reasonable suspicion is a standard, more than a hunch but considerably below preponderance of the evidence, which justifies an officer's investigative stop of an individual upon the articulable and particularized belief that criminal activity is afoot, Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. at 695; Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. at 235..."
-Congressional Research Service Washington
You can also find more information suprisingly on Wikipedia
Look at the case law referenced on these Wikipedia articles (e.g. Terry v. Ohio, landmark case that established a step test for reasonable suspicion) and read the landmark cases, they will help you better understand why these two concepts are so different but sometime lead you to the same result.
They are two different standards which contain different elements you will have to satisfy. I found a memo which briefly explains them...
"...This is in response to your request for a brief description of the Fourth Amendment's probable cause, reasonable suspicion, and reasonableness standards. In over simplified terms, probable cause "exist[s] where the known facts and circumstances are sufficient to warrant a man of reasonable prudence in the belief that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found," Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690, 696 (1996); Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238 (1983).
Under a similar gloss, reasonable suspicion is a standard, more than a hunch but considerably below preponderance of the evidence, which justifies an officer's investigative stop of an individual upon the articulable and particularized belief that criminal activity is afoot, Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. at 695; Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. at 235..."
-Congressional Research Service Washington
You can also find more information surprisingly on Wikipedia
Look at the case law referenced on these Wikipedia articles (e.g. Terry v. Ohio, landmark case that established a step test for reasonable suspicion) and read the landmark cases, they will help you better understand why these two concepts are so different but sometime lead you to the same result.