4 ms·

I just wanted to respond to "just another physicist". In university about a million years ago, I was very unhappy. I loved being a programmer, but I found my

I just wanted to respond to "just another physicist". In university about a million years ago, I was very unhappy. I loved being a programmer, but I found my CS courses very limiting and actually boring. I decided to switch to honours physics. At my university, the school realised that there is no demand for a huge number of physicists. In the honours program, they simply gear the course for the top 2 or three students, with the intent on only graduating those few people after 4 years. Everybody else they expect to drop out of the honours program and do a general science degree. I always thought of myself as a pretty smart guy, but honours physics kicked my ass really badly. I remember getting assignments with differential equations before I had ever seen them before. I asked my prof what I should do. He indicated that there were several good books in the library on the topic. After spending virtually every night studying and only just barely able to keep my head above water, I realised. I am not going to get a PhD in physics. it was a valuable lesson. I went back to CS and ate it up (my god it was easy after that). Thinking about "just another physicist" reminds me of the 2 or 3 people who could actually make it through the programme and then go on to do a PhD. Well, in my case, the class I was in eventually graduated 5 people -- the most ever! It turns out they had to turn it up to 11 and still couldn't pare it down, so I don't feel that bad. But I still feel that the ordinary physics PhD is not really so ordinary ;-)

sytelus 7y ago
You are not alone! I've come across enough of CS folks who wanted to be a physicist but ended up "downgrading" to CS. Within physicists, there are enough folks who wanted to be mathematicians but ended up "downgrading" to physics :).
- rochak 7y ago
  I am one of those people. I consider myself as above average but I don't think I have ever had the aptitude to make career as a physicist or something more involved for the matter. I like to learn but, sometimes, the stuff I'm trying to learn is just too much.
scottlocklin 7y ago
You're probably selling yourself short. Differential equations isn't a bad course if you did well in Calculus and have the patience to grind out a ton of examples. E&M, StatMech and/or Lagrangian Mechanics also ain't bad if it's taught well, but this is a case where you really have to do the diff eqs before you can do the physics piece. Diff Eqs is the language of most of physics; trying to wrap your brain around the other parts and differential equations at the same time is too big a lift even for a galaxy brain. It's like being asked to compile kernel modules without knowing how to use a mouse or keyboard. I've thought about trying to write something like Lenny Susskind's "theoretical minimum" book, assuming you have the prerequisites of differential equations and linear algebra. I mean, everyone struggles with the complicated problems, but more people should be able to appreciate the results. Meanwhile Susskind's book is pretty good!
- rubidium 7y ago
  I'll echo the grandparent that learning diff eq at the same time as the subject (e.g. mechanics) is "par for the course" for physics programs. There's many times throughout the progression to Physics PhD where "yes ideally you'd learn the math first" but there is only so much time. And some physics math is uniquely physics. I get your general point Scott, but I disagree with "trying to wrap your brain around the other parts and differential equations at the same time is too big a lift even for a galaxy brain". Learning both in the same course is doable.
  - scottlocklin 7y ago
    The guy I was responding to, mikekchar, claimed that he was given advanced physics problems requiring diff eqs without having studied them before; this is absolutely not the case in any physics program I've ever heard of. By the time you get to Junior Year physics, you've had diff eqs, or at least an introduction to the ordinary diff eqs you get in late Calculus. You can probably learn them both in the same course; but only if the course is designed for this purpose (aka Boas based "math methods for physicists" or something). I do remember some guys in grad school who had never seen a Greens function before (I was doing them in sophomore years; guess I was lucky) encountering JD Jackson, but that's about the only disconnect I've seen.
Ididntdothis 7y ago
I am just a mechanical engineer but I remember really well when they introduced three dimensional differential equations. I realized that I had hit the limit where math for me would be hard and not easy like it was until then.
- watertom 7y ago
  My son went the other way, was struggling with Mechanical Engineering and decided that he needed to switch to something easier. I braced my self for some ridiculous major, instead he switched to Mathematics, he's been a 4.0 student since, and was accepted into an accelerated Masters Degree program, and still kept his 4.0. Turns out he was enamored with the math, and couldn't focus on the engineering parts.
dhimes 7y ago
I wonder how many people are lost to a particular field like this? It's not just the subject, it's also how it's taught. It is very well possible that you would have been a first rate physicist if you had been exposed to it in a different environment with a different philosophy about teaching it.
aqme28 7y ago
I was one of those 2-3 I suppose (I think we graduated like 5-10 per year), but there weren't any jobs in physics so now I'm a programmer too. It all ends up the same.

sytelus 7y ago

You are not alone! I've come across enough of CS folks who wanted to be a physicist but ended up "downgrading" to CS. Within physicists, there are enough folks who wanted to be mathematicians but ended up "downgrading" to physics :).

rochak 7y ago
I am one of those people. I consider myself as above average but I don't think I have ever had the aptitude to make career as a physicist or something more involved for the matter. I like to learn but, sometimes, the stuff I'm trying to learn is just too much.

scottlocklin 7y ago

You're probably selling yourself short. Differential equations isn't a bad course if you did well in Calculus and have the patience to grind out a ton of examples. E&M, StatMech and/or Lagrangian Mechanics also ain't bad if it's taught well, but this is a case where you really have to do the diff eqs before you can do the physics piece. Diff Eqs is the language of most of physics; trying to wrap your brain around the other parts and differential equations at the same time is too big a lift even for a galaxy brain. It's like being asked to compile kernel modules without knowing how to use a mouse or keyboard. I've thought about trying to write something like Lenny Susskind's "theoretical minimum" book, assuming you have the prerequisites of differential equations and linear algebra. I mean, everyone struggles with the complicated problems, but more people should be able to appreciate the results. Meanwhile Susskind's book is pretty good!

rubidium 7y ago
I'll echo the grandparent that learning diff eq at the same time as the subject (e.g. mechanics) is "par for the course" for physics programs. There's many times throughout the progression to Physics PhD where "yes ideally you'd learn the math first" but there is only so much time. And some physics math is uniquely physics. I get your general point Scott, but I disagree with "trying to wrap your brain around the other parts and differential equations at the same time is too big a lift even for a galaxy brain". Learning both in the same course is doable.
- scottlocklin 7y ago
  The guy I was responding to, mikekchar, claimed that he was given advanced physics problems requiring diff eqs without having studied them before; this is absolutely not the case in any physics program I've ever heard of. By the time you get to Junior Year physics, you've had diff eqs, or at least an introduction to the ordinary diff eqs you get in late Calculus. You can probably learn them both in the same course; but only if the course is designed for this purpose (aka Boas based "math methods for physicists" or something). I do remember some guys in grad school who had never seen a Greens function before (I was doing them in sophomore years; guess I was lucky) encountering JD Jackson, but that's about the only disconnect I've seen.

Ididntdothis 7y ago

I am just a mechanical engineer but I remember really well when they introduced three dimensional differential equations. I realized that I had hit the limit where math for me would be hard and not easy like it was until then.

watertom 7y ago
My son went the other way, was struggling with Mechanical Engineering and decided that he needed to switch to something easier. I braced my self for some ridiculous major, instead he switched to Mathematics, he's been a 4.0 student since, and was accepted into an accelerated Masters Degree program, and still kept his 4.0. Turns out he was enamored with the math, and couldn't focus on the engineering parts.

dhimes 7y ago

I wonder how many people are lost to a particular field like this? It's not just the subject, it's also how it's taught. It is very well possible that you would have been a first rate physicist if you had been exposed to it in a different environment with a different philosophy about teaching it.

aqme28 7y ago

I was one of those 2-3 I suppose (I think we graduated like 5-10 per year), but there weren't any jobs in physics so now I'm a programmer too. It all ends up the same.