5 ms·

To the physicist here, how much of "physics" you really get if you go through all this "minimal" courses? To give it some context: I watched classical mechanic

To the physicist here, how much of "physics" you really get if you go through all this "minimal" courses? To give it some context: I watched classical mechanics a bit. Basically it's just math in the end, and to be honest after 50% of the lectures I had the feeling that the "practical" side or "intuition" is lacking. Especially in case of the conservation law's. So maybe the question would be how much more do you get if you go through a true physics bachelor progamm?

Isinlor 5y ago
I went trough Quantum Mechanics course and it really helped me understand Quantum Mechanics on mathematical level. I had my head full of Quantum woo from popular science programs and I barely could make heads or tails out of it. Knowing basic mathematics behind it helped a lot.
macilacilove 5y ago
I am not a physicist but I have gone through most of the courses. It is aimed at preparing you to be able to read theorethical phisics research papers. It is not supposed to be practical and is ignoring engineering physics and history of phsics for the most part. I think you can learn here the core concepts in theorethical phisics even at the masters program level, but you will not go through the same "math muscle training" that college students go through, so you will have to supplement that from elsewhere.
- MichaelRazum 5y ago
  Thanks a lot for the answer! Sounds good. Guess I would have to combine it a bit with Engineering Physics (or at least experimental physics) to get the most out of it, since had really some difficulties to undestand, why core concepts, like conservation of momentum for example are important.
petermcneeley 5y ago
The answer to your question is Labs. In the Labs you reproduce the results many of the 19-20th century experiments.
jarvist 5y ago
Physics is really a working knowledge, like computer programming. You have to be able to solve problems. All the 'practical' and 'intuitive' aspects of theoretical physics are built by working on problem sheets. A lot of progress in understanding (both personally and for the field!) is in tackling apparent paradoxes. Susskind's courses are very much overviews / appreciations. For each of these areas (GR, StatMech, Quantum etc.) you would expect several 30-hr lecturer courses + problem sheets (or equivalent working through a textbook) to gain a deep knowledge.
drran 5y ago
If you want to understand physics, then you need to build physical models and demonstrations, or perform experiments. If you want to get correct answers and make predictions, or you want to build a virtual model, then you need to study math a lot.
crispyambulance 5y ago
Susskind's excellent lectures are very much a survey of physics. They're great for a lay person trying to get an initial grip on the subject matter. These lectures necessarily can't have the mathematical content that you would see even in an undergrad program. The lectures I've seen introduce the key mathematical ideas but don't exercise them in a way someone learning to be a practitioner would. > how much more do you get if you go through a true physics bachelor program? Every physics major will spend countless long nights working problems with pages and pages of algebraic manipulation and mathematical reasoning. It is (and must be) much more mathematical than what you see in the Susskind lectures. They're not intended to be an alternative to a traditional program, but IMHO, they do give a true understanding of the main concepts in physics. Looking at Susskind's youtube, he has massive amount of content on Special Relativity (https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD9DDFBDC338226CA https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD9DDFBDC338226CA). Content-wise, it's the same as what a physics major would see, but without the many, many hours of problem solving exercises. The wonderful thing about Special Relativity is that it takes not a whole lot more than careful reasoning, a fair amount of algebra, and a little calculus to understand. The Susskind lectures actually go a bit farther, applying Special Relativity to Electro-Magnetism One of the issues that Physics has (as a field) that others do not suffer, is a proliferation of cranks. I suspect that Susskind intends, in part, to counteract the cranks by providing solid, correct informational resources to the general public.

Isinlor 5y ago

I went trough Quantum Mechanics course and it really helped me understand Quantum Mechanics on mathematical level. I had my head full of Quantum woo from popular science programs and I barely could make heads or tails out of it. Knowing basic mathematics behind it helped a lot.

macilacilove 5y ago

I am not a physicist but I have gone through most of the courses. It is aimed at preparing you to be able to read theorethical phisics research papers. It is not supposed to be practical and is ignoring engineering physics and history of phsics for the most part. I think you can learn here the core concepts in theorethical phisics even at the masters program level, but you will not go through the same "math muscle training" that college students go through, so you will have to supplement that from elsewhere.

MichaelRazum 5y ago
Thanks a lot for the answer! Sounds good. Guess I would have to combine it a bit with Engineering Physics (or at least experimental physics) to get the most out of it, since had really some difficulties to undestand, why core concepts, like conservation of momentum for example are important.

petermcneeley 5y ago

The answer to your question is Labs. In the Labs you reproduce the results many of the 19-20th century experiments.

jarvist 5y ago

Physics is really a working knowledge, like computer programming. You have to be able to solve problems. All the 'practical' and 'intuitive' aspects of theoretical physics are built by working on problem sheets. A lot of progress in understanding (both personally and for the field!) is in tackling apparent paradoxes. Susskind's courses are very much overviews / appreciations. For each of these areas (GR, StatMech, Quantum etc.) you would expect several 30-hr lecturer courses + problem sheets (or equivalent working through a textbook) to gain a deep knowledge.

drran 5y ago

If you want to understand physics, then you need to build physical models and demonstrations, or perform experiments. If you want to get correct answers and make predictions, or you want to build a virtual model, then you need to study math a lot.

crispyambulance 5y ago

Susskind's excellent lectures are very much a survey of physics. They're great for a lay person trying to get an initial grip on the subject matter. These lectures necessarily can't have the mathematical content that you would see even in an undergrad program. The lectures I've seen introduce the key mathematical ideas but don't exercise them in a way someone learning to be a practitioner would. > how much more do you get if you go through a true physics bachelor program? Every physics major will spend countless long nights working problems with pages and pages of algebraic manipulation and mathematical reasoning. It is (and must be) much more mathematical than what you see in the Susskind lectures. They're not intended to be an alternative to a traditional program, but IMHO, they do give a true understanding of the main concepts in physics. Looking at Susskind's youtube, he has massive amount of content on Special Relativity (https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD9DDFBDC338226CA https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD9DDFBDC338226CA). Content-wise, it's the same as what a physics major would see, but without the many, many hours of problem solving exercises. The wonderful thing about Special Relativity is that it takes not a whole lot more than careful reasoning, a fair amount of algebra, and a little calculus to understand. The Susskind lectures actually go a bit farther, applying Special Relativity to Electro-Magnetism One of the issues that Physics has (as a field) that others do not suffer, is a proliferation of cranks. I suspect that Susskind intends, in part, to counteract the cranks by providing solid, correct informational resources to the general public.