The Field of Physics

Off Topic
161

[quote]PulsedEE wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Swolegasm wrote:
I will say one thing for physics, your guys ability to hype the shit out of things is quite impressive.[/quote]
I haven’t seen that from pioneering bodies[/quote]

Ach, come on, Hawkins book was pure pandering to the masses.

A cheap shot if you will.

Anyone with an IQ of a mere 140 has certainly grasped the gist of it?

Possibly?

In short, it was a species of literary slumming. [/quote]
I haven’t read it[/quote]

Then, please do.

It is a very educational experience when someone tries to be as simple and straightforward as he can and yet you have no idea what he is talking about.

Of course, if we must force blame on anyone, it is him, for failing to bridge the gap, but that is hardly a consolation. [/quote]

In fairness to Hawking and other mainstream physics authors, keep in mind that they are writing about topics that most actual physicists spend over a decade in school and several years or more in postdoc research before they really have a grasp of the topic at hand and it is only possible to simplify it so much before you lose too much of the material. It is pretty much impossible to take topics like string theory, quantum mechanics, and astrophysics and explain them to people with with little to no formal education in physics and math. If people buy a book on those topics and expect to fully grasp a significant portion of the material are kind of kidding themselves.

I am not trying to sound conceited here, either, this works for almost all fields. I wouldn’t pick up a book, even an overly simplified one written for lay people, on theoretical computer science or advanced topics in biology or chemistry that are not covered until graduate study in that field and expect to understand more then a fraction of the information being presented to me.[/quote]

You are being too modest. Advanced topics in physics really are much harder to grasp than advanced topics in biology, chemistry and computer science.
[/quote]
A lot of scientific fields begin overlapping with physics when you get to an advanced graduate level. Many times, research in different scientific fields involves overcoming physical limitations or trying to better understand physics from a practical point of view as it pertains to your particular problem. Hell, that’s all my area of EE is.[/quote]
x2 that’s the nature of physics

162

If a thread is bumped on an internet forum …

163
164

[quote]theuofh wrote:
Physics is for people without the faith or personal strength to accept Jesus and all his miracles as their personal savior.[/quote]

Actually one’s faith or relationship is not based on one’s personal strength, it is based on grace and Christ’s strength. Phil 4:13.

So, please…get out, get out with your heresy. Repent and believe in Jesus and his Church.

Anyway, physics…what’s new with it. Anything exciting?

165

I’m an undergrad majoring in Physics. Haven’t really narrowed it down yet though. Not sure where I will branch off with it

166

[quote]ABenns wrote:
I’m an undergrad majoring in Physics. Haven’t really narrowed it down yet though. Not sure where I will branch off with it[/quote]
pretty jack3d and tan for an undergrad

167

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]ABenns wrote:
I’m an undergrad majoring in Physics. Haven’t really narrowed it down yet though. Not sure where I will branch off with it[/quote]
pretty jack3d and tan for an undergrad[/quote]
Hahaha thanks man. I work out every once in a while.

168

[quote]ABenns wrote:
I’m an undergrad majoring in Physics. Haven’t really narrowed it down yet though. Not sure where I will branch off with it[/quote]

You really won’t be able to really narrow down your interests until are ready to start work on your PhD, which won’t be until after your second or third year of grad school.

The reason for this is that your undergrad curriculum, and a good portion of your first semester or two of grad school, will consist almost entirely topics in classical physics. The reasoning for this is twofold:

  1. You absolutely need to have a very in depth knowledge of classical physics before you begin studying more advanced topics in modern physics, and

  2. You need to develop the mathematical skills to be able to understand the material in more advanced topics in physics.

Most undergrad programs will have less then 4 classes related to modern physics topics: a 1-2 semester sequence usually called intro to modern physics, which is a sophomore level sequence and is the most useless course/courses you will ever take. There is also usually a 1-2 semester intro to quantum mechanics sequence that is usually a senior level course and will be the second most useless course/courses you will ever take. Good luck with your pursuits in physics and do not forget to take extra math classes like advanced calculus and differential geometry. You will have to take them eventually anyway, so you may as well do them in undergrad where you have more free time.

169

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]ABenns wrote:
I’m an undergrad majoring in Physics. Haven’t really narrowed it down yet though. Not sure where I will branch off with it[/quote]

You really won’t be able to really narrow down your interests until are ready to start work on your PhD, which won’t be until after your second or third year of grad school.

The reason for this is that your undergrad curriculum, and a good portion of your first semester or two of grad school, will consist almost entirely topics in classical physics. The reasoning for this is twofold:

  1. You absolutely need to have a very in depth knowledge of classical physics before you begin studying more advanced topics in modern physics, and

  2. You need to develop the mathematical skills to be able to understand the material in more advanced topics in physics.

Most undergrad programs will have less then 4 classes related to modern physics topics: a 1-2 semester sequence usually called intro to modern physics, which is a sophomore level sequence and is the most useless course/courses you will ever take. There is also usually a 1-2 semester intro to quantum mechanics sequence that is usually a senior level course and will be the second most useless course/courses you will ever take. Good luck with your pursuits in physics and do not forget to take extra math classes like advanced calculus and differential geometry. You will have to take them eventually anyway, so you may as well do them in undergrad where you have more free time.

[/quote]
All the more reason why money and time shouldn’t be wasted on a stupid core curriculum.

170

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]ABenns wrote:
I’m an undergrad majoring in Physics. Haven’t really narrowed it down yet though. Not sure where I will branch off with it[/quote]

You really won’t be able to really narrow down your interests until are ready to start work on your PhD, which won’t be until after your second or third year of grad school.

The reason for this is that your undergrad curriculum, and a good portion of your first semester or two of grad school, will consist almost entirely topics in classical physics. The reasoning for this is twofold:

  1. You absolutely need to have a very in depth knowledge of classical physics before you begin studying more advanced topics in modern physics, and

  2. You need to develop the mathematical skills to be able to understand the material in more advanced topics in physics.

Most undergrad programs will have less then 4 classes related to modern physics topics: a 1-2 semester sequence usually called intro to modern physics, which is a sophomore level sequence and is the most useless course/courses you will ever take. There is also usually a 1-2 semester intro to quantum mechanics sequence that is usually a senior level course and will be the second most useless course/courses you will ever take. Good luck with your pursuits in physics and do not forget to take extra math classes like advanced calculus and differential geometry. You will have to take them eventually anyway, so you may as well do them in undergrad where you have more free time.

[/quote]
All the more reason why money and time shouldn’t be wasted on a stupid core curriculum.[/quote]

I agree, as do most physics professors. 15-20 credits of general education, tops, and I think that even 10 would suffice, but that will not happen anytime soon. There is way too much money in filling up a philosophy 101 class with 2-300 students versus a differential geometry class which in a good semester will have 20 students at a large university no matter what.

171

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]ABenns wrote:
I’m an undergrad majoring in Physics. Haven’t really narrowed it down yet though. Not sure where I will branch off with it[/quote]

You really won’t be able to really narrow down your interests until are ready to start work on your PhD, which won’t be until after your second or third year of grad school.

The reason for this is that your undergrad curriculum, and a good portion of your first semester or two of grad school, will consist almost entirely topics in classical physics. The reasoning for this is twofold:

  1. You absolutely need to have a very in depth knowledge of classical physics before you begin studying more advanced topics in modern physics, and

  2. You need to develop the mathematical skills to be able to understand the material in more advanced topics in physics.

Most undergrad programs will have less then 4 classes related to modern physics topics: a 1-2 semester sequence usually called intro to modern physics, which is a sophomore level sequence and is the most useless course/courses you will ever take. There is also usually a 1-2 semester intro to quantum mechanics sequence that is usually a senior level course and will be the second most useless course/courses you will ever take. Good luck with your pursuits in physics and do not forget to take extra math classes like advanced calculus and differential geometry. You will have to take them eventually anyway, so you may as well do them in undergrad where you have more free time.

[/quote]
Thank you for the in depth response. I have taken a classical physics course and a modern physics course. More magnetism and electronics to go sophomore year. I do have a ton of core requirements and a pretty straight forward physics path ahead of me. I am taking multi variable too. But the reason I mentioned the narrowing down of the subject is because, where I go to school(Bates College), I will have to complete a physics thesis,
Half a year or a whole year. This obviously has to have some narrowing down involved. At the moment it is probably too far off to think about yet though. I did love the intro to electronics that I took this past freshman year

172

[quote]ABenns wrote:

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]ABenns wrote:
I’m an undergrad majoring in Physics. Haven’t really narrowed it down yet though. Not sure where I will branch off with it[/quote]

You really won’t be able to really narrow down your interests until are ready to start work on your PhD, which won’t be until after your second or third year of grad school.

The reason for this is that your undergrad curriculum, and a good portion of your first semester or two of grad school, will consist almost entirely topics in classical physics. The reasoning for this is twofold:

  1. You absolutely need to have a very in depth knowledge of classical physics before you begin studying more advanced topics in modern physics, and

  2. You need to develop the mathematical skills to be able to understand the material in more advanced topics in physics.

Most undergrad programs will have less then 4 classes related to modern physics topics: a 1-2 semester sequence usually called intro to modern physics, which is a sophomore level sequence and is the most useless course/courses you will ever take. There is also usually a 1-2 semester intro to quantum mechanics sequence that is usually a senior level course and will be the second most useless course/courses you will ever take. Good luck with your pursuits in physics and do not forget to take extra math classes like advanced calculus and differential geometry. You will have to take them eventually anyway, so you may as well do them in undergrad where you have more free time.

[/quote]
Thank you for the in depth response. I have taken a classical physics course and a m
[/quote]
seems legit

173

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]ABenns wrote:

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]ABenns wrote:
I’m an undergrad majoring in Physics. Haven’t really narrowed it down yet though. Not sure where I will branch off with it[/quote]

You really won’t be able to really narrow down your interests until are ready to start work on your PhD, which won’t be until after your second or third year of grad school.

The reason for this is that your undergrad curriculum, and a good portion of your first semester or two of grad school, will consist almost entirely topics in classical physics. The reasoning for this is twofold:

  1. You absolutely need to have a very in depth knowledge of classical physics before you begin studying more advanced topics in modern physics, and

  2. You need to develop the mathematical skills to be able to understand the material in more advanced topics in physics.

Most undergrad programs will have less then 4 classes related to modern physics topics: a 1-2 semester sequence usually called intro to modern physics, which is a sophomore level sequence and is the most useless course/courses you will ever take. There is also usually a 1-2 semester intro to quantum mechanics sequence that is usually a senior level course and will be the second most useless course/courses you will ever take. Good luck with your pursuits in physics and do not forget to take extra math classes like advanced calculus and differential geometry. You will have to take them eventually anyway, so you may as well do them in undergrad where you have more free time.

[/quote]
Thank you for the in depth response. I have taken a classical physics course and a m
[/quote]
seems legit[/quote]

sure does.

174

[quote]ABenns wrote:
I did love the intro to electronics that I took this past freshman year
[/quote]
Fucking electronics lol. I took digital electronics my senior year of high school. It was fun, but annoying as fuck at the same time. I’m sure it had more to do with the way the class was taught though considering there were three classes in the same room with one instructor. Still good stuff though.

175

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]ABenns wrote:
I did love the intro to electronics that I took this past freshman year
[/quote]
Fucking electronics lol. I took digital electronics my senior year of high school. It was fun, but annoying as fuck at the same time. I’m sure it had more to do with the way the class was taught though considering there were three classes in the same room with one instructor. Still good stuff though.[/quote]
Yea…It can be very stressful and tedious, but I thought I got a lot out of the course.

176

bump - http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-rover-curiosity-shoots-mars-rock-laser-210740644.html

That we can focus coherent light from such a distance is an incomparable achievement.

(note: unless, of course, you believe that the moon landing was faked and that we’re simply carrying on the charade. I only mention this because I hung out with one such religious zealot this past weekend and was reminded that they are still out there)

177

Dr. Matt - any plans to make use of femtophotography?

178

[quote]chillain wrote:
bump - http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-rover-curiosity-shoots-mars-rock-laser-210740644.html

That we can focus coherent light from such a distance is an incomparable achievement.

(note: unless, of course, you believe that the moon landing was faked and that we’re simply carrying on the charade. I only mention this because I hung out with one such religious zealot this past weekend and was reminded that they are still out there) [/quote]

Shit the fact that I am seeing HD pictures of ANOTHER WORLD is amazing in itself. I will be so excited the day I see man walk on Mars.

I would love for man to be able to excavate the terrain for the chance to run into fossils. That would be shit fucking amazing.

179

[quote]MangoMan305 wrote:

[quote]chillain wrote:
bump - http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-rover-curiosity-shoots-mars-rock-laser-210740644.html

That we can focus coherent light from such a distance is an incomparable achievement.

(note: unless, of course, you believe that the moon landing was faked and that we’re simply carrying on the charade. I only mention this because I hung out with one such religious zealot this past weekend and was reminded that they are still out there) [/quote]

Shit the fact that I am seeing HD pictures of ANOTHER WORLD is amazing in itself. I will be so excited the day I see man walk on Mars.

I would love for man to be able to excavate the terrain for the chance to run into fossils. That would be shit fucking amazing.[/quote]
I’d rather slay alien beasts and bang alien sloots.

180

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]MangoMan305 wrote:

[quote]chillain wrote:
bump - http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-rover-curiosity-shoots-mars-rock-laser-210740644.html

That we can focus coherent light from such a distance is an incomparable achievement.

(note: unless, of course, you believe that the moon landing was faked and that we’re simply carrying on the charade. I only mention this because I hung out with one such religious zealot this past weekend and was reminded that they are still out there) [/quote]

Shit the fact that I am seeing HD pictures of ANOTHER WORLD is amazing in itself. I will be so excited the day I see man walk on Mars.

I would love for man to be able to excavate the terrain for the chance to run into fossils. That would be shit fucking amazing.[/quote]
I’d rather slay alien beasts and bang alien sloots.[/quote]

Lmao dude!