Hey guys, /lit/ fag here with a question for those of you who've completed a physics degree.
How much would you say you learned in your undergrad? I'm very interested in completing one. Currently, I've completed a minor in mathematics, so I don't overly fear any calculations, and alongside that I'm still working toward an Honors Degree of Philosophy. Now, I figure philosophy is probably quite disfavored here, but I feel as though Physics is somewhat a matrimony of it, and math. So, in light of this, I feel I would be (at the very worst) decent in Physics--I'm just curious if you guys feel the undergrad is worth the extra 2 years it would require to complete.
My interests in physics are:
- (the implications of) The double slit experiment (obviously)
- (the implications of) The delayed quantum choice experiment
- String theory
- Physical Dimensions / Spacetime
* Sorry, I realize these are vague and are probably, themselves, ill-conceived on my behalf
Do those of you who have completed an undergrad in physics believe I will cover those topics therein? Also, what is the most difficult aspect of the degree?-the calculations, or the general concepts?
Thanks guys--I feel this may be better suited for /adv/, but I figure this board is probably the best to reach people who've actually done the degree I've in question.
>inb4 arts fag
I know philosophy yields 0$. This isn't about money.
you can probably specialize in quantum mechanics if that is your area of interest but I think most people who major in physics deal with kinematics/mechanics and shit
>>7758929
Yeah, sadly most of the pre-reqs surround kinematics/mechanics (and magnetic/eletric fields, unless that's already contained in kinematics/mechanics)
I do really want to study quantum mechanics, though. As seems to be the norm here, the double slit experiment actually blows my mind. I just want to know more about it; and the idea of time as a dimension also blows me away.
>>7758899
>My interests in physics are:
>- (the implications of) The double slit experiment (obviously)
>- (the implications of) The delayed quantum choice experiment
>- String theory
>- Physical Dimensions / Spacetime
Just learn more math.
>>7758929
Don't know where you went but in my university (Strathclyde) we did QP from year 1.
>>7758899
>- (the implications of) The double slit experiment (obviously)
>obviously
Why obviously? The particle's guiding wave interferes with itself. It's not magic.
>- Physical Dimensions / Spacetime
That's just Modern Geometry / (pseudo-) Riemann Geometry
>>7758937
>Yeah, sadly most of the pre-reqs surround kinematics/mechanics (and magnetic/eletric fields, unless that's already contained in kinematics/mechanics)
You dumb faggot you need to understand mechanics to even begin with QM.
>>7758929
>but I think most people who major in physics deal with kinematics/mechanics and shit
>>7758937
>sadly most of the pre-reqs surround kinematics/mechanics and magnetic/eletric fields
So you DON'T want to actually learn physics, just want to spout popsci nonsense in postmodernism fashion?
>>7758937
You will get nowhere in physics without a foundation to build up to. Without concepts covered in prerequisite courses, the qm will sound even more insane than its normal garbled explanations
>>7758937
>literally 2016
>passing up on the beauty that is the hamilton-jacobi formalism
Stick to pop-sci youtube channels please
>>7758899
Well i would say that if you would do minors in physics you wouldn't really get even to study String theory or GR (Physical Dimensions / Spacetime)
>>7759020
Exactly this, in physics all the "new" theories are build on older ones and they will just assume you know these.
honestly your interest in physics is purely a meme. Those are all things that you learn about watching michio cuckoo. you probably dont have the intelligence to do an actual physics degree
>>7759021
I really enjoyed Hamiltonian and Lagrangian mechanics and I have to admit that they really are more elegant way to solve problems, and if I'm not wrong they use the same kind of formalism in quantum mechanics.
>>7759037
You can at least heuristically derive the Schrödinger Equation from HJ
>>7758937
Okay it sounds like you want to dig into physics because of the "neat" implications. Nothing wrong with that, but there is a veritable mountain of work before you can work with these concepts in any kind of mathematically rigorous manner. I will say I've found kinematics and electromagnetism to be as rewarding in that sense as quantum mechanics and relativity.
I'd say studying epistemology or history of science would probably be more adequate
>>7759034
>you probably dont have the intelligence to do an actual physics degree
Intelligence has little to do with gaining a physics degree as hard work is required mostly; intelligence just allows you to learn things faster.
Don't discredit OP for wanting to learn physics. It's a great thing that he aspires to. He just decided that he really wanted to at an age greater than yours, I presume. I am working on my physics undergrad because of youtube videos and books that informed me on the quantum physic and general relativity. As are many of my friends. Yes, his interest currently may be a meme to you, but people mature, as did I.
>>7759041
thank you for this serious response, though, anon.
to all who've answered seriously: thank you.
to all who havent: eat my dick
>>7758899
You will not cover
>String Theory
You will brush over
>The double slit experiment
>The delayed quantum choice experiment
And
As indicative about how little you know about Physics in general, Physics requires an in depth understanding of "Physical Dimensions / Spacetime" to move beyond introductory physics.
>>7759059
ty anon
and with regards to dimensions, i (specifically) meant the justifications for the existence of the dimensions predicted by string theory. I'm curious as to why they are predicted at all, and the math underlying them
>>7759063
From the beginning to end of any undergraduate degree program to do with physics, there are four dimensions you are going to learn about and that's it.
I minored in physics and majored in Mechanical engineering.
I suppose There are institutions like MIT where you can take undergraduate courses in String Theory, but most institutions don't offer these courses. Mine didn't haha
>>7758899
Currently at my university, I'm studying on a Physics with a math concentration track. We study all the usual physics, along with graduate courses on quantum mechanics. These classes are an option for regular students, but most take them at the undergrad level. Still, they require a lot of math. I'm currently taking complex analysis, and I've already done all the calc and diff eq courses. For string theory, you won't see that till grad school, sorry. Depending on your university, you may be able to participate in research at an undergraduate level. But it still needs a lot of math. What did you complete for your minor? You'll definitely learn GR and SR as an undergrad.
If you're concerned about money, physics undergrads usually do alright as long as they participate with professors' research projects. The minor in math will get you far too. Most physicists can be hired for about any job an engineering major can. Most will also want to pursue graduate level degrees.
>>7759034
I came to physics for the meme as well. Currently doing research in graphene. I may have came for the cool "meme" shit, but I fell in love with the more subtle parts as well. Don't be an asshole who judges teenagers who like popsci. They can grow into something more.
>>7758899
>- (the implications of) The double slit experiment (obviously)
Obviously?
The maths is the hardest part of physics but if you're comfortable with uni level stuff you'll be fine. Undergrad phys isn't hard and I know at my uni in later years there were a wide variety of units you could take.
Whether or not it's worth it is up to you. What do you hope to achieve out of it?
Buy a popscience book and that will teach you enough that you can blow the minds of your friends.
As for learning physics, you're just doing lots and lots and lots of mathematics. That should be sufficient however if you have a naturally curious mind that is not easily defeated. Unfortunately you seen averse to the idea of learning anything that isn't immediately as mindblowing as popsci shit.
>>7759002
>That's just Modern Geometry / (pseudo-) Riemann Geometry
Eh it depends on what spacetimes he is thinking of. Op mentioned String Theory, in which the geometry is quantum mechanical and therefore behaves differently. You end up with strange properties like T-duality and Mirror Symmetry.
>>7758899
>My interests in physics are:
>- (the implications of) The double slit experiment (obviously)
>- (the implications of) The delayed quantum choice experiment
>- String theory
>- Physical Dimensions / Spacetime
Holy fucking memes batman
It's really true that you'll soon overcome them. They are goofy. Not to say [spoiler]spooky[/spoiler]
>>7759162
it's entirely possible that OP is smart enough to make contributions to any of those fields
the real question is: is OP willing to put in the appropriate amount of hard work? does OP have enough money and patience to attend undergrad/grad/postgrad school?
time will tell
>>7759153
>the geometry is quantum mechanical
>>7758899
>- (the implications of) The double slit experiment (obviously)
Interpretations are all handwavey unless they are some non-local hidden variable hocus-pocus.
>- (the implications of) The delayed quantum choice experiment
See above.
>- String theory
You won't cover this in any meaningful depth (and it is starting to falter anyways).
>- Physical Dimensions / Spacetime
This is poorly defined. If you mean string theory and its "spoopy extradimensions," see above. If you mean spacetime as in general relativity, then you should at the very least have access to some basic courses on it.
>String theory
Cool kids go into canonical quantum gravity
>>7759171
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_geometry
>>7759174
>Cool kids go into canonical quantum gravity
lolno
>>7759171
>Gravity is geometry
>String theory is a theory of quantum gravity
What did you expect?
>>7758899
>/lit/ fag
no, you're just going to be wasting money.
watch lecture videos, download books from the internet.
>>7759126
I just want to understand more. I know that currently all I'm able to read is the popsci stuff, and I hate that. I know that it's very watered down, and I know that some conceptions drawn from it will be inherently ill-conceived due to simplification. However, when I hear talk of time moving backward, or the potential existence of 11 dimensions, or quantum entanglement, or other concepts I have very little knowledge of, I'm both incredibly excited because the ideas seem so fascinating! But also incredibly disappointed, because I know in my current state I cannot fully understand the ideas that are exciting me. So, really, even if I never go beyond the degree, I'd just like to have the foundations to be able to read works that aren't popsci--I just want to learn.
>>7759141
Not at all! My dad was a physics teacher, so via his influence I'd learned kinematics in high school, alongside other very basic things. Naturally, being taught at the high school level I wasn't as stimulated by it, and as a result, being more interested in math/philosophy, I decided to stray from physics under the impression it was dry. I now realize that, although parts of it will be dry, you can never adequately tackle the mind blowing stuff without having first mastered the dry stuff. Thus, in light of my interests now, I wish to revisit it--it's just that this would be 2 years allocated to something that will potentially have 0 bearing on my career path. So I'm torn between my desire to learn, and the practicality of what it is I'll be learning (it's terms of whether or not it's conducive to my desired career path).
>>7759276
Do you have any suggestions for works that are recommended for total beginners, but who wish to avoid total layman explanations?
>>7759170
Ty anon. Hopefully time will bid me well. If the undergrad proves to be what I wish to devote my life to, I'll certainly go to grad school. I've already decided to be an academic (yes, I realize it's risky--money isn't an issue), so I'm just trying to sort out exactly what it is I wish to do
>>7759112
Do you mean what math have I learned? Ordinary differential equations; vector calculus; number theory; linear algebra; obviously a lot of calculus; no real analysis though, sadly. Was supposed to, but the prof who was in charge that year didn't have a clue what he was doing so I dropped his course (he literally asked us once if he was doing something, of which I forget exactly, properly. Like how the fuck should I know man you're supposed to be teaching me??? It was a shame, but it wasn't worth the gpa drop)
Any math you'd recommend familiarizing myself with?
>>7759313
>talk of time moving backward
This isn't physics. Traveling back in time is not allowed in any realistic physics (including string theory).
>or the potential existence of 11 dimensions
This is an interesting topic and the way the result is derived is quite beautiful. To get an idea of what the topic looks like, watch it being introduced: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-O3g6MhLUU&list=WL&index=3
> quantum entanglement
This is actually pretty simple mathematically, and you can understand with just knowledge of vector calc and linear algebra. Watch these lectures:http://theoreticalminimum.com/courses/quantum-mechanics/2012/winter
>>7759362
forgive my ignorance, but isnt a result of the delayed quantum choice experiment that events in the present may be seen to influence the past? is this not time moving backward? (im not saying it is, im just posing the question--im clearly a novice, but could you correct my misinterpretation?)
thank you so much anon!!! i really appreciate the links :) ive done vector calc and lin alg, so im going to watch those lectures right away!
>>7759374
>that events in the present may be seen to influence the past
sort of
>is this not time moving backward
no it is not
What the...
Sounds like about half the people on this thread aren't even physics majors, just like to spout stuff like "X is meme" or "Y is not Z, faggot (according to my pop sci understanding)".
I've learned a lot in undergrad, but only the fundamentals of hi-lvl physics. No string theory.
Covered math subjects are:
>standard calc (up to triple integration, ODE and PDE and different solutions)
>physical math (coupled DEs, calculus of variations)
>vector analysis
>complex analysis
>linear algebra
Can't remember any more to add.
Covered physics subjects are:
>introduction to physics for physics majors (class mech, wave mechanics, fluid dynamics, optics, EM, special relativity, quantum mech, thermodynamics & statistical physics)
>class mech (Newtonian, Hamiltonian, Lagrangian)
>electromagnetics (fuckload of vectors)
>electronics and circuit theory (at least in my uni)
>quantum mechanics (up until hydrogen atom)
>thermo
>some electives (my uni had solid-state physics, plasma physics, computational physics, lasers, and astrophysics)
>whatever lab you choose to work under for your thesis (I did remote-sensing and LIDAR under atmospherics, but there are many fields like geophysics, theoretical physics, photonics, instrumentation labs, all depends on your uni)
>>7759434
same anon
>Also, what is the most difficult aspect of the degree?-the calculations, or the general concepts?
Forgot to answer this one.
In physics, the math IS the general concept. You're not going to find a divide between the calculations and the concepts, like in high school physics. You've got to get this out of your head.
The classes aren't designed to be "Alright everyone, X is the general concept. Everything clear? Now to describe X using math, here's Y computations..." The classes will start straight with the math, and after you solve everything, you'll find out what the physical interpretations are. This way, you'll know precisely what the concept is, as opposed to if you just heard popsci statements that are designed to be vague and understandable to laymen. NONE of the classes are going to be designed for laymen.
Having said that, I feel that the hardest part of the whole thing is the vector calculus/analysis, which will become especially apparent during your electromagnetics classes. Also hardest in terms of work you have to do will obviously be your thesis.
>>7759379
why? i figure that it is indeed tricky, considering that the entirety of the situation is unknown, but as I (naively) understand it, it seems as though if any event may be said to influence the past (our 'which-path' information in the delayed choice exp), is not this influencing causal? It's not that I claim this to be correct, I'm just curious as to how, if you agree that said influencing is indeed causal, this can be understood in terms of a linear timescale. Are you able to explain it to me? Im seriously interested
>>7759443
thank you so much anon. this has been extremely helpful. Seriously, ty--this (as in both of your posts) is(/are) exactly what i wanted
>>7758937
Astrophysics?
>>7758899
like most degree related questions, the answer to this can be very institution-specific.
where do you go to school, anon?
>>7758899
I warned you Americans that shit like this could happen. I warned you bros.
>>7759434
>quantum mechanics (up until hydrogen atom)
Out of curiosity, is this the standard level undergraduate courses generally go up to? I am asking because my undergraduate course went far beyond the hydrogen atom and into scattering and perturbation theory, but a few people I knew in grad school had barely touched the hydrogen atom.
>>7760751
At my school there are 2 semesters of undergrad QM. The first one goes up to the hydrogen atom, and then the second does shit like perturbation theory, multiparticle systems, etc.
