Which Course is Best for a Future in Nanotechnology?

  • Context: Courses 
  • Thread starter Thread starter crazy student
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Course
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the best undergraduate course selection for a future career in nanotechnology, considering interests in physics, mathematics, and chemistry. Participants explore various academic paths, including nanotechnology, chemical engineering, and materials science and engineering, while debating the mathematical rigor of these programs.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses interest in nanotechnology but is concerned about the lack of mathematics in the program, suggesting that chemical engineering or materials science and engineering may be more suitable for incorporating more math.
  • Another participant shares an example of a classmate who triple majored in math, physics, and chemistry and is now engaged in molecular electronics research, implying that a strong foundation in these subjects can lead to opportunities in related fields.
  • A participant asserts that scientific engineering involves a significant amount of mathematics, contingent on the specific area chosen within the field.
  • One participant notes that the nanotechnology program at their university only includes mathematics in the first year, leading them to consider other programs that might offer more math throughout the course.
  • Another participant suggests that pursuing solid-state physics or chemistry with a focus on physical chemistry could be beneficial, indicating that physicists have versatile career options, while also highlighting the difference between bulk processes in chemical and materials engineering versus the microscopic focus of nanotechnology.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on which course is definitively better for entering the field of nanotechnology, as multiple competing views and considerations are presented regarding the importance of mathematics and the relevance of different academic paths.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the mathematical content of various programs and how that may impact their future in nanotechnology. There are also assumptions about the relationship between different fields of study and their applicability to nanotechnology.

crazy student
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I am interested in physics, maths and a bit chemistry
but i am not sure which course I should choose.
I have thought about nanotechnology(BSc), but there isn't much maths in the course...
I want to do more maths during my undergrad course.
I wonder 'chem eng' or 'material sci & eng' is more suitable to to get in the field of nanotech. after I graduate...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well one of my HS classmates triple majored in math, physics, and chemistry and is doing molecular electronics research.
 
there's a lot of math in any kind of scientific engineering. It just depends on whether you pick the right section of your field.
 
I just had a glance on the nanotech program in the Uni, maths subject just appears in year one, they won't focus too much on maths afterwards
that's y I am considering 'chem eng' and 'material sci and eng.', there is more maths in these programs...
but I am interested in nanotech field, that's my main problem.
so I wonder which program is more suitable for jumping into nanotech after my undergraduate studies.
 
You'd probably want to do solid-state physics then, or possible chemistry with a concentration in physical chemistry. Physicists can do just about anything nowadays. Chemical and materials engineers deal mainly with bulk processes, while nanotechnology is suppose to be about controlling things on the microscopic level. Though it would be nice if you could throw a bunch of stuff in a beaker, apply heat and pressure, and get a couple moles of molecular sized motors :-).
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
41
Views
11K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K