Why is my physics education at Texas Tech University lacking in actual physics?

In summary: The examples given in the beginning are not enough to solve most problems. I think the more example problems are given, the better, because there are such a sheer number of possibilities (what if we have a rotating charged rod that's underwater? What's its torque?!) that it's virtually impossible to account for them all.In summary, the physics course at Texas Tech University is basic and the problems given are from a book that is not helpful. The student is considering switching to computer science because they don't feel they are learning the physics they need to get a doctorate in computational physics.
  • #1
FermiParadox
10
0
I'm going to Texas Tech University (if anyone else is thinking about it, do not go to this school) I'm currently enrolled in Physics II and Calculus III. I'm making A's (well, at least close to that) in both. Here's my problem:

The amount of actual 'calculus' that we use in the course is elementary at best. It's as if the course was designed to provide the barest bones, generalist overview of electromagnetism even when it's completely and utterly unnecessary. Why even take the classes? Yes, yes, 'concepts', 'problem solving skills', etc. Except I don't actually develop either of those. The problems that we're assigned - we're using Giancoli, and that's where all of the problems are from, although I also own Halliday & Resnick. The problems from Giancoli are mostly just find the right formula and go go go - not much problem solving there. The problems from Halliday & Resnick can be very challenging but it's difficult to work up the inspiration to work on very challenging problems that are only given cursory coverage in the text.

I think that's one of the fundamental problems with that particular book; the examples given in the beginning are not enough to solve most problems. I'm of the opinion that the more example problems are given, the better, because there are such a sheer number of possibilities (what if we have a rotating charged rod that's underwater? What's its torque?!) that it's virtually impossible to account for them all. But I'm getting sidetracked here.

The point is this: I want to learn physics. Real, honest to God physics. I want to learn what Newton discovered, not some watered down version spoonfed to me by the faculty at a "party school" that hungrily devour whatever scraps of resources are tossed their way, most of those scraps coming from the College of Engineering all whilst we sit in the College of Arts & Sciences, forced to take electives that mean nothing to us and devoid of funding for research that goes beyond the computational. I can handle advanced math. I love advanced math. I am far more interested in theory than in "application" - oh, yes, the makings of a real breadwinner - and I don't understand why we're all forced to sit in a lab for four hours so we can get "research experience" (yeah right, by the way. A college lab is nothing like actual research and I can say this as someone who has never actually done any research).

I want to get a doctorate (computational physics woooo) but frankly I'm considering switching to computer science (which is in the College of Engineering, has better funding, better resources, everything) because I don't know if I can take this anymore. Does anyone have any similar experiences, or some advice to share? I hope the enormous rant didn't scare anyone away - I know it's disjointed and covers a ridiculous number of topics and concerns, but frankly, I just kind of want to air my grievances and also need some help coming to terms with what I want to do with the rest of my life.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
It sounds to me like someone needs an attitude adjustment.
 
  • #3
Well... If it's easy, do the course with the minimal effort, get ur doctorate and expand your career. Maybe you're just smarter than everyone else...
 
  • #4
Why are you taking a class that uses algebra-based physics?

Also, you want examples for EVERY type of physics problem? What? If you're wondering why you aren't learning the concepts and problem solving skills, it sounds like it's because you want someone to spoon feed you these higher order skills.
 
  • #5
RandomGuy88 said:
It sounds to me like someone needs an attitude adjustment.

Do I? I really don't mean to come across as someone with an attitude, but the problems I'm having are real ones and not somehow a fabrication of my enormous ego, and I think everyone has had a moment in their life when they wanted to just vent and let everything out. Nothing wrong with that, nor does it indicate a 'bad attitude'.

I never said the classes were too easy. I said the material was watered down - we're not learning anything that we couldn't learn included as a subset in a higher-level class. I've looked over material for Classical Mechanics (a junior-level class) and it's the same as Physics I - the same concepts, at least, but with 'higher-level' math.

Why are you taking a class that uses algebra-based physics?

Also, you want examples for EVERY type of physics problem? What? If you're wondering why you aren't learning the concepts and problem solving skills, it sounds like it's because you want someone to spoon feed you these higher order skills.

I'm not taking a class that uses algebra-based physics. You misunderstand - my point is that the actual difference between algebra and calculus based is minimal.

Also, I don't want to be spoon fed, but it would be nice to have some general pointers as to common situations that spring up in problems, and how the different physical elements actually interact with one another. I'm not certain how I'm supposed to know how to combine torque and, say, electric charge unless someone tells me how. I come across these kinds of problems all the time in physics and they frustrate me to no end! I wish I knew how to approach them better.
 
  • #6
Well you're only in physics 2 and calculus 2. Most pre-med, engineering, and pre-other stuff have to take these classes. Once you start getting into the higher level mathematics and physics, it will probably get more interesting and more difficult. The lecturers at such not-so-hard schools know that their students are not UChicago students, so they won't treat them like they are.

But instead of complaining about it, take your education into your own hands. I'm in exactly the same situation you are, but I decided to stuff all the math I could as soon as possible. I'm a first year student and I have an entire shelf full of physics books, and another with math/scientific computing books. That's what you ought to do, buy some books and learn on your own. By doing this, I've been able to get myself involved in research as well.

You said you wanted to go into computational physics? Learn a programming language in your free time. Google 'how to learn C++' and install Linux on your computer and figure out how this stuff works. Or something along these lines. Point is, there's no time to waste, you'll be on this Earth for <100 years, don't be a pouting loser (not that I'm calling you that, I'm just saying don't be one).
 
  • #7
FermiParadox said:
I'm not taking a class that uses algebra-based physics. You misunderstand - my point is that the actual difference between algebra and calculus based is minimal.

Also, I don't want to be spoon fed, but it would be nice to have some general pointers as to common situations that spring up in problems, and how the different physical elements actually interact with one another. I'm not certain how I'm supposed to know how to combine torque and, say, electric charge unless someone tells me how. I come across these kinds of problems all the time in physics and they frustrate me to no end! I wish I knew how to approach them better.

Ok so you're taking calculus based physics? Why are you using Giencolli though? I'm just a bit confused.

Also, that's one of the points of learning physics. You want to gain an intuition based off what you're learning and doing. For your example of electric charge and torque: What causes torques? Forces. What force is generated by electric charges? Thus you should be able to relate the two quite easily. Through experience, you'll gather all of these bits and pieces and hopefully be able to learn how to put things together. It's really soemthing you have to build on your own in ways that may seem just plain stupid or a waste of time.

Speaking of stupid wastes of time, labs aren't that! Or well, a well thought out and run lab (which is rare :( ) that is. One of the things I tell my students is that it's not about learning how to push a car down a track or correctly press a stop watch or whatever. It's about just being able to dive into a real physical hands-on situation and trying to connect theory with experiment. It's better that your first encounter with an experiment is a cart going down a track in your intro physics courses than with an x-ray spectrometer in an important condensed matter course or something.
 
  • #8
hadsed made a great point. If you want to go further, then by all means do so. There has to be at least one resource to guide you. If not the faculty staff at your school, certainly one of the many websites advising students in your situation, or perhaps even someone right here on PF.

If you end up qualifying for a spot in grad school, you should no doubt get a lot of time to learn something deeply in a specific area.

Also I want to just point something out: a lot of courses, especially in science, will go through things quickly and probably not as deep as the more ambitious students may expect. You have to remember that math is thousands of years old, and physics is hundreds of years old (as an experimental science, not talking about philosophy). Hell even psychology is more than a hundred years old.

There's a saying that it takes about 10,000 hours in the arts to become decent at a particular craft, and I'm sure with with something like mathematics, physics or any science, its no different.
 
  • #9
Pengwuino said:
Ok so you're taking calculus based physics? Why are you using Giencolli though? I'm just a bit confused.

A google search shows that Giancoli has both an algebra-based and a calc-based physics book.
 
  • #10
Jack21222 said:
A google search shows that Giancoli has both an algebra-based and a calc-based physics book.

Ahh, google > amazon apparently.
 
  • #13
Pengwuino said:
Go Away.

Yes sir.
 
  • #14
Pengwuino said:
Go Away.

I think this provides more evidence that the internet is all about proving an anonymous person other than you that they are wrong.

http://www.jerrah.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/someone_is_wrong_on_the_internet1.jpg [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #15
Hi Fermi :)

I'm at lower level classes than you are, so I'm probably not the best person to give you advice, but I can definitely understand your frustration. This is something I have encountered with education my entire life and the only solution I found is to devote time to external studies. I know you were frustrated when you made your initial post, but I would say if you really want to study physics, don't change. My close friends and family are always encouraging me to go into engineering or programming because the prospects for a "good career" are better, but physics is something I love entirely and I really want to learn more.

chiro said:
hadsed made a great point. If you want to go further, then by all means do so. There has to be at least one resource to guide you. If not the faculty staff at your school, certainly one of the many websites advising students in your situation, or perhaps even someone right here on PF.
This is really true. In ZapperZ's "So you want to be a physicist" thread he mentions an organization called the Society of Physics Students. It might be worth checking out.

I hope you find a course of study that is fulfilling!
 
  • #16
which physics courses are you taking? There is no "Physics II" listed in the catalog. According to the Texas Tech catalog, they have a number of non-technical courses, then 1402 "General Physics" which specifically non-Calculus based. 1408 "Principles of Physics" sound like the appropriate first course in physics.
 
  • #17
This is essentially the plight of Tier 3 universities everywhere. Most students that attend them do not belong in higher education, and course expectations reflect that. If you're going to be in that environment, you need to have real discipline to learn the material autonomously of the course.
 
  • #18
PhDorBust said:
This is essentially the plight of Tier 3 universities everywhere. Most students that attend them do not belong in higher education, and course expectations reflect that. If you're going to be in that environment, you need to have real discipline to learn the material autonomously of the course.

This could end up being to your advantage though. In graduate school, you'll basically be expected to understand and work on your own to figure out the concepts in the classes. Of course, this leads to the research role when doing a thesis since you'll have to do something no one has ever done before, so doing this sort of thing since undergraduate level could be a huge help.
 
  • #19
If you find the course material too easy, why not take a more advanced course? Learn some calculus and physics on your own, and persuade your school to let you skip a few prerequisites. That's what I'm currently doing for physics, and I don't regret my decision. (Incidentally, I also decided to skip a CS prereq without telling anyone. I highly recommend not doing this.)
 
  • #20
HallsofIvy said:
which physics courses are you taking? There is no "Physics II" listed in the catalog. According to the Texas Tech catalog, they have a number of non-technical courses, then 1402 "General Physics" which specifically non-Calculus based. 1408 "Principles of Physics" sound like the appropriate first course in physics.

Sorry, I didn't really expect anyone to go through and check what the course was called - everyone here just calls it "Physics II". It's Physics 2401.
 
  • #21
ideasrule said:
If you find the course material too easy, why not take a more advanced course? Learn some calculus and physics on your own, and persuade your school to let you skip a few prerequisites. That's what I'm currently doing for physics, and I don't regret my decision. (Incidentally, I also decided to skip a CS prereq without telling anyone. I highly recommend not doing this.)

I HIGHLY recommend this! If the material is easy and you find yourself with a lot of time, try to get ahead! If you plan on going to graduate school, you'll regret having so much time on your hands and not taking advantage of it.
 
  • #22
Oh no, I wasn't talking about skipping my CS prereq; I was referring to the fact that I skipped it without informing the school. I don't regret not taking the prereq, because it would have bored the hell out of me and contribute nothing I don't already know.
 
  • #23
FermiParadox said:
I'm going to Texas Tech University (if anyone else is thinking about it, do not go to this school)
I want to get a doctorate (computational physics woooo) but frankly I'm considering switching to computer science (which is in the College of Engineering, has better funding, better resources, everything) because I don't know if I can take this anymore. Does anyone have any similar experiences, or some advice to share? I hope the enormous rant didn't scare anyone away - I know it's disjointed and covers a ridiculous number of topics and concerns, but frankly, I just kind of want to air my grievances and also need some help coming to terms with what I want to do with the rest of my life.

Why don't you transfer to a different school then? Transfer to UT-Austin. It's a GREAT school for physics.
 
  • #24
FermiParadox said:
Why even take the classes? Yes, yes, 'concepts', 'problem solving skills', etc.

At most universities the intro physics classes are also taken by engineering majors and are often geared more to engineers than to physicists. If you have an engineer designing a bridge or building, the emphasis is often on using exactly the same techniques that have been handed down.

I think that's one of the fundamental problems with that particular book; the examples given in the beginning are not enough to solve most problems.

Bit confused here. First you are complaining about too much plug and chug, and now you are complaing about too little. The reason physics textbooks don't give a lot of examples is so that you bang your head against the wall for a few hours until you get the answer.

The point is this: I want to learn physics. Real, honest to God physics. I want to learn what Newton discovered,

You probably don't. It's easy to find copies of the Principia Mathematica online, but what you'll find is that the notation and the mathematical concepts that are in most modern physics books aren't there, so it's really hard to follow Newton's arguments.

I am far more interested in theory than in "application" - oh, yes, the makings of a real breadwinner - and I don't understand why we're all forced to sit in a lab for four hours so we can get "research experience" (yeah right, by the way. A college lab is nothing like actual research and I can say this as someone who has never actually done any research).

Yes a college lab is like actual research. Most of actual research involves spending hours staring at numbers to don't make any sense only to find that there is a problem in your equipment. Real research is messy and time consuming, and being forced to sit in a lab and figure out why the #@$##@ machine seems to be #$@##$$# broken, and then having to repeat the last @$#@$ day of work because you had your meter on the wrong setting is your introduction to honest to god research.

I want to get a doctorate (computational physics woooo) but frankly I'm considering switching to computer science (which is in the College of Engineering, has better funding, better resources, everything) because I don't know if I can take this anymore. Does anyone have any similar experiences, or some advice to share?

It's not clear to me whether there is a basic problem in your physics curriculum or whether "real physics" isn't what you thought it would be. In any case, that's fine. College is a time where you get to learn new stuff and you find out what you thought you liked, you really don't like, and what you thought you didn't like, you actually like.

One thing that you might try is to get involved in some undergraduate physics research or just read more things on your own. There is no rule that says that you are limited to the problems that you are assigned, and if you find that you are bored, you can always give yourself more problems.
 
  • #25
FermiParadox said:
I never said the classes were too easy. I said the material was watered down - we're not learning anything that we couldn't learn included as a subset in a higher-level class. I've looked over material for Classical Mechanics (a junior-level class) and it's the same as Physics I - the same concepts, at least, but with 'higher-level' math.

That's intentional. You start with physics I where you are using basic math to understand basic situations. You'll find in other classes that you can generalize those techniques to deal with other situations. The reason physics is taught this way is to give you some grounding in reality.

For example, if I talk about forces and pinballs, this is something that you can see and feel. If I start with something really abstract like the Langrangian fields, you end up with more powerful math techniques, but you have no clue whether those techniques really give you the right answer.

I'm not certain how I'm supposed to know how to combine torque and, say, electric charge unless someone tells me how. I come across these kinds of problems all the time in physics and they frustrate me to no end! I wish I knew how to approach them better.

The general philosophy behind physics education is that if you do enough of these sorts of problems and knock your head against the wall enough times, your brain will develop an almost subconscious ability to analyze these sorts of problems.

Again, you seem to be saying contradictory things. You seem to be complaining that the work is too plug-and-chug while at the same time complaining that the work isn't plug-and-chug enough.
 
  • #26
PhDorBust said:
This is essentially the plight of Tier 3 universities everywhere. Most students that attend them do not belong in higher education, and course expectations reflect that.

There are lots of people in some universities that really aren't serious about learning, but I've never see too many of them select physics or engineering as a major.

In any case, you can get the entire set of MIT introductory physics courses online at

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/

If there really is a problem in your curriculum, then I think you can patch it up with OCW. It's not clear to me whether the problem is some basic issue with the physics curriculum or the OP's expectations of what physics looks like.

Also you might want to look at how Newton did things

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Mathematical_Principles_of_Natural_Philosophy_(1846)

Personally, I think it's sort of fun in a "let's see how it feels like to write with a quill pen" sort of thing, but the text is near useless for modern classical physics.

If you're going to be in that environment, you need to have real discipline to learn the material autonomously of the course.

The trouble is that physics is one of those things in which you really can't learn well without being in a social group. One reason social groups are important is that they create "peer pressure" to get you to do certain things.
 

1. Why do I feel like my physics education at Texas Tech University is not focused enough on actual physics?

There could be a few reasons for this feeling. It is possible that the curriculum at Texas Tech University is more focused on other areas of physics, such as engineering or applied physics, rather than the theoretical or fundamental aspects. It could also be that the teaching style or resources used in your specific classes are not catering to your learning style. Additionally, it could simply be a matter of personal expectations and preferences.

2. How does the physics program at Texas Tech University compare to other universities?

The physics program at Texas Tech University is ranked fairly high among other universities in the United States. According to the U.S. News & World Report, it is ranked #118 in the nation for undergraduate physics programs. However, rankings should not be the only factor in determining the quality of a program. It is important to also consider the specific courses and opportunities offered at each university.

3. What resources are available to students who feel like their physics education is lacking at Texas Tech University?

Texas Tech University offers various resources for students who are struggling with their physics education. The physics department has a tutoring center where students can get extra help with their coursework. There are also research opportunities available for students who want to further their understanding of physics beyond the classroom. Additionally, students can speak with their professors or academic advisors for advice and guidance.

4. How can I get more hands-on experience with physics at Texas Tech University?

Texas Tech University offers several opportunities for hands-on experience in physics. The physics department has well-equipped laboratories where students can conduct experiments and gain practical experience. There are also research opportunities available for students to work on projects with faculty members. Additionally, students can join physics clubs or participate in physics-related events to further their understanding of the subject.

5. Will my physics education at Texas Tech University prepare me for a career in the field?

Yes, your physics education at Texas Tech University can prepare you for a career in the field. The physics program at Texas Tech University covers a wide range of topics and provides a strong foundation in the principles and theories of physics. Additionally, the university offers career services and networking opportunities for students to help them prepare for their future careers. It is also important for students to actively seek out internships and research opportunities to gain practical experience in their chosen field.

Similar threads

  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
10
Views
838
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
11
Views
522
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
4
Views
564
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
8
Views
1K
Back
Top