This might be far too much work, but for fairly large things try to find out about their historical background like how they were discovered/derived and maybe any very intersting uses they've had. It's much easier to remember something with a story to it.
But the trouble is you have to be predicted an A early enough for it to count. Applying to somewhere very competitive when you're predicted Ds they're just going to ignore you even if you swear on your life you'll get an A. Being predicted a C in further maths might have been what kept me out of...
They have been experimentally observed. You've probably been looking at the wrong experiments, neutrinos require enormous specialised detectors, and no particle detector designed for any other purpose bothers looking for them. At a collider, even if you did have a huge netrino detector around...
They may be new, but for physics students studying now in the UK, an MSci is far more common than an MSc, at least in Bristol where it's about 50 MSci graduates to one MSc. I only know 3 people who have done MScs, one because his grades were too bad to so an MSci, one because he did an MSci in...
So what's an antineutron? Antihydrogen? And like someone else said, antinetrino? OK, so the first two have internal components which are charged, but having charge is not the requirement for having an antiparticle, antimatter has all quantum numbers reversed, including charge if applicable...
I think it's best to be honest because if doing a the course is genuinely a good idea for someone, then they'll have reasons why it is a good idea and should simply state them honestly and enthusiastically, which will end up with something along the lines of what you suggest. That's basically...
I don't think don't think the US concept of qualifying exams applies to Oxford or Cambridge, unless I'm in for a shock next year or Cambridge do weird stuff I don't know about. They seem to be marginally equivalent to showing you've made suitable progress at the end of the first year in the UK...
I personally would consider being able to talk at over 3 words per minute a good thing in a supervisor, and especially important if they had a lot of other commitments...
I was rejected from Oxford as an undergraduate, from talking to someone else a year or two above me who did get it it sounds...
What's their attitude towards the Big Bang? If they're hardcore creationists then I can't see how any of the content of an astronomy degree could be in line with mainstream astronomy, and I can't see how you'd get accepted onto any astronomy PhD with that. Physics would be less of an issue if...
I'm not doing theoretical physics, but I was predicted a low 2:1 at the time of application and interview, have no published papers or other experience of scientific writing, and had no research experience not part of my course, although I had helped with lab refurbishment and university open...
Not quite U to A, but my further maths grade went from a C to an A with the help of a tutor. The C must have been down to poor teaching as ever since then I've been very good at maths, even by physics student standards. The stuff my tutor made me learn properly has been very helpful ever since...
There's a more famous similar example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_Affair
That one wasn't written by a computer programme but a joke article written by a professor called Alan Sokal, and the journal wasn't peer reviewed at all.
I do know people who have published physics papers...
MScs are quite unusual in the UK, the usual way of doing a masters degree is a 4 year undergraduate course (MSci). Most current and recent PhD students I know have an MSci degree. That or an MSc is recommended for doing a PhD, but not compulsory.
But Newton's laws are outdated and obsolete to theoretical fundamental physics. I'd hestitate to say "false", as they're very useful to most everyday applications, but certainly not complete. So no, you're never going to get a complete understanding of gravity from them, and no real physicist...