Can someone please describe physics after year 1?

  • Thread starter Thread starter torquemada
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physics Year
torquemada
Messages
108
Reaction score
0
So in the first 2 or 3 semesters of intro physics i know you're grinding into the system of thinking in terms of physics and learning how to approach a problem - to that end you do hundreds of thought provoking examples to hone your skills so that you don't just plug and chug but actually learn how to reason through any word problem thrown at you. That being said, is a physics degree 4 years of that? Or are intermediate and upper level courses more focused on theory and proofs and lots of math too I'm sure, but not a grind-like approach involving tons of problems? The more detail the better I'm looking for a comprehensive description if possible. Thx :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Generally as you move up in your classes you have less problems, but they become much more difficult. Prepare to spend hours haranguing over that one problem that still eludes you after solving the other 5 in the set in "only" 10 hours. And that's just for one class.
 
do yourself a favor and learn everything about the harmonic oscillator now
 
kreil said:
do yourself a favor and learn everything about the harmonic oscillator now

Lawls.

Oh wait, that's the most true statement I've ever heard in my life.

And learn what symmetry means.
 
And don't forget Lorentz invariance the first commandment of any theory although that comes into symmetry
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
605
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
4K
Back
Top