Did I make a mistake in choosing physics over math?

  • Thread starter Thread starter quasar_4
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mistake Physics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a graduate student accepted into a program focused on gravitation, expressing concerns about the mathematical rigor of their upcoming research, which leans towards astrophysics and data analysis. The student has a strong background in mathematics and is unsure if they made the right choice by pursuing physics over mathematics. Respondents reassure that theoretical astrophysics and general relativity will still involve significant mathematical concepts, even if some aspects are more numerical. They suggest exploring recent faculty publications to gauge the mathematical depth of the program. Overall, the consensus is that the student will likely find sufficient mathematics in their research.
quasar_4
Messages
273
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone,

I've been accepted to a graduate school that is good in gravitation, which is what I want to do. Here is the thing: lately I've been wondering if I should've become a mathematician instead of a physicist. I was a dual math/physics major for my undergrad. work, and loved the math side - mostly geometry, algebra, topology, etc. I did research in general relativity as an undergrad. and loved it, but my research was on the mathy side of things (finding isometry groups, classifying things, etc.).

Now the grad program I'm heading to is good in gravity, but I think leans more toward the astrophysics approach - specifically a lot of data analysis, modeling binary coalescence, etc. The problem is I don't know what that really entails. Will there be any math in this stuff? I love my upper division physics courses, esp. quantum, but I can't imagine my life doing some kind of research without utilizing any pretty math (manifolds, groups, etc.). Have I made a huge mistake in choosing physics over math? What kind of math is typically employed for the average theoretical astrophysicist? How "mathy" can one make this stuff?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I had a very good friend who came from a math background, she did very similar undergraduate research as you have done. She did her PhD in Numerical Relativity/GR. Her word is extremely "mathy."

I really do not think you will be wanting for mathematics while working in GR or Theoretical Astrophysics.
 
I don't think "numerical" would qualify as mathy here. What kind of stuff did she do specifically?
 
Norman said:
I really do not think you will be wanting for mathematics while working in GR or Theoretical Astrophysics.

I'm not a graduate student, but from those I've spoken to...you probably won't be wishing you had more math with GR.

I'm an applied math major, astrophysics minor that is hoping to follow a similar route as you into a physics graduate program. As I get closer to the application process, I'm really wondering if I should go the math route? I enjoy math more than physics, but...all the math I enjoy "playing" with involves theoretical physics.
(If that is confusing...I want to do mathematics at the graduate level...but everything I seem to enjoy in mathematics ends up being something that is applied to cosmology, GR, etc.)
I doubt you'll remember this thread (or that I'll remember it), but as you get into the swing of things, I'd really be interested to hear your take on how "mathy" your program has been.

Good luck!
 
durt said:
I don't think "numerical" would qualify as mathy here. What kind of stuff did she do specifically?

It would be hard for you to determine the validity of that statement since you are not the one who originally used the term "mathy" which I don't believe has a clear definition.

Either way, she did some work on black hole thermodynmics, quantum gravity, and neutron equations of state constrained from gravitational wave astronomy. The latter work on neutron equations of state was mainly done using numerical simulations of neutron star inspirals which is why I included the numerical statement.

Either way, the best thing for quasar to do is to have a look around on the Arxiv at recent papers the faculty at the institution (s)he will be attending have published and decide if there is enough elegant math to satisfy him.
 
Hey, I am Andreas from Germany. I am currently 35 years old and I want to relearn math and physics. This is not one of these regular questions when it comes to this matter. So... I am very realistic about it. I know that there are severe contraints when it comes to selfstudy compared to a regular school and/or university (structure, peers, teachers, learning groups, tests, access to papers and so on) . I will never get a job in this field and I will never be taken serious by "real"...
Yesterday, 9/5/2025, when I was surfing, I found an article The Schwarzschild solution contains three problems, which can be easily solved - Journal of King Saud University - Science ABUNDANCE ESTIMATION IN AN ARID ENVIRONMENT https://jksus.org/the-schwarzschild-solution-contains-three-problems-which-can-be-easily-solved/ that has the derivation of a line element as a corrected version of the Schwarzschild solution to Einstein’s field equation. This article's date received is 2022-11-15...

Similar threads

Back
Top