Do physicists really need to master mathematical modeling?

AI Thread Summary
Mastering mathematical modeling is essential for physicists, as it is integral to the discipline of physics itself. Mathematical modeling allows physicists to analyze and contextualize measurements, leading to the formulation of general laws that describe relationships between different physical quantities. While the complexity of these models can vary across subfields—ranging from simple proportional relationships in classical physics to more intricate frameworks in particle physics and cosmology—the foundational principle remains the same. Success in physics is significantly hindered for those who neglect mathematical modeling, with few, if any, notable examples of physicists achieving success without it. Overall, a strong grasp of mathematical modeling is crucial for a physicist's career and contributions to the field.
MOKHTAR
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Summary: Do physicists really need to master mathematical modeling?

Do physicists really need to master mathematical modeling?

As far as I know Mathematical modeling is a separate discipline form Physics?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Mathematical modelling of physical systems is generally what physicists do. Of course you may do more or less of it depending on your subfield, but it is an absolutely essentiall skill for most physicists.
 
  • Like
Likes JD_PM
Whatever you call it. Physics is to measure something and put the result into context of other measurements with the goal to deduce a general rule between those measurements. So you have a bunch of numbers representing quantities (variables) and you want to deduce a law (formula) between those quantities.

At school, i.e. in classical physics, those laws are often proportional dependences like ##P\sim T## or ##U\sim R##. In particle physics and cosmology those laws become more complicated and need more framework, but the basic principle is still the same.

What do you think physics is, or how else could it be done?
 
Most physicists have mastered a significant subset of mathematical modeling.

Odds of success in physics are much, much smaller for those who avoid it.

I guess it is hypothetically possible to succeed as some kind of experimentalist without mathematical modeling, but I cannot think of any real examples of physicists who have done it.
 
  • Like
Likes JD_PM
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...
Back
Top