Do you have to be a genius to do nuclear/particle physics?

[gleem]

Will it be possible for me to find a Phd in nuclear/particle physics or am I too far out already ?

You have a very varied background. From what you have said there would be a few items of concern if they came to light. Your two years of substandard scholastic endeavor and your lack of focus regarding what you are interested in. You show indecision in your own mind about what you want to do. If a graduate program can get by this probably because of your recent outstanding performance? then you can try most any area you what. Specialization comes when you qualify for the Ph.D. program. You can combine Physics and Biology but you must decide so you can find the right program. Like I said if you are confident you can contribute to a field then give it a go. I would leave my options open as long as possible. But having said that you must chose a program that likes your background. They want people that they think will fit and contribute their programs. The Bachelor's degree is for a sound foundation in the fundamentals In the grad program you only need to commit to a research area after about two years.

 

[Arsenic&Lace]

I did not state that progress in HEP was solely measured by the number of fundamental particles discovered. Indeed, I stated:

I would be curious to know what you think since this is clearly a birds eye view of the situation.

which was intended to communicate that I am well aware that this is only one indicator.

Considering that a substantial portion of HEP theorists, from my vantage point, have adopted pseudo-scientific views (The theory is aesthetically pleasing, and therefore it is almost certainly true!), I do not need to be a professional to lose respect for them.

Again, my goal is to communicate to the OP that:
1. There's nothing special about HEP/Nuclear; people often quote philosophical reasons for entering these fields which are silly.
2. Both fields, from my vantage point, appear to be comparatively saturated and established. The comparison is to structural biology.

It would still be reasonable to enter the field, but I know for me that I personally was very interested in HEP until I realized points 1 and 2, at which point I completely changed where I was headed.

 

[gleem]

And it might not be a bad idea to think about waiting to lose respect for your peers until, you know, you actually become one of their peers.

Amen, something like don't judge a person until you have walked a mile in his moccasins.

 

[Mark Harder]

Your love of the subject is at least as important as some 'innate' intelligence. It and your determination will carry you through the rough spots you encounter.

My college biology adviser (my declared major was biochemistry) advised me to drop my math studies because of one D grade in one course, which was probably a 'separate the men from the boys' course for would-be math majors in a highly competitive college. I was also discouraged by a poor instructor in the one-quarter year course. So I pursued a career in biochemistry, which came to involve more and more math & physics as it progressed. But I still half-regret that early decision, because I have since discovered I have an ability to sit with an interesting math/phys problem for hours on end (sometimes) until I get it right. Einstein had this tenacity as well. The Germans call it 'sitzfleisch'. Granted, he was a genius and I am not. But both of us probably have/had severe cases of ADD. One peculiarity of people like us is that there is usually one thing, maybe 2, on which we can give this extreme 'hyperconcentration', as psychologists call it. Mine also seem to be math and music.

So my advice is to develop your 'sitzfleisch' ( roughly translated as 'sit yer meat', or what I would call ' park your a** and stay there until you're finished for the day (and night, if necessary) until you solve it, fall asleep, or answer one of the calls of nature '. Also, don't sell biophysics and biophysical chemistry short. There are problems in macromolecular structure and dynamics that will need challenging work for some time to come. Many of these are highly relevant to problems pharma companies encounter developing rational approaches to drug design.