Importance of E&M for physics grad school

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the necessity of understanding Electromagnetism (E&M) for pursuing a graduate degree in physics. While the original poster expresses a lack of interest in E&M, they are informed that it is a fundamental area that underpins many physical phenomena and mathematical techniques, such as Green's functions. The consensus is that while a passion for E&M is not required, a solid grasp of its concepts is essential for success in most physics fields. Recommended literature includes "Principles of Electrodynamics" by Schwartz to appreciate the subject's beauty.

PREREQUISITES
  • Fundamental knowledge of Electromagnetism concepts
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics and its applications
  • Familiarity with statistical mechanics
  • Basic proficiency in mathematical techniques relevant to physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study "Principles of Electrodynamics" by Schwartz for a deeper understanding of E&M
  • Explore advanced topics in quantum mechanics, particularly its relation to E&M
  • Research current trends in solid-state physics and materials modeling
  • Investigate potential career paths in government labs focusing on theoretical physics
USEFUL FOR

Physics graduate students, researchers in theoretical physics, and individuals considering careers in government labs or applied physics fields.

creepypasta13
Messages
370
Reaction score
0
Hi all! I graduated last year with my BS in physics and math. I am kind of confused about my choice to do physics in grad school, even though if I get my phD I probably wouldn't want to go into academia. I would like to do research in a government lab. I am comfortable with those theoretical and abstract concepts, and doing computational but not experimental work. Luckily, I heard that theoretical physicists with strong computational skills can easily find jobs in industry. But I want the job to involve physics and/or engineering, so I don't want to work as a programmer or in WS

My favorite physics class was quantum mechanics, one reason being that it used a lot of linear algebra, which was also my favorite math class. I didn't take any physics electives, but solid-state physics looks interesting based on what I've read about it. I also liked statistical mechanics, though we barely covered it in my thermo class. However, the physics I enjoyed the least was thermodynamics and E&M. I discover that I am not interested in a lot of the concepts in Griffith's E&M, such as problems involving circuits, solenoids, inductance, etc. As a result, I've had doubts of going into grad school for physics, and even related areas such as EE. I heard that Jackson's E&M is the toughest grad course in physics, so that's worrying to me.

My 2 undergrad research projects dealt with materials modeling and a little solid-state physics, and I enjoyed both projects. Also, based on my reading, it seems like there's some interesting research going on in physics such as lasers, quantum optics, and solid-state physics. I haven't looked too much into the more theoretical areas, such as HEP, astrophysics, etc, since I want to have more employment opportunities after I finish my phD. Although I liked my applied math classes, I tend to have a preference for the physical aspects of problems.
Is it vital to really like E&M for physics grad school? I enjoyed quantum and statistical mechanics much more..
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
E&M is nearly inescapable. It describes a huge range of everyday phenomena. Take a look at your QM text to see how E&M is used in the discussion of the emission and absorption of light by atoms. There are also lots of important mathematical techniques that are usually introduced in the context of a E&M course (e.g. Green's functions). A graduate E&M course will not typically involve any circuit theory.

You don't have to love E&M, but you are probably not going to be able to avoid it in most fields of Physics.

A book that might help you to see what a beautiful subject this can be is Principles of Electrodynamics by Schwartz.
 
You don't have to like it. But you do have to know it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
986
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K