Is BSc in Mathematics and Physics a waste of time?

[sunnydarling]

Hi,

Can someone explain what the appeal is of a joint subject degree such as BSc Mathematics and Physics? Logic dictates that you will not get proficient at either, so what are the benefits of such a programme? You would be stuck in the middle knowing a little bit of both but not enough of either.

If I am, for example, interested in theoretical particle physics wouldn't it make more sense to get a BSc Mathematics and then pursue BSc and PhD in Physics?

EDIT: It might make more sense to show the actual syllabus for both:
#
# BSc Mathematics
#

--- Level 4
Discovering mathematics
Essential mathematics 1
Introducing statistics
Essential mathematics 2

--- Level 5
Pure mathematics
Mathematical methods, models and modelling

--- Level 6
Applications of probability
Complex analysis
Deterministic and stochastic dynamics
Electromagnetism
Further pure mathematics
Graphs, networks and design
Mathematical methods and fluid mechanics
Optimization
The quantum world

#
# BSc Mathematics and Physics
#

--- Level 4
Questions in science
Essential mathematics 1
Essential mathematics 2

--- Level 5
Physics: from classical to quantum
Mathematical methods, models and modelling

--- Level 6
*Optional physics modules 60 credits
Astrophysics
Electromagnetism
The quantum world
The relativistic Universe

*Optional mathematics modules 60 credits
Applications of probability
Complex analysis
Deterministic and stochastic dynamics
Graphs, networks and design
Mathematical methods and fluid mechanics
Optimization

 

[dkotschessaa]

It's not uncommon for people to do this double major and then do physics for graduate school. There's lots of overlap in the classes.

If you only do math, then you'll have to catch up on physics courses before you can do physics for graduate school.

You would be stuck in the middle knowing a little bit of both but not enough of either.

Undergraduate education is about getting a wide knowledge, not a deep one. Graduate education is about deepening your understanding,and then specializing.

-Dave K

 

[sunnydarling]

Thanks Dave, I always thought (according to what people say online) that theoretical Physics is mostly Mathematics and that one would be better off getting a BSc in Maths. I might be wrong, I don't know.

 

[dkotschessaa]

Thanks Dave, I always thought (according to what people say online) that theoretical Physics is mostly Mathematics and that one would be better off getting a BSc in Maths. I might be wrong, I don't know.

Also consider what would be expected to admit you to graduate school. A double major is going to be more "competitive." (I know we hate the idea of competing, but we have to think of it that way sometimes).

 

[Choppy]

A double major offers the advantage of building foundations in the two different subjects. In principle, they qualify one for graduate school in either discipline. But you're right in that they typically come at the cost of the ability to dive more deeply into either subject and they tend to restrict one's freedom in terms of electives in other areas.

In general, if you're interested in going to graduate school for physics, even if the sub-field is math heavy, you're better off starting with a physics degree and building up from there. Trying to get in from another field may draw into question your ability to pass a qualifying exam.

 

[sunnydarling]

Well Open University doesn't offer any BSc Physics programmes, BSc Mathematics and Physics is the closest one. I was interested in a couple more universities and/or colleges around the area I live in, but none of them have their programmes accredited by the Institute of Mathematics and/or Institute of Physics in the United Kingdom, but Open University has.

 

[Logical Dog]

ACCREDITATION is not the end all be all. Going to a physical university means you get more labs in physics for xample, even though it may not be "accreditad".

Often, the reasons for not getting accreditation are marginal or not really reflective of the quality of the program. I would even venture to say its a bit of a misleading thing. Believe me there are a lot of bad unis that are "accredited".http://www.ima.org.uk/activities/education/university_degree_programme_accreditation.cfm.html

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en

http://www.ima.org.uk/activities/education/university_degree_programme_accreditation/what_does_accreditation_mean_to_undergraduates_and_graduates.cfm.html

http://www.ima.org.uk/activities/education/university_degree_programme_accreditation/programme_accreditation_faqs.cfm.html

one of the the
link states:
"My degree is not accredited by the Institute. What does this mean?
Do not worry if your degree is not accredited by the Institute. If you apply to join the Institute at Associate Member grade, transfer from Student member to Associate Member grade or apply for CMath then you will need to supply a copy of your transcript with your application, which will be considered by the Institute’s Membership Committee.

they visit each institute once or twice each year, for one day, is that enough in your opinion?

The system isn't as effective as you think, I used to study at a I-gcse school where we literally learned nothing in one year *no lie* there were no teachers, and yet when the "inspector" arrived everything was prepared to be professional and such, but it was renewed, and most likely due to money they get from charging so much for the education. One of the kids cut his hand in front of the inspector and one student who was failing all her courses was reccomended by the instructors to be given special attention, never happened.

I will easily tell you more but I don't have the time to go through the trail of papers. Accreditation may be more useful for engineering and other applied kinds of subjects, but even then I wouldn't base my whole decision on it, especially if considering an entirely online degree vs brick university.

 

[sunnydarling]

ACCREDITATION is not the end all be all. Going to a physical university means you get more labs in physics for xample, even though it may not be "accreditad".

Thanks. So would you say the course structure I posted in my opening post is quality enough? I am asking because I'm 32 and I can't study full time, so I'm looking for either part-time courses or the distance learning one with Open. I was looking at Birkbeck but I've heard people who did their degrees with them say their Maths programme is horrible, but on the other hand I've heard some people say Open is quite decent for Maths. It would also suit me better, time-wise, but I am not competent enough to judge what people say as I have no clue about undergraduate-level of Mathematics or Physics.

I've begun to develop a strong interest in Mathematics and Physics recently and I've decided that I want to get a degree so I can pursue MSc and PhD afterwards and become a theoretical mathematician or a theoretical physicist one day (I like both equally). Apart from a strong interest in these fields I'm quite clueless and therefore asking for help here. So please keep that in mind when reading my questions as I am a Penny to your Sheldon.

 

[Logical Dog]

I was looking at Birkbeck but I've heard people who did their degrees with them say their Maths programme is horrible,

agh I would be very careful, some people just don't want to work hard, a subject like maths is constant hard work, overwork of your mind, often you will be thinking about what you don't understand for days. I would say you are really on your own and teaching might or might nor make that much of a difference. i never learned much math or physics during lectures

so I'm looking for either part-time courses or the distance learning one with Open

I will ask @dkotschessaa answer that for you as I am not a maths graduate.

http://www.bbk.ac.uk/study/2017/undergraduate/programmes/UUBSMTHT_C/

http://www.open.ac.uk/courses/qualifications/q77

birkbeck is more geared towards people who want to study part time while having a 9 - 5 job. I remember one of the authors of economics for dummies did his masters there as he was working and then moved to do a Phd and is now a professor at a good university.

 

[ZapperZ]

ACCREDITATION is not the end all be all. Going to a physical university means you get more labs in physics for xample, even though it may not be "accreditad".

Often, the reasons for not getting accreditation are marginal or not really reflective of the quality of the program. I would even venture to say its a bit of a misleading thing. Believe me there are a lot of bad unis that are "accredited".http://www.ima.org.uk/activities/education/university_degree_programme_accreditation.cfm.html

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en

http://www.ima.org.uk/activities/education/university_degree_programme_accreditation/what_does_accreditation_mean_to_undergraduates_and_graduates.cfm.html

http://www.ima.org.uk/activities/education/university_degree_programme_accreditation/programme_accreditation_faqs.cfm.html

one of the the
link states:
"My degree is not accredited by the Institute. What does this mean?
Do not worry if your degree is not accredited by the Institute. If you apply to join the Institute at Associate Member grade, transfer from Student member to Associate Member grade or apply for CMath then you will need to supply a copy of your transcript with your application, which will be considered by the Institute’s Membership Committee.

they visit each institute once or twice each year, for one day, is that enough in your opinion?

The system isn't as effective as you think, I used to study at a I-gcse school where we literally learned nothing in one year *no lie* there were no teachers, and yet when the "inspector" arrived everything was prepared to be professional and such, but it was renewed, and most likely due to money they get from charging so much for the education. One of the kids cut his hand in front of the inspector and one student who was failing all her courses was reccomended by the instructors to be given special attention, never happened.

I will easily tell you more but I don't have the time to go through the trail of papers. Accreditation may be more useful for engineering and other applied kinds of subjects, but even then I wouldn't base my whole decision on it, especially if considering an entirely online degree vs brick university.

Oy vey. If this is remotely true, then the accreditation status in the UK is significantly different than here in the US. Just in case those students in the US think that you can go to a non-accredited schools, think again. Your degree is almost worthless, and you may not even get student loans or financial support to go to such schools.

Zz.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Hi,

Can someone explain what the appeal is of a joint subject degree such as BSc Mathematics and Physics? Logic dictates that you will not get proficient at either, so what are the benefits of such a programme? You would be stuck in the middle knowing a little bit of both but not enough of either.

If I am, for example, interested in theoretical particle physics wouldn't it make more sense to get a BSc Mathematics and then pursue BSc and PhD in Physics?

EDIT: It might make more sense to show the actual syllabus for both:
#
# BSc Mathematics
#

--- Level 4
Discovering mathematics
Essential mathematics 1
Introducing statistics
Essential mathematics 2

--- Level 5
Pure mathematics
Mathematical methods, models and modelling

--- Level 6
Applications of probability
Complex analysis
Deterministic and stochastic dynamics
Electromagnetism
Further pure mathematics
Graphs, networks and design
Mathematical methods and fluid mechanics
Optimization
The quantum world

#
# BSc Mathematics and Physics
#

--- Level 4
Questions in science
Essential mathematics 1
Essential mathematics 2

--- Level 5
Physics: from classical to quantum
Mathematical methods, models and modelling

--- Level 6
*Optional physics modules 60 credits
Astrophysics
Electromagnetism
The quantum world
The relativistic Universe

*Optional mathematics modules 60 credits
Applications of probability
Complex analysis
Deterministic and stochastic dynamics
Graphs, networks and design
Mathematical methods and fluid mechanics
Optimization

I wonder to which logic do you subscribe to...

 

[Logical Dog]

If this is remotely true

Birkbeck falls under as a college of the university of london, so it is good enough. : - D.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_London
Op might want to visit their proffessers or lessons and talk with students, see if anyone has gone down his desired path before. (Which I don't see any reason why it cannot be accomplished, accreditation or not).

 

[George Jones]

Birkbeck falls under as a college of the university of london, so it is good enough. : - D.

Indeed.

Roger Penrose was a faculty member at Birkbeck for nine years before moving to Oxford. Penrose was at Birkbeck when he did much of his brilliant work on general relativity, including his work on singularity theorems.

David Bohm was a faculty member at Birkbeck for twenty-two years.

 

[Logical Dog]

Indeed.

Roger Penrose was a faculty member at Birkbeck for nine years before moving to Oxford. Penrose was at Birkbeck when he did much of his brilliant work on general relativity, including his work on singularity theorems.

David Bohm was a faculty member at Birkbeck for twenty-two years.

, and they didn't worry about accreditation (tho they were not really doing a bsc i imagine) : - )

 

[Crek]

Don't pay for anything which isn't widely recognized.

 

[sunnydarling]

Birkbeck falls under as a college of the university of london, so it is good enough. : - D.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_London
Op might want to visit their proffessers or lessons and talk with students, see if anyone has gone down his desired path before. (Which I don't see any reason why it cannot be accomplished, accreditation or not).

Birkbeck doesn't have a Physics undergraduate programme, not even Physics and Mathematics. They only offer a Certificate in Higher Education.

I know they used to teach Physics, not sure what happened.

 

[Logical Dog]

Birkbeck doesn't have a Physics undergraduate programme,

yes

 

[spaghetti3451]

It's not uncommon for people to do this double major and then do physics for graduate school. There's lots of overlap in the classes.

If you only do math, then you'll have to catch up on physics courses before you can do physics for graduate school.
Undergraduate education is about getting a wide knowledge, not a deep one. Graduate education is about deepening your understanding,and then specializing.

-Dave K

The OP's list of courses looks like they are not taught with the view that you would want to go graduate school in maths. Certainly, advanced math undergraduates do courses in stuff like differential geometry, topology, number theory, etc.

I bring up this point because a lot of students who want to study theoretical particle physics or theoretic condensed matter physics think that doing a double major in maths and physics us useful. But then, I have talked to undergrads doing double major and they negate this claim. Undergrad math courses are all about theorems and proofs. There's certainly no hand-waving arguments or use of heuristic intuition, which is the hallmark of a practicing theoretical physicist. Of course, unless one wants to work on the mathematics of string theory, for example, in mirror symmetry, in which case you would better be a mathematician than a physicist.

 

[spaghetti3451]

Hi,

Can someone explain what the appeal is of a joint subject degree such as BSc Mathematics and Physics? Logic dictates that you will not get proficient at either, so what are the benefits of such a programme? You would be stuck in the middle knowing a little bit of both but not enough of either.

If I am, for example, interested in theoretical particle physics wouldn't it make more sense to get a BSc Mathematics and then pursue BSc and PhD in Physics?

EDIT: It might make more sense to show the actual syllabus for both:
#
# BSc Mathematics
#

--- Level 4
Discovering mathematics
Essential mathematics 1
Introducing statistics
Essential mathematics 2

--- Level 5
Pure mathematics
Mathematical methods, models and modelling

--- Level 6
Applications of probability
Complex analysis
Deterministic and stochastic dynamics
Electromagnetism
Further pure mathematics
Graphs, networks and design
Mathematical methods and fluid mechanics
Optimization
The quantum world

#
# BSc Mathematics and Physics
#

--- Level 4
Questions in science
Essential mathematics 1
Essential mathematics 2

--- Level 5
Physics: from classical to quantum
Mathematical methods, models and modelling

--- Level 6
*Optional physics modules 60 credits
Astrophysics
Electromagnetism
The quantum world
The relativistic Universe

*Optional mathematics modules 60 credits
Applications of probability
Complex analysis
Deterministic and stochastic dynamics
Graphs, networks and design
Mathematical methods and fluid mechanics
Optimization

You might want to skip out on Graphs, Network and Design, and Optimization. They have no uses in theoretical particle physics, as far as I know.

 

[sunnydarling]

The OP's list of courses looks like they are not taught with the view that you would want to go graduate school in maths. Certainly, advanced math undergraduates do courses in stuff like differential geometry, topology, number theory, etc.

I've had a look at the two obscurely named subjects from the list in the opening post and what they entail:

Year 2 - Pure Mathematics 60 Credits (Group Theory, Linear Algebra, Analysis)
http://www.open.ac.uk/courses/modules/m208

Year 3 - Further Pure Mathematics 60 Credits (Number Theory, Groups, Numbers and Rings, Metric Spaces I, Metric Space II, Rings and Fields)
http://www.open.ac.uk/courses/modules/m303

I've emailed Imperial College London and asked them if they take Open University Maths students into their MSc programme. I want to see what they say.

You might want to skip out on Graphs, Network and Design, and Optimization. They have no uses in theoretical particle physics, as far as I know.

Cheers for the advice, although a lot of people have made a valid point by saying that a 'double-degree' is not suitable for pursuing either subjects in more depth.

 

[Logical Dog]

op might want to read and browse these here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Mathematics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Physics.

EDIT: let us know what you decide op, I am curious lol :D @sunnydarling

 

[Stavros Kiri]

Logic dictates that you will not get proficient at either, so what are the benefits of such a programme? You would be stuck in the middle knowing a little bit of both but not enough of either.

But there are many common things and apparent interaction between the two sciences (Math and Phy). [Studying both I am sure you get the full picture ... (or at least a more complete one) ...]

 

[ZapperZ]

Looking at this thread, I can't help feeling that many people are talking about different things, and that I still don't quite get the full picture yet of the actual animal in question.

Here's the problem. The OP specifically asked, in the first post, about:

...joint subject degree such as BSc Mathematics and Physics...

My take on this is that this is NOT a double-major, i.e. not two separate majors in Mathematics and in Physics. Rather, this is a degree that is a hybrid between the two.

I think there are posts in here that are assuming that this is a double major. Here in the US, one can do a double major in physics and in mathematics. It is the same as if you get two separate degrees. It isn't one degree that that combines the two subject areas. So such a double major is NOT a "watered-down" version of each one. One gets the same amount of courses in those subject areas as a physics major and as a mathematics major.

This, however, is not what the OP is looking at from the way I understand it. It appears that this is just ONE degree that combines the two. My guess is that the coverage of physics and mathematics courses do not add up to the same courses that a physics major and a mathematics major would take.

It is this type of major that is the topic in question.

Zz.

 

[sunnydarling]

Looking at this thread, I can't help feeling that many people are talking about different things, and that I still don't quite get the full picture yet of the actual animal in question. Zz.

Yes it is a hybrid as you say. I do not believe there is such a thing as a 'double-major' anywhere in Europe.

 

[gleem]

Have you seen Gerard 't Hooft's (1999 Nobel Prize) article "How to become a good theoretical physicist"

http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gadda001/goodtheorist/primarymathematics.html

 

[Stavros Kiri]

Have you seen Gerard 't Hooft's (1999 Nobel Prize) article "How to become a good theoretical physicist"

http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gadda001/goodtheorist/primarymathematics.html

Thanks for that! Valuable article! ...

 

[sunnydarling]

Just wanted to add that out of top Universities in the UK for Mathematics these below have replied back saying that they accept Maths undergraduates from Open University into their MSc programmes (and of course into PhD later on):

Cambridge, Oxford, Warwick, Bristol

I haven't heard from Imperial and I'm still waiting for a reply from St Andrews, Durham and LSE but I would assume that they wouldn't have any reason not to accept OU students. I think this is the best way to be sure whether the course is any good or not, ask your fav Uni if you can continue postgrad studies with them and if they say yes then it should be fine. That's FYI as it may have nothing to add to the discussion in this thread, but I'm sure some people will find this bit of information useful and perhaps even a deciding factor whether to study at OU or not. Of course, most of those Unis require First Hons (say at least 90%) so you'll have to work your ass off regardless of where you study, but it's good to know that the piece of paper is recognised.

 

[Logical Dog]

Just wanted to add that out of top Universities in the UK for Mathematics these below have replied back saying that they accept Maths undergraduates from Open University into their MSc programmes (and of course into PhD later on):

Cambridge, Oxford, Warwick, Bristol

I haven't heard from Imperial and I'm still waiting for a reply from St Andrews, Durham and LSE but I would assume that they wouldn't have any reason not to accept OU students. I think this is the best way to be sure whether the course is any good or not, ask your fav Uni if you can continue postgrad studies with them and if they say yes then it should be fine. That's FYI as it may have nothing to add to the discussion in this thread, but I'm sure some people will find this bit of information useful and perhaps even a deciding factor whether to study at OU or not. Of course, most of those Unis require First Hons (say at least 90%) so you'll have to work your ass off regardless of where you study, but it's good to know that the piece of paper is recognised.

looks like you answered your question. :-)

 

[Independent]

Just wanted to add that out of top Universities in the UK for Mathematics these below have replied back saying that they accept Maths undergraduates from Open University into their MSc programmes (and of course into PhD later on):

Cambridge, Oxford, Warwick, Bristol

I haven't heard from Imperial and I'm still waiting for a reply from St Andrews, Durham and LSE [...]

You can add Durham, King's College London, LSE as well as Leiden and Utrecht from the Netherlands to the list.

 

[radium]

Most theoretical physicists learn math as needed for their research, so it is definitely not required to do a math major as an undergrad.