Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
Science and Math Textbooks
STEM Educators and Teaching
STEM Academic Advising
STEM Career Guidance
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Science and Math Textbooks
STEM Educators and Teaching
STEM Academic Advising
STEM Career Guidance
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Science Education and Careers
STEM Academic Advising
Is it normal to be a dunce in some areas of physics?
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="TomServo, post: 5680432, member: 253819"] Maybe "dunce" is the wrong word, but I'm pretty weak on stat mech/thermo. I've had a few courses in them but not to the point where I can understand anything but the most rudimentary basics (each time I took a course in them I happened to have been distracted with other things). I'm a thirdish year grad student specializing in gravity, and so far I'm learning GR pretty well. So how big of a concern should this be? Does it hinder my abilities as a physicist? Aren't thermo and stat mech such big, important subjects that you need to be well-versed in them to do any area of physics? Or is it normal for people with PhDs, like professors and postdocs, to be very weak in a big area of physics like this once they've gotten to the point where they start specializing? Thanks. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
Science Education and Careers
STEM Academic Advising
Is it normal to be a dunce in some areas of physics?
Back
Top