Is my view of Theoretical physics romanticized?

[Philosopher_k]

Hey guys. I am a final year high school student and have lately been researching a career in Mathematics/Theoretical physics. Most recently i have come to the conclusion that:
1. I am not as gifted in mathematics as i thought
2. I do not enjoy PURE mathematics as much as i once believed i did.

I had this view that mathematicians sat around and had massive eureka moments (like Archimedes), solving problems such as fermats last theorem, or Poincare’s conjecture with flashes of genius. Yet when i look at the actual proofs just noted, i am struck by just how different my perceptions are. For example Wiles' proof is something like 150 pages long and filled with long definition/lemma/proof style formatting. It isn't that the ideas are not clever of right, its just that in the end i don't really care that much about ricci flow or modular forms as much as i thought i would. A modular form is not some abstract idea that exists wether we care or not, it is a definition which we have formed so as to define more objects. Disagree all you want, i have come to disagree with even plato.

With my love of mathematics corrupted i quickly turned to theoretical physics. After all what could be cooler than discovering a theory about dimensions, tiny strings, other universes or time itself. So once again i began to research the field of mathematical/theoretical physics, only to find that once again i was misled. The field was all about Gauges, Metric spaces and Eigenvectors, whatsmore the questions were not as philosophical as i enjoyed, no answers to the mystery’s of time or how the universe came into being, more about how abstract mathematics was perceived to fit in with reality.

For years i have read popsci books by hawking, Kaku and greene, speaking about the exact things i love. Yet why is the practice of theoretical physics so different to these ideals? What is wrong with me? did i miss some gene which stops me loving mathematics as much as Edward Witten or Stephen Hawking? Does it just not click in my head? Or do i just need more training in mathematics and physics before i see the true beauty beneath the surface?
I have tried to find this beauty but so far, no matter which college book i read, there is nothing like the excitement i felt when reading a brief history of time.

Are the days of Einstein gone? Did the ever exist in the first place? I am so damn confused!
If i am right, then what the hell do i do with my life?

 

[Jack21222]

Perhaps you should major in philosophy?

 

[Dickfore]

Be prepared to work in Starbucks.

 

[hadsed]

Maybe your real interest is in great things. Romanticizing is a lot of what liberal arts majors like to do (I'm only partially poking fun, but it's kind of true). In history, you can shape your perception of some figure to what you want it to be (provided with enough backing evidence that is). Literature has an even longer leash with that. Political science and such are cool to think about. Hell, you could be a programmer and find that solving these little puzzles that come in strange computer language form is a little game that you don't mind playing as long as people pay you large sums of money.

In the end, you have to realize everything has nitty gritty stuff. You just have to figure out what nitty gritty stuff you don't mind doing to get to the awesome stuff that it has. Every field has insane stuff in it I think.

 

[Philosopher_k]

Dont get me wrong i still enjoy mathematics. Just not as much as i thought i would.

I like the rigor, just not THAT much. Philosophy is a no go for me. I would rather work at burger king then spend four years debating things that cannot be answered. I would feel left out from all the great discoveries if i didn't go into some form of math/physics.

 

[Pengwuino]

You've run head long into reality. There are reasons people write 100 page dissertations after years upon research about things that sound so unbelievably unimportant. The truth is that there is good reason that some of the greatest questions haven't been answered completely after being looked at by tens of thousands of physicists over many decades.

Popular science books help spark curiosity, they don't typically attempt to give a concrete, believable argument to anyone who is interested in actually confirming what they say.

You learn a lot being a physicist but you're not going to discover the theory of everything after becoming a physics major. You're only going to find out that... well... how does the saying go, "You don't even know enough to know how much you don't know?". Does that sound right? Well, whatever. Though to get right to the point, you'll know more about the "true beauty" of the universe than you would by becoming a business major or philosophy major.

And no, the "days of Einstein", as some people see it, are not just gone, they never existed. Physics has been romanticized. One of my professor always said and still says that it's unfortunate that everything about physics has been shown as this linear progression of breakthrough after breakthrough. It's not true. Every breakthrough was followed by countless dead-ends. Hell, Einstein was almost beaten to the punch on a few theories (I've heard Hilbert had GR almost figured out before Einstein). He was wrong on others. It's tough to distill the reality of a couple of decades of physics research into something people would enjoy reading.

 

[Dickfore]

You might want to consider atmospheric science. It relies on applied math and physics and it has a large practical value as well as possibility for fundamental research.

 

[Philosopher_k]

Thanks Pengwuino.

My dream has been to get edward wittens job at princeton... All my eggs are going to hatch and i will win the fields medal at the age of 20.

 

[Philosopher_k]

Also i would rather work at burger king than do atmospheric science (well not quite). I would rather go work for microsoft than spend my time and money persuing a phd in an area that i found boring.

 

[insilicium]

Maybe it's romanticized a little bit. I'm a mathematical physicist, and I enjoyed reading popular science books in high school too, and I definitely experienced a bit of a "wonder gap" when I hit undergrad. It took a little bit to reignite my interest - the introductory physics classes taught to freshmen tend to be, as you say, "nitty gritty," because they are usually geared towards engineers, who just want to know the useful results.

My suggestion is to stick out your freshmen classes, and take an advanced course after that, perhaps in Classical Mechanics or Quantum Mechanics. Both are gorgeous theories - Lagrangian mechanics especially.

I applaud you for attempting to find a real understanding of the really interesting advanced stuff, like black holes, Wiles' proof, etc. But without knowing the basics, it all seems like boring details.

That being said, it is patently untrue that discoveries are made merely by Great Men staring wistfully into space. It requires a lot of often frustrating work, and misunderstanding even small details can make everything go awry. But the payoff - the feeling you get when you finally get something right - there is no substitute for that.

So hang in there, and keep an open mind. Make sure to take an advanced course in physics when you are ready, and see if that does anything for you. In the meantime, keep reading popular books to feed your interest.

 

[Philosopher_k]

thanks insilcium. Do you have any tips on becoming a mathematical physicist? The other thing i am really considering is astrophysics/cosmology.

I plan to stick to my guns and continue down the academic track. I frankly don't care if i only earn 50 grand a year.

 

[Pengwuino]

I frankly don't care if i only earn 50 grand a year.

That's good ...

 

[insilicium]

Do you have any tips on becoming a mathematical physicist?

Go to college. If you major in physics, take a bunch of math courses, and if you major in math, take a bunch of physics courses. While you're there, try to get involved in research with a professor. It can be a little difficult to do theory research as an undergrad, but it's certainly possible. That way you'll get a taste of what it's like. At that point, you'll probably know whether you love it or whether you should be running for the hills!

The other thing i am really considering is astrophysics/cosmology.

Wonderful! That is my field. If you're just dying to get a taste of some big ideas, you should definitely check out Einstein's popular book on relativity.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1451002165/?tag=pfamazon01-20

 

[Philosopher_k]

What exact area of astrophysics/cosmology do you work in? Sounds cool.

Also Peng, i will work part time as a quant and part time as a professor at harvard, while i am formulating the unified theory of everything, so i am sure i will be able to earn at least 250 k a year :)

 

[Pengwuino]

What exact area of astrophysics/cosmology do you work in? Sounds cool.

Also Peng, i will work part time as a quant and part time as a professor at harvard, while i am formulating the unified theory of everything, so i am sure i will be able to earn at least 250 k a year :)

At least you know how to poke fun at your prospects!

 

[Philosopher_k]

Poke fun :uhh: What do you speacialise in, Pengwuino?

 

[insilicium]

I work on connecting predictions in high energy/particle physics and cosmology to physical observables. That is, taking predictions that are unfeasible to test in the laboratory and seeing what they imply about stellar structure, the CMB, etc.

 

[Philosopher_k]

The beautiful thing i like about mathematics is that it requires no experiments (beside thought experiments), and it is logically self coherent.

Therefore i may still go down the mathematics side of things. How are the tenure track opps in Mathematics as opposed to physics? Chances to earn more money? Also are there any mathematicians out there that can tell me the realities of the job? It does kind of annoy me thinking about the fact that i may end up teaching in a liberal arts college or god forbid community college.

Which is more intellectually challenging Theoretical physics or Mathematics?

 

[Dickfore]

The beautiful thing i like about mathematics is that it requires no experiments (beside thought experiments), and it is logically self coherent.

Therefore i may still go down the mathematics side of things. How are the tenure track opps in Mathematics as opposed to physics? Chances to earn more money? Also are there any mathematicians out there that can tell me the realities of the job? It does kind of annoy me thinking about the fact that i may end up teaching in a liberal arts college or god forbid community college.

Which is more intellectually challenging Theoretical physics or Mathematics?

lol, high school kid with an A- in pre calc math thinking about tenure in Mathematics.

 

[Philosopher_k]

lol, high school kid with an A- in pre calc math thinking about tenure in Mathematics.

I have taken several college courses allready even though i am only in high school. Though i am aware that i have a long way to go, i probably mastered pre calc when i was 10.

 

[Pengwuino]

The beautiful thing i like about mathematics is that it requires no experiments (beside thought experiments), and it is logically self coherent.

Therefore i may still go down the mathematics side of things. How are the tenure track opps in Mathematics as opposed to physics? Chances to earn more money? Also are there any mathematicians out there that can tell me the realities of the job? It does kind of annoy me thinking about the fact that i may end up teaching in a liberal arts college or god forbid community college.

Which is more intellectually challenging Theoretical physics or Mathematics?

Tenure track positions in both fields are few and far between. You can earn money in industry, but not so much in academia until you're pretty high up there... and even then, meh. Get use to the idea of possibly ending up at a non-high end school if you absolutely must become a professor.There are very very very few "dream positions" out there and you are not the only one who wants one and the people who have them usually die before they give up their job... or are forced into retirement.

 

[insilicium]

Everyone starts somewhere.

As far as intellectually challenging goes...That's up to you. Take courses in both, see which you like better. And I agree with Pengwuino, keep an open mind for your career.

 

[Dickfore]

I have taken several college courses allready even though i am only in high school. Though i am aware that i have a long way to go, i probably mastered pre calc when i was 10.

Sure. What college courses have you taken?

 

[Philosopher_k]

Chemistry, Calculus up to 3, linear algebra

(these are rough estimates as i am not American)

 

[Kevin_Axion]

I don't understand why people pose themselves as such a greater intellect because they have taken college courses. Very interesting... I could walk into a topology course at a university and gain a rough approximation of what the person is saying. All that matters is if you can apply it.

 

[Philosopher_k]

Trust me i am aware there are much smarter people out there than me. I am pretty stupid. I knew a guy who could do calculus in year 1.

 

[Caramon]

"Who could do calculus in year 1". What do you mean by this? Everyone should be done calculus I by the time they enter University, at least in Canada.

 

[Kevin_Axion]

This is true, I live in Toronto and we take introduction to linear algebra and calculus in grade 12.

 

[Caramon]

In Calgary we took AP Calculus 31 and Pure Math 30 in the same semester in Grade 12 so we could start on Linear Algebra and Classical Physics before we went to University. But I did go to a really high-end school.

 

[Kevin_Axion]

Sadly, we don't have any AP Sciences, except Computer Science. Although our physics is pretty awesome, I know we do Quantum Mechanics in grade 12.

 

[Caramon]

Our Physics 20 curriculum is:
A: Kinematics
B: Dynamics
C: Circular Motion, Work and Energy
D: Oscillatory Motion & Mechanical Waves

and our Physics 30 curriculum is:
A: Momentum and Impulse
B: Forces & Fields
C: Electromagnetic Radiation
D: Atomic Physics

 

[Kevin_Axion]

It's the same at my high school, although they took out Atomic Physics, I'm not sure why though. One of the grade 12 teachers said she's afraid to have me in her class, she says I'm going to stand her up and prove her wrong. I wouldn't do that but when I know the teacher did something wrong I'd tell them later. For instance my Chemistry teacher was trying to explain the Strong Interaction and wasn't clear which was fine, but my grade 10 chemistry teacher said that atomic nuclei stay together because their massive. I felt like walking out of the class. I can't wait to get to University!

 

[Philosopher_k]

lol year 1 means 7 years old.

I could do calculus at age 15 (which is pretty late as far as i am concerned)

Here in Australia our physics course sucks but mathematics is ok in high school.

 

[twofish-quant]

Hey guys. I am a final year high school student and have lately been researching a career in Mathematics/Theoretical physics.

Don't try to plan things out just yet. Go to college, do some undergraduate research. If you like it, keep dong it. If you don't, then find something else to do.

I had this view that mathematicians sat around and had massive eureka moments (like Archimedes), solving problems such as fermats last theorem, or Poincare’s conjecture with flashes of genius.

Those do come from time to time, but I've found that most of my Eureka moments end up being false alarms. Just last week, I thought I figured out how to solve this problem that I was spending weeks looking at. I took a look at the problem, and I told the person next to me that I'm going to have lunch now, and enjoy this good feeling, because there is a good chance that I'll go to lunch, come back, figure out that I made a mistake, and that I really didn't solve the problem.

Which is what more or less happened...

Also you do have flashes of insight, but those are mixed in with slow, grinding work.

Yet when i look at the actual proofs just noted, i am struck by just how different my perceptions are. For example Wiles' proof is something like 150 pages long and filled with long definition/lemma/proof style formatting.

That's mathematics. Physics, even theoretical physics, is quite different. Physicists generally don't care about proofs. And a lot of theoretical physics are things like "if we assume that Y = alpha * X, then we can come up with something that we can calculate."

After all what could be cooler than discovering a theory about dimensions, tiny strings, other universes or time itself.

Except that more often than not you'll quickly find out that your brilliant idea just doesn't work. Personally, I prefer creating models for things that I can see. Like fire.

The field was all about Gauges, Metric spaces and Eigenvectors, whatsmore the questions were not as philosophical as i enjoyed, no answers to the mystery’s of time or how the universe came into being, more about how abstract mathematics was perceived to fit in with reality.

Which is pretty cool. If it were easy to figure out the mysteries of the universe, it wouldn't be nearly that interesting to me. Also, I like mysteries that are right in front of me. Light a match, and there are things about fire which people don't quite understand.

For years i have read popsci books by hawking, Kaku and greene, speaking about the exact things i love. Yet why is the practice of theoretical physics so different to these ideals?

Because reality is complex, and science is hard. If you just sit in a corner and try to "think out" how the universe works, you'll never figure anything out. You have data that you are trying to explain, and it takes a huge amount of effort to try to explain it.

I have tried to find this beauty but so far, no matter which college book i read, there is nothing like the excitement i felt when reading a brief history of time.

That's because a brief history of time doesn't have that much to do with what physicists do. Personally, I've found that this makes physics *more* interesting since I am more interested in building a better mousetrap than "useless philosophy about time" but that's just me.

Are the days of Einstein gone? Did the ever exist in the first place? I am so damn confused!
If i am right, then what the hell do i do with my life?

I think they never existed, and the problem is that reading Stephen Hawking gives you a very warped idea of what physicists really do.

 

[twofish-quant]

The beautiful thing i like about mathematics is that it requires no experiments (beside thought experiments), and it is logically self coherent.

Maybe. Read Godel, Escher, Bach by Hofstadter.