Courses Which Abstract Algebra Sequence is Best for Aspiring High Energy Physicists?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on choosing between two abstract algebra sequences for a physics major interested in high energy physics. The first sequence focuses on group theory, ring theory, and algebraic field extensions, while the second includes number theory and more advanced topics like permutation groups and modules. The first sequence is an honors course, expected to be more challenging and taught in a smaller setting. Participants emphasize the importance of consulting academic advisors for tailored guidance, while also acknowledging the value of peer insights from current and former physics students. Ultimately, the decision should align with the student's academic goals and comfort level with the material.
Josh0768
Messages
53
Reaction score
6
My university offers two different two-semester sequences for learning abstract algebra, and I can't decide which one would be better for me, a physics major. Here are the two sequences and their course descriptions, copied and pasted from the university website:

Algebra 1: Theory of groups, Sylow theory, the structure of finite Abelian groups, ring theory, ideals, homomorphisms, and polynomial rings.
Algebra 2: Algebraic field extensions, Galois theory. Classification of finite fields. Fundamental Theorem of Algebra.
OR
Abstract Algebra I and Number Theory: Structure of the integers, congruences, rings, ring homomorphisms, ideals, quotient rings. A writing course with an emphasis on proofs.
Abstract Algebra II: Permutation groups, groups of transformations, normal subgroups, homomorphism theorems, modules. Principal ideal rings, unique factorization domains, noncommutative rings, rings of fractions, ideals.

Which one of these sequences would be the most beneficial for me (a physics major with aspirations to enter high energy physics) to take?

(It might be worth noting that the first sequence is an honors sequence, and as such, I would expect it to be taught in a smaller setting and I think it would be the harder of the two sequences.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have started several threads on "Physics and XXX". Given that the potential range of XXX is enormous, what did your advisor say when you asked him or her? And why do you think our advice is any better?
 
Vanadium 50 said:
You have started several threads on "Physics and XXX". Given that the potential range of XXX is enormous, what did your advisor say when you asked him or her? And why do you think our advice is any better?
I thought it would be most appropriate not to pepper my advisor with daily emails and questions before I’ve even met him in person. I also figured that a website full of ex and current physics majors would be able to help me with questions that pertain to majoring in physics.
 
  • Like
Likes member 587159
Josh0768 said:
not to pepper my advisor with daily emails and questions

That's very considerate.

You're working yourself into a tizzy for nothing. You don't have your entire life planned out before you've finished high school.
 
TL;DR: Jackson or Zangwill for Electrodynamics? Hi, I want to learn ultrafast optics and I am interested in condensed matter physics, ie using ultrafast optics in condensed matter systems. However, before I get onto ultrafast optics I need to improve my electrodynamics knowledge. Should I study Jackson or Zangwill for Electrodynamics? My level at the moment is Griffiths. Given my interest in ultrafast optics in condensed matter, I am not sure which book is better suited for me. If...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
883
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
944