QFT for Nuclear Physicists: Course Value & Weak Interaction

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the value of taking a course in Quantum Field Theory (QFT) for students in nuclear physics, particularly in relation to research on weak interactions and the potential overlap with solid state physics. Participants explore the relevance of QFT in various research areas and its necessity for pursuing a PhD in nuclear physics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that QFT could be beneficial for nuclear physicists, citing its application in various nuclear research areas such as chiral field theory and lattice gauge theory.
  • Others argue that QFT is also relevant in solid state physics, with examples like superconductivity and quantum Hall phenomena.
  • A participant expresses uncertainty about the necessity of QFT for specific areas of nuclear physics, such as nuclear spectroscopy and nuclear moments.
  • There are differing opinions on whether QFT is essential for a PhD in nuclear physics, with some asserting it is part of the general toolkit required for all PhD students.
  • One participant mentions that in their region, QFT is not considered necessary for a PhD, suggesting that the relevance of QFT may vary by institution.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the distinction between quantum field theory and mean field methods, with participants emphasizing that QFT is the focus of the discussion.
  • There is a debate about the relationship between solid state physics and condensed matter physics, with conflicting views on which is a sub-field of the other.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the necessity of QFT for a PhD in nuclear physics, with multiple competing views remaining regarding its relevance and application in both nuclear and solid state physics.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about their educational background and future research goals, which may influence their perspectives on the necessity of QFT. Additionally, there are unresolved distinctions between different types of field theories and their applications in various physics domains.

eXorikos
Messages
281
Reaction score
5
Is there any value in taking a course in QFT for a nuclear physicist student? I'd like to take a course on QFT just out of interest, but if it's more useful to take an extra course on solid state physics (I'm not sure if I want to do research in nuclear or nuclear solid state physics) I'm doing that instead.

However a knowledge of QFT might enable me to do research on weak interaction in nuclei. Or is a knowledge of QFT not necessary? This is basically the low-energy equivalent of the LHC in that it's looking for the same boundaries of the SM.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes I think QFT could be very useful to you as a nuclear physicist. There are plenty of research areas in nuclear which use field theories (take a look at chiral field theory, lattice gauge theory, the old school one boson exchange models for instance).

I am a little confused about why you think QFT would not be of use in solid state. There are plenty of examples in which QFT and second quantization is used in solid state physics (superconductivity comes to mind immediately, also quantum hall phenomena).

So, I would think QFT would be very useful to you. But I have no idea about your level of education or your goals, so it is hard to say.
 
That wasn't what I was saying. I'm already doing a master in nuclear physics and combining this with a couple of courses from solid state physics. So I would have to drop a course on solid state and take QFT instead.
 
You will need a course on field theory if you want a PhD in nuclear physics. Whether you take it now or later is really up to you.
 
And what do you mean by field theory? Mean field methods or quantum field theory?

Mean field methods is in a course next semester.
My current knowledge of QFT is limited to intro to elementary particles by Griffiths... So pretty non-existent.

Why would QFT be necessary for a PhD? Why would you need it for example in nuclear spectroscopy or nuclear moments?

Now I think of it, taking QFT makes my options broader for the future, because even if I take it, I will still have a good knowledge of solid state physics as well.
 
*bump*
 
eXorikos said:
And what do you mean by field theory? Mean field methods or quantum field theory?

Quantum field theory, like the title of the thread. I have never heard "field theory" used to describe mean field theory.

eXorikos said:
Why would QFT be necessary for a PhD? Why would you need it for example in nuclear spectroscopy or nuclear moments?

Reason 1 - because it's part of the general toolkit that all PhD's should be able to use.

Reason 2 - because the PhD-granting institute says it's necessary.

Reason 3 - "but when are we going to use geometry in real life?" is so high school.

Like I said, you're going to end up taking it sooner or later if you want a PhD. It's up to you when.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
Reason 1 - because it's part of the general toolkit that all PhD's should be able to use.

Reason 2 - because the PhD-granting institute says it's necessary.

Reason 3 - "but when are we going to use geometry in real life?" is so high school.

Like I said, you're going to end up taking it sooner or later if you want a PhD. It's up to you when.

Reason 2 - In Belgium it isn't so.

Reason 3 - I didn't mean it like that. I was just implying that if solid state courses are more relevant, QFT can wait.

Anyway I'm incorporating it in my plan for next academic year. :)
 
Enjoy it!
 
  • #10
QFT, is usually necessary in Theoretical CMS. It's also an amazing tool kit and very interesting.
 
  • #11
What is theoretical CMS?
 
  • #12
It's Condensed Matter Physics, a sub-field of Solid State Physics.
 
  • #13
Kevin_Axion said:
It's Condensed Matter Physics, a sub-field of Solid State Physics.

You have it backwards here. Solid State Physics (the study of bulk solids) is a sub-field of Condensed Matter Physics (the study of condensed phases of matter).
 
  • #14
  • #15
Kevin_Axion said:
"Historically, condensed matter physics grew out of solid-state physics, now considered one of its main subfields." -Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condensed_matter_physics
You're right though, wikipedia is wrong.

The wiki article is ambiguous. Solid-state is considered one of CM's main subfields.
 

Similar threads

Courses Statistical Physics vs QFT vs General relativity
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Other Can a Physics Graduate Successfully Transition to Nuclear Engineering?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Studying Theoretical Physics Study Path (it's about tetrads....)
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Courses Introductory Chemistry Requirement for Physics Majors: Why is it Mandatory?
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
6K
Courses Which (online) course in Physics should I choose?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Learning about condensed matter physics as a particle physicist
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Is modern physics as a course necessary for all future physicists?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Programs MS in Nuclear Engineering or Engineering Physics question
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Admissions Advice on how best to spend my time for graduate school applications
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Other Can I (with a math major) do a masters in theoretical physics?
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K