Should I Take Insane Physics Classes or Focus on Math First?

  • Thread starter Thread starter HungryChemist
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Taking upper division courses in Electromagnetism (E&M), Classical Mechanics, and Quantum Mechanics simultaneously is considered highly challenging, with many students struggling to manage the workload. It is generally advised to limit the number of upper-division physics classes to two per semester for the average student. A foundational understanding of linear algebra is beneficial for Quantum Mechanics, and prior exposure to eigenvectors from earlier courses should suffice. While Real Analysis is not directly applicable to undergraduate physics, it is valuable for its own sake. Advanced Calculus, which involves proving concepts from Calculus I-III, is also important, particularly for mastering the mathematical tools needed in physics. Students are encouraged to consult their physics department for specific program guidelines and seek advice from professors regarding course selections. Proper mathematical preparation is crucial to avoid confusion between physics concepts and mathematical techniques.
HungryChemist
Messages
140
Reaction score
0
Hello, I am sorry to bore you for another thread like this...But I at least I am not posting this on 'General Physics' threads. Soon, I will be taking upper division E&M and Classical Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics. So people said they are 'insane' classes and taking all three of them at the same time is like killing yourself. Is that really true? Well what do you think of that?

Another question is...my friend told me that I should take upper division linear algebra before I start taking Quantum Mechanics but I can't really trust him. What do you think of that?

One last question, I know I will be taking one year of Mathematical Methords classes (for it is required as a physics major), But I am thinking that's just not enough math. So same friend I mentioned above told me that I should take Real Analysis but I can't trust him. I want to take Advanced Calculus instead of Real Analysis but what do you think of that?

Please, end my misery.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are no simple answers because we have no idea what your abilities, previous coursework, and ambitions are. Also - things are kind of different from college to college.

I do think that 2 classes of upper-division physics each term (or semester) is plenty for the average student.

You should know some linear algebra for QM, but if you've taken a freshman or sophomore-level course that already covered eigenvectors, then you should be fine. Real analysis will not be useful for undergrad physics per se, but is worth learning for its own sake. I have no idea what you mean by Advanced Calculus, but if that means Calculus III (multivariable and vector calculus) - then you definitely need to know this for your physics courses, before you learn real analysis.

What kind of physics program do you have at your school? There should be some guidelines/requirements somewhere out there. Isn't there anyone in your physics dept to talk to, like a professor?
 
Last edited:
HungryChemist said:
Hello, I am sorry to bore you for another thread like this...But I at least I am not posting this on 'General Physics' threads. Soon, I will be taking upper division E&M and Classical Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics. So people said they are 'insane' classes and taking all three of them at the same time is like killing yourself. Is that really true? Well what do you think of that?

Another question is...my friend told me that I should take upper division linear algebra before I start taking Quantum Mechanics but I can't really trust him. What do you think of that?

One last question, I know I will be taking one year of Mathematical Methords classes (for it is required as a physics major), But I am thinking that's just not enough math. So same friend I mentioned above told me that I should take Real Analysis but I can't trust him. I want to take Advanced Calculus instead of Real Analysis but what do you think of that?

Please, end my misery.

Well, I'll let you be a bore if you will permit me to do the same. I will be VERY tacky here and will suggest to you that you read my essay that is being described in the Sticky. One of the chapters is exactly what you are asking: mathematical preparations.

QM and especially E&M (if you're taking this at the level of Griffith) will be mathematically challenging. In fact, many students could not see the forrest due to the trees, i.e. they lose track of the physics because they get stuck with the math. It is imperative that you arm yourself with the math so that you do not end up learning the math at the same time as you are trying to learn the physics.

.. and for heavens sake, get that book that I highly recommend. You can thank me later when you get your degree... :)

Zz.
 
I'm presently taking E&M (griffiths), Thermodynamics, and Quantum II (shankar) and it's a neverending nightmare of more homework. I wish I had put one off. As classical mechanics is definitely more complicated & mathematically intense than therm, I can honestly recommend waiting on at least one. In fact, taking classical mechanics before E&M is pretty standard (I think) and will give you a solid once over in vector calculus - it gets pretty thick in E&M.

Learning mathematics before physics is definitely a plus, do it if you can.

Hope this helps
 
Last edited:
Advanced calculus is like analysis from what I understand, basically you go back over Calc 1-3 and prove everything and don't bother computing things. It is to calculus what computational linear algebra is to proof based linear algebra. It is a 3 course sequence just like calculus.
 
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...

Similar threads

Back
Top