State School for Physics or Elite School Humanities

[Gabe123]

Hello Everyone,

This is my first post here, but I've been reading for awhile and I'd like to say thank you for such an informative website.

I'm having a bit of a personal crisis at the moment. In a very short amount of time, about one week, I will have to decide if I would rather attend my cheap local state school to study physics (or something else if I want to change my major later) or an elite institution across the pond in England (Oxbridge,) for Classics. I am currently enrolled at Oxbridge as an undergraduate, and while I enjoy the degree okay, and of course the reputation of the school is fantastic, it is very expensive and a hassle to get all the way out there for school. I am beginning to regret the decision and think that it isn't worth it after all, especially because Classics isn't particularly vocational (I would probably teach), and the degree system in the UK does not allow you to change subjects.

I can afford it without TOO much strain, but it better REALLY be the right decision to go through with it and stay. With a Classics degree from there and the networking and campus recruiting that goes on I would probably have decent odds in the Financial Sector or teaching, but of course I would be closing the door on a career in engineering or science because it would not be worth it to me to start all over again after receiving the classics degree.

This would be my second transfer, and I have previously taken Physics I and II, Calculus I and II, Chemistry I and II and most of my gen-eds. Although I am very much interested in science, I fear I do not have enough experience in programming, research, advanced physics classes, internships or any of the other elements of a scientific career that would really clue me in on to just how much I would really enjoy it, so it could be a massive mistake to jump into this irreversible decision without the info, but I can't really get that info without jumping in, and I'm spending more time and money the longer I wait. I have not alway liked science and math, in fact I didn't like it until I took Physics and Calc, which I found fascinating and got A's in (at college level calc-based physics). I have always been something of a History guy, and I wouldn't mind teaching high-school, which might be all I can do with a physics Bs anyway.


What do you all think, especially about the career prospects of the two options? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers

 

[3.141592]

Hello Gabe123,

May I ask, where would you be looking for work? As I understand it, around 70% of all graduate jobs advertised in the UK do not require a specific subject. I expect that is not nearly such a high figure, if at all, for most engineering and science jobs. So where, and in what, you would like to work might be a relevant factor.

One thing I would say is that Oxford frequently comes out as the top uni in the world, in various tables, whatever their worth. The 'old boy network' might help you out in looking for work ('Oh I see you went to Oxford, oh you were in X college too?!') but I wouldn't give that much weight in your decision. Just something to be aware of - if you are likely to enjoy both physics and classics, and likely to go for a job that is not engineering or science (by sheer weight of numbers there are more non-sci/eng jobs out there), then having 'Oxford' on your degree will - rightly or wrongly - do more for you than 'not-well-known school'.

This is, of course, all my opinion.

 

[Gabe123]

Thanks for the response.

I'm not entirely sure where I will end up working, I really have no idea. That's my main problem, because if I pursue Classics I will exclude myself from science and engineering, which might end up being what I wanted to do after all, but if I leave Oxford I will exclude myself from that Old Boy Network and prestige, which would be advantageous in just about any other career. What do you think? Is the competition for science and engineering jobs so high that its not worth it to try and jump into it from a state school with no guarantee of perfect gpa and great research/intern opportunities? I'm really torn on this one. What's the best way to know if a science/engineer career really is best for me? I would be sacrificing a lot to pursue it.

Thanks again

 

[FalconOne]

The only way to know if science is "for you" is to do a research gig. A lot of students realize that physics really isn't for them after their summer REU.

What I can tell you is this: I was a political science major. I shot to the top and was the state chair of a political organization. I was flown all over the country for speaking engagements. I changed my major to physics - but I did NOT lose those contacts. You don't need to get out of the network just because you don't study with them. Just continue to keep in contact.

 

[Gabe123]

Unfortunately, there's no way I could do a summer REU before making this decision.

Why did you choose to switch from physics to political science, especially if you were so involved in it? Did you lose interest in political science, randomly decide you liked physics better, change because of job prospects or money, or something else entirely? Are the job prospects for a physics BS from a big state school any good?

Unfortunately again, I will almost certainly lose contacts with the few people that I have met at this point in England, and will close all of those doors almost automatically simply by leaving Oxbridge. Oxbridge and the potential for that name on my degree is what opened those doors in the first place. This will be an irreversible decision, and perhaps the right one, so I must be very sure. I am saying Oxbridge instead of one or the other to keep my identity a little more secure.

I'm not sure about the undergrad rank, I couldn't find it, but the grad school rank of my local state school in physics is tied with a few other schools in the low 60s on US news and world report, if that gives you any idea of the prestige and how to help you compare.

An important thing to note; the reason I did not pursue science prior to now instead of going down the Classics route was that, although I knew I loved physics and Calculus, and doing word problems, and the way it kind of all seemed like the secrets of the universe and related so closely to philosophy, I have never enjoyed statistical analysis, lab work, data collection or computer programming, and so I thought that although I enjoy the theoretical side, a career in the sciences was not for me. What do you think of this evaluation? Are those things just something to grind through as an undergraduate, or are they really the crux of not only scientific education but a career in science and engineering. If they are I might very well steer clear of the sciences. All help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks again!

 

[FalconOne]

Why did you choose to switch from physics to political science, especially if you were so involved in it? Did you lose interest in political science, randomly decide you liked physics better, change because of job prospects or money, or something else entirely?

A few personal reasons (I didn't really like having my personal life exposed always) but also because I met with politicians that didn't know much about science. I took a class my freshman year called Climate and Crisis and really liked it, and it made me concerned that politicians didn't really know much about the research they are funding. I plan on getting my PhD in physics, but will most likely go into science policy or lobbying later. Also, I didn't really like taking out loans to get an education that taught me what I could learn by reading Wikipedia or the news. I was able to be successful in politics without the formal degree, and feel as though it's more than possible to do the same in the future.

Are the job prospects for a physics BS from a big state school any good?

Why wouldn't they be? Lab techs are always needed. Most of my friends found easy employment, and we live in rural America (i.e. I'm on dial-up right now). However, they work in labs and make about $30k a year.

Unfortunately again, I will almost certainly lose contacts with the few people that I have met at this point in England, and will close all of those doors almost automatically simply by leaving Oxbridge. Oxbridge and the potential for that name on my degree is what opened those doors in the first place. This will be an irreversible decision, and perhaps the right one, so I must be very sure. I am saying Oxbridge instead of one or the other to keep my identity a little more secure.

Once again, I'm not sure this is necessarily true. I still talk to ambassadors that I met. The governor still knows me by name. A few prominent Congress people recognize me when I see them at events. Professors in particular take stock in the person - I wouldn't be so cynical and think that your professors all think of you as a disposable student. If that is the case, you would lose those contacts simply by graduating, would you not?

I'm not sure about the undergrad rank, I couldn't find it, but the grad school rank of my local state school in physics is tied with a few other schools in the low 60s on US news and world report, if that gives you any idea of the prestige and how to help you compare.

Don't worry about rank. Worry about what you would learn and the research you would be able to do and the relationships you could make with professors. Are you sure that there is no way you could take a semester break to "study abroad" in America taking physics courses?

An important thing to note; the reason I did not pursue science prior to now instead of going down the Classics route was that, although I knew I loved physics and Calculus, and doing word problems, and the way it kind of all seemed like the secrets of the universe and related so closely to philosophy, I have never enjoyed statistical analysis, lab work, data collection or computer programming, and so I thought that although I enjoy the theoretical side, a career in the sciences was not for me. What do you think of this evaluation?

Yikes! You don't like lab or statistical analysis? I don't really see you getting a good job straight out of undergrad if you cut those things out entirely. Plus, I would say that lab was the backbone of my undergraduate career. There aren't a lot word problems in the real world. However, I didn't like lab in high school and ended up loving it in college.

Are those things just something to grind through as an undergraduate, or are they really the crux of not only scientific education but a career in science and engineering. If they are I might very well steer clear of the sciences. All help is greatly appreciated.

You can certainly get a theoretical job if you get the credentials needed (probably a PhD), but I could guarantee you that you would be doing data analysis and complex calculations. But I think that you would have a hard time finding a school that would skimp on such essential skills for your undergraduate.

 

[Gabe123]

It's not so much that I would expect to skimp on those skills as an undergraduate. I can and expect to work my way through those sorts of things in school. I guess my question is, are those things to be worked through, or absorbed as part of an indispensable skill set to be used regularly and repeatedly throughout a career in the sciences? I've done lab work in college some before [this would be my second transfer ):], and I didn't really enjoy it much then either, but I feel like maybe all jobs, careers and majors will have parts I dislike. The question is partly whether or not a science career will be consumed by that sort of thing.

I'm also not necessarily interested in being a lab tech, that seems somewhat tedious (but I don't really know). And 30k a year isn't really any better than my Classics options, but that's far from my primary motivation. But, I'm not sure what else I would do with a physics degree after getting my Bs except teach, go on to a master/phd in physics or go to engineering grad school, which I understand would require quite a few more undergraduate engineering classes, and I don't think I'm interested in engineering, and if I was it would save time and money to just do engineering now I guess. Perhaps I would be better off getting the degree in Classics and teaching high school or going into whatever else besides science. I guess I just don't want to be in a position where I always wonder.

Maybe if you could tell me what sort of person you are and what the people you work with are like and, by extension, what sort of person would relish a career in the sciences above all else, and love going to work everyday. This is the most important thing for me. I may be somewhat glorifying a scientific job though, having watched too much Cosmos and not done enough actual physics grunt work.

I have access to the American Institute of Physics database, do you think that there is something on there I could look over, like old undergrad physics research, that would give me a really good idea of where I'm headed?

Thanks again for the help

 

[Gabe123]

A few more things:

I would almost certainly not maintain those contacts in Englad because I have simply not been there for long enough, I only just started this fall. And if I were to study abroad from Oxford it would have to be in the same coursework, and I don't think Classics students can do that regardless.

And some more somewhat abstract questions: How satisfied are you by your physics education? I don't know if you are interested in philosophy at all, but have you considered physics to be a comforting, informing and or mind-expanding way to view the world around you that truly changes your life? Or is it just kind of more of the same but more in depth once you go beyond general physics I and II? This decision is partially motivated by a strong desire to understand the workings of the natural world from a philosophical perspective, as well as the desire to understand science and technology from a practical perspective on our world which is ever increasingly dominated by science and the relative few who truly understand it. Do you think I can fulfill these ambitions with physics, or do you think I will walk away disappointed?

 

[FalconOne]

It's not so much that I would expect to skimp on those skills as an undergraduate. I can and expect to work my way through those sorts of things in school. I guess my question is, are those things to be worked through, or absorbed as part of an indispensable skill set to be used regularly and repeatedly throughout a career in the sciences? I've done lab work in college some before [this would be my second transfer ):], and I didn't really enjoy it much then either, but I feel like maybe all jobs, careers and majors will have parts I dislike. The question is partly whether or not a science career will be consumed by that sort of thing.

It's in my opinion that you're going to be hard-pressed to find a job with an undergraduate degree that doesn't include lab. I know that my research basically took up all my time. If I didn't love it, I would probably have been suicidal.

I'm also not necessarily interested in being a lab tech, that seems somewhat tedious (but I don't really know).

It can be, depending on your placement.

And 30k a year isn't really any better than my Classics options, but that's far from my primary motivation.

Good. It is horribly depressing to see people in science careers motivated by money. The long hours hardly make it worth it.

But, I'm not sure what else I would do with a physics degree after getting my Bs except teach, go on to a master/phd in physics or go to engineering grad school, which I understand would require quite a few more undergraduate engineering classes, and I don't think I'm interested in engineering, and if I was it would save time and money to just do engineering now I guess.

Umm, I really don't think engineering is for you from what you describe. ;-)

I think you should go to a few conferences and see if anything doesn't bore you to death. That might be a good gauge? Make sure that the conferences are diverse though - a particle conference would make me want to swallow glass. Have you considered being a mathematician who also studies physics?

Perhaps I would be better off getting the degree in Classics and teaching high school or going into whatever else besides science. I guess I just don't want to be in a position where I always wonder.

Where would you be planning to teach?

The rest of this will be in another response.

 

[FalconOne]

Maybe if you could tell me what sort of person you are and what the people you work with are like and, by extension, what sort of person would relish a career in the sciences above all else, and love going to work everyday.

Well, I am a 23 year old female who is an Army officer. I don't really care about how I look and I don't really mind not watching TV or going out to the bars. I really care about my studies. Throughout my physics education, I only ordered about 5 pizzas and spent only about $100 on alcohol. Instead, I'm sort of stereotypical and play Settlers of Catan, Magic, or other similar games in the physics lounge. However, I had lots of extra-curricular activities and really enjoyed college.

A typical school day for me started at 6 AM. I would work out until 7 AM. I would take a shower and get ready, going to school by 7:30 AM. I would work on homework until 9 AM and would go to work tutoring math students. From this, I would go from class from 10-noon. At noon, I had a lunch break. I brought lunch, and work work on more homework. Then, from 1-4, I had class again. I would take a break from 4-6 for dinner and whatnot. Then, I would either work in lab/do homework from 6-10 PM or I would go to work for another two hours, depending on what day it was. During my advanced lab year, I spent more time in lab. Sometimes, I would work until 11PM or midnight. On weekends, I would come in for about 8 hours a day unless I had drill. This year, I didn't have advanced lab - I just had my own independent research. I ended up spending about 10 hours a week in lab this year, as opposed to 20+.

This summer, I worked at a summer REU. While some of my friends there only worked for about 8 hours a day, I worked about 12 hours every day, unless I wanted to go biking. I did take weekends off, however. But, I got my project done and some of it's on its way to getting published. My advisor was pushy too as he had me come in on July 4th.

But the thing is, I don't really get tired of it. I feel like I'm always "catching up" and striving to understand more or be better. No matter what my grade is, I don't really feel like I'm good enough - even with a BS in physics, I refuse to call myself a "physicist". I doubt I even will if/when I get a doctorate! It gets kind of bad though, because I get a little disillusioned because I think I'm worse than I actually am. I'm strongly turned off by people that are very full of themselves due to my Army training, so I think that this that "issue" comes from that. You certainly can get by without working as much as I did, but I have dyslexia and I had to compete for a good work position for the Army, so I had motivation to maintain a 4.0.

I don't think there is anyone personality "type" that fit the bill for succeeding in the science field.

This is the most important thing for me. I may be somewhat glorifying a scientific job though, having watched too much Cosmos and not done enough actual physics grunt work.

You wouldn't BELIEVE how common that is! In reality, I spent my birthday, my Halloween, my Thanksgiving... soldering wires and characterizing thin films. It's not particularly glamorous.

I have access to the American Institute of Physics database, do you think that there is something on there I could look over, like old undergrad physics research, that would give me a really good idea of where I'm headed?

Absolutely! I think that SPS would be a good place too. If you would like, I could also send you my lab formals.

 

[Gabe123]

You sound a lot like me in many ways. I am similarly dedicated to my studies, and have always had a passion for my school work, but I cannot be sure if that passion would be fueled by upper level lab work. I felt physics was a good way to put off making any hard and fast career decisions, it being the theoretical foundation of science and therefore a good base for anything, but also not really directly applicable from the BS level in too many cases.

Out of curiosity, will you become/are you an army scientist then?

Sending those lab formals would be appreciated, if it's not too much hassle.

Thanks so much for the quick and thorough responses!

 

[Gabe123]

I would be planning to teach anywhere I could find a job, probably at first anyway. It doesn't have crazy good pay, but the benefits and 15 weeks vacation would provide me with the lifestyle I enjoy (i.e. plenty of time to think, read and study on my own).

 

[FalconOne]

You sound a lot like me in many ways. I am similarly dedicated to my studies, and have always had a passion for my school work, but I cannot be sure if that passion would be fueled by upper level lab work.

As my favorite professor would say, "then graduate school isn't for you."

I felt physics was a good way to put off making any hard and fast career decisions, it being the theoretical foundation of science and therefore a good base for anything, but also not really directly applicable from the BS level in too many cases.

Funny. That's what I've always heard about the Classics.

Out of curiosity, will you become/are you an army scientist then?

Absolutely not if I have any control of what I do.

Sending those lab formals would be appreciated, if it's not too much hassle.

Please PM me.

I would be planning to teach anywhere I could find a job, probably at first anyway. It doesn't have crazy good pay, but the benefits and 15 weeks vacation would provide me with the lifestyle I enjoy (i.e. plenty of time to think, read and study on my own).

Everyone gets stuck in the "I can only teach" mode. I don't get it. =P

 

[Gabe123]

Ah, it would really be a killer if graduate school isn't for me, because that was my plan from a physics BS. But if graduate school is truly not for me then I need to seriously rethink this decision, and fast. Whats the best way to VERY quickly get an idea of physics graduate school life, work, lab time, and job prospects?

Army Scientist that bad huh?

Yeah, teaching would be a fine job I think, maybe not even a fall back, but actually a top choice.

PM on on the way once I figure it out.

 

[FalconOne]

You seriously need to do a research gig. Ask if you can "study abroad" someplace and try doing research at an institution for a semester and come back.

 

[Gabe123]

Unfortunately, study abroad, especially in a different subject, is not really an option. YOu come to Oxbridge to study one thing and one thing only, its just the uk system. I could potentially finish out the year at Oxbridge before transferring, although that would put me more than a year behind due to available class and necessary prereqs in physics, and try and tag along some research project this summer, but I don't know what/who would let me into do that. Is there a good way to get a quick peek at some ongoing research at my local state university do you think? Maybe I would have to answer that but I'm not sure where I'd just walk in.

 

[Mépris]

Have you tried coding? Maybe you'll like it.

FalconOne, why would "grad school not be for him/her" if he/she is not particularly keen on lab work? What about computational or theoretical work?

 

[Rika]

Research is mundane and boring. If OP doesn't like lab work, calculations and programming there is no way he will enjoy science. After all grad school and science job is all about lab work, programming and calculations.

I think OP should read some pop-sci books and do "science for humanities students"' courses. This is all what is interesting about science without boring stuff to do.

 

[Gabe123]

I have tried coding in a basic IT class that involved some java, coding helper type software, and making your own website. I did not enjoy any of it.I was also terrible at it and that class was my worst grade that semester even though it should have probably been my easiest class.

If I should choose not to go into science or engineering as a field, and not go on to grad school, is there any point in an undergraduate physics degree other than personal fulfillment? And those of you out there with a philosophical bent towards science, did you find physics classes in the upper division courses to be somehow gratifying or mind expanding in the same way that general physics and calculus are when first taken? If so, which parts of which classes?

I should probably do the pop-sci books thing, and I do enjoy serious science fiction as well, particularly Isaac Asimov, but it may be a mistake to pursue science based off these interests and an interest in calc and physics alone.

In essence, I like doing book problems and the gratification that comes with getting the answer right, but I have little to no interest in just about anything that goes on in the lab. What do you make of that?

 

[FalconOne]

Have you tried coding? Maybe you'll like it.

FalconOne, why would "grad school not be for him/her" if he/she is not particularly keen on lab work? What about computational or theoretical work?

OP said earlier that he really doesn't like computation or data analysis either and also ruled out computer science - so I assumed that included coding.

I think OP should read some pop-sci books and do "science for humanities students"' courses. This is all what is interesting about science without boring stuff to do.

I couldn't agree more. Or if his math skills permits, he could easily take an upper level "for fun". That's what my math professor did with E&M - and it made him awesome to work with.

I have tried coding in a basic IT class that involved some java, coding helper type software, and making your own website. I did not enjoy any of it.I was also terrible at it and that class was my worst grade that semester even though it should have probably been my easiest class.

Hmm, I don't have knowledge of that. I learned C programming and my professor made us basically make "sledgehammer" programs so that we could really learn how to get a programming language to at least WORK, even if it isn't beautiful. That class was HARD, but I liked it a lot because of its approach.

If I should choose not to go into science or engineering as a field, and not go on to grad school, is there any point in an undergraduate physics degree other than personal fulfillment?

I know people interested in law school do better on their tests if they have physics degrees. You can take that for what it's worth. My friend also ended up going to medical school with his physics degree.

And those of you out there with a philosophical bent towards science, did you find physics classes in the upper division courses to be somehow gratifying or mind expanding in the same way that general physics and calculus are when first taken? If so, which parts of which classes?

Quantum mechanics really messed with me, haha. But seriously, my math professor took any non-lab course that was math intensive and it was awesome for him and it made him a better teacher. Classical mechanics, electricity and magnetism, optics (if there's no lab), acoustics (take that lab, lol, it's fun), nuclear and particle, condensed matter physics, and thermodynamics are all classes you might enjoy. But some of them are VERY math intensive.

I should probably do the pop-sci books thing, and I do enjoy serious science fiction as well, particularly Isaac Asimov, but it may be a mistake to pursue science based off these interests and an interest in calc and physics alone.

I can promise you that I have not once done anything as cool as listed in the pop-sci books. But I can say that those interests can help you see the "big picture". At least you like math?

In essence, I like doing book problems and the gratification that comes with getting the answer right, but I have little to no interest in just about anything that goes on in the lab. What do you make of that?

I don't really know if book problems come very often in the real world. After a while, you start making a calculation for a problem you have, and you have no idea whether or not you are even close to being right. Then you take that and send it off to the experimental physicists to *do* that work. If you don't care what going on in lab, I'm going to be angry at you because you might not care about what you're sending OFF to lab. See what I'm saying? Even if it doesn't personally affect what you're doing, it'll still affect lab work.

 

[Gabe123]

I do like math and am fairly keen at it, especially calculus, but I'm certainly no prodigy. I received A's in Calculus I and II, if that means anything. So I think math intensive is okay.

Unfortunately, I can't take upper level physics or math classes for fun. if I stay at Oxbridge I am locked into Classics (Latin, Ancient Greek, History, Philosophy [of any era, not just ancient], archaeology and art history). It's a nice variety of humanities that would be a good preparation for life outside of science/engineering, but once again, that may be what I want.

I'm not really interested in Law School or Medical School, the only profession that requires a degree that appeals to me is science, so if not that then no professional school probably.

I see the connection between the Lab and Theoretical work, and I wouldn't disrespect that in a professional environment, I just wouldn't be interested in being in the lab myself.

What are the odds of someone moving into theoretical physics/math successfully anyway? Are they all 145 plus IQ's who've loved science and math since childhood, who live and breath calculus, and even then don't often find a good job in their field?

 

[FalconOne]

Unfortunately, study abroad, especially in a different subject, is not really an option. YOu come to Oxbridge to study one thing and one thing only, its just the uk system.

Have you actually asked if you can take a semester off? I know for a FACT my friend at Oxford did it.

I do like math and am fairly keen at it, especially calculus, but I'm certainly no prodigy. I received A's in Calculus I and II, if that means anything. So I think math intensive is okay.

Differential equations or calc III? Linear algebra? Discrete?

What are the odds of someone moving into theoretical physics/math successfully anyway? Are they all 145 plus IQ's who've loved science and math since childhood, who live and breath calculus, and even then don't often find a good job in their field?

That depends on the individual. Work ethic can take you a long way. I switched from political science and did fine.

 

[Gabe123]

According to the local state school I may attend the Calc II I already did is more like their Calc III, so I've already done most of their Calc, but they will still make me retake Calc II and at least have to do a test to validate Calc III, if not retake it, just because of the content difference. Also, my earlier school puts people straight into upper division physics after what they called Math Modelling, Statistics, Calc I and II, and with a mathematical physics class (which I didn't take), so maybe they somehow cram it all into those. Looking at linear Algebra, multivariable, partial diff equations and discrete on the internet rings some bells so I think that's maybe what they did there.

I have not requested the semester off yet (its actually a trimester system, so I would request the next two Trimesters off and then pick it back up perhaps a year from now, I'm not sure), although that is an option I think.

 

[FalconOne]

Well, I'm done helping you. Best of luck.

 

[Gabe123]

Okay, thanks for all the help! much appreciated :)

 

[3.141592]

Hi Gabe123,

I saw you are interested in philosophy, and the intersection of philosophy and science. My undergrad and master's are in philosophy, both from the UK. I am also interested in science from a philosophical perspective. I am now approaching completing 1/3 of a mathematics and statistics undergraduate.

Have you considered sticking with Classics, reading popular science (as suggested) and taking philosophy of mathematics and philosophy of physics modules at Oxbridge? I am reasonably confident both will offer at least one of these and both will have very, very good philosophers in them. The best philosophers of mathematics/physics often have some uni-level maths/physics behind them. Maybe throw in some mathematical logic if your free credits allow, given your interest in/aptitude for textbook mathematics problems. No data collection, stat analysis or programming there!

As someone with a humanities under/postgrad education, philosophically interested in science, now trying to get that background through study, my remarks might be a little relevant to your position, hopefully anyway. I won't say much about jobs as I don't have facts to hand.

You can do any subject on your own to some extent. I think it is easier to wander off track in philosophy this way. There are no answers at the back of the book to let you know you're heading down a dead-end. You will know the importance of many minds arguing together to let you know when you are wrong, from your time in Classics.

I too enjoy textbook maths problems and get a lot out of getting the right answer. But I was perfectly happy doing formal logic proofs out of a book. I have chosen this degree (as opposed to studying on my own) as I want better job prospects.

I think at a very high theoretical level, physics and philosophy are not so far apart. A friend from Europe with a master's in physics was on my philosophy MA. He said his work in physics led him to it. Google's Director of Engineering gave a similar speech about humanities in general and technology.

If you remain in the UK, and have a spare £1 250 lying around, have you looked at the Open University? Try some physics modules there. It is a distance-learning university designed for part-timers who cannot necessarily get to a fixed location to study. Something like this, alongside Oxbridge study? http://www3.open.ac.uk/study/undergraduate/course/s207.htm

Lastly, I know for my philosophy MA, any undergrad degree was ok, so long as one could evidence an interest in, and aptitude for, philosophy. Usually by an essay. I expect this is not the same for postgrad physics. You might keep more doors open re. postgrad study, by going for physics and doing serious philosophical study on the side. If you're not interested in postgrad study this probably isn't relevant.

 

[Bipolarity]

Hello Everyone,

This is my first post here, but I've been reading for awhile and I'd like to say thank you for such an informative website.

I'm having a bit of a personal crisis at the moment. In a very short amount of time, about one week, I will have to decide if I would rather attend my cheap local state school to study physics (or something else if I want to change my major later) or an elite institution across the pond in England (Oxbridge,) for Classics. I am currently enrolled at Oxbridge as an undergraduate, and while I enjoy the degree okay, and of course the reputation of the school is fantastic, it is very expensive and a hassle to get all the way out there for school. I am beginning to regret the decision and think that it isn't worth it after all, especially because Classics isn't particularly vocational (I would probably teach), and the degree system in the UK does not allow you to change subjects.

I can afford it without TOO much strain, but it better REALLY be the right decision to go through with it and stay. With a Classics degree from there and the networking and campus recruiting that goes on I would probably have decent odds in the Financial Sector or teaching, but of course I would be closing the door on a career in engineering or science because it would not be worth it to me to start all over again after receiving the classics degree.

This would be my second transfer, and I have previously taken Physics I and II, Calculus I and II, Chemistry I and II and most of my gen-eds. Although I am very much interested in science, I fear I do not have enough experience in programming, research, advanced physics classes, internships or any of the other elements of a scientific career that would really clue me in on to just how much I would really enjoy it, so it could be a massive mistake to jump into this irreversible decision without the info, but I can't really get that info without jumping in, and I'm spending more time and money the longer I wait. I have not alway liked science and math, in fact I didn't like it until I took Physics and Calc, which I found fascinating and got A's in (at college level calc-based physics). I have always been something of a History guy, and I wouldn't mind teaching high-school, which might be all I can do with a physics Bs anyway. What do you all think, especially about the career prospects of the two options? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers

Does classics iclude economics? I know that in Cambridge, a PPE track is offered which includes Politics, Philosophy and Economics. Is that included in Oxford?

I see your interests are in physics, but are you sure that they are not in the classics? This is an important question, because the fact you like physcs is not equivalent to the fact that you dislike everything else. If you can enjoy the classics just as much you would physics, there is little use of transferring out.

More importantly, what specifically do you like about physics? When I first showed interest in physics, it was in the fact that mathematics could be applied to the real world, but this extends to ecoomics as well, which is certainly within the intersection of the classics as well as applied mathematics. So if economics is included in the classics track at Oxford, do consider it. Now I can safely say I find economics far more interesting than physics :D

And how do you like stuff such as philosophy, mythology, and Greek and Latin? Do you appreciate Homer, Virgil etc.? IIRC, these form a large component of the classics.

BiP

 

[Gabe123]

"Have you considered sticking with Classics, reading popular science (as suggested) and taking philosophy of mathematics and philosophy of physics modules at Oxbridge?"

Yes! Thoroughly, I go to every philosophy and physics society lecture I can at Oxbridge, and they do offer philosophy modules, including phil of physics and math, during a classics degree.

"You can do any subject on your own to some extent." this is an excellent point and one I have considered. I've looked at quite a few websites with lists of books and guides for how to teach yourself physics. The problem would be finding the time, energy, and discipline to do that on my own, outside of a course with an instructors guidance, something which is quite difficult, but certainly not impossible, in math and science.

"I have chosen this degree (as opposed to studying on my own) as I want better job prospects."
This is a serious worry for me, and from a finances/time perspective it probably would not make sense for me to go back and do math or science at he undergrad level like you are doing, after I complete a degree in the humanities at Oxford.

"I think at a very high theoretical level, physics and philosophy are not so far apart. A friend from Europe with a master's in physics was on my philosophy MA. He said his work in physics led him to it. Google's Director of Engineering gave a similar speech about humanities in general and technology."
This is certainly very relevant, but would probably push me more towards understanding the science first, and then moving into philosophy more as I got into the upper division mathematics and physics. But maybe not, I can't be sure without more info.

I'll check out that study abroad

"Lastly, I know for my philosophy MA, any undergrad degree was ok, so long as one could evidence an interest in, and aptitude for, philosophy. Usually by an essay. I expect this is not the same for postgrad physics. You might keep more doors open re. postgrad study, by going for physics and doing serious philosophical study on the side. If you're not interested in postgrad study this probably isn't relevant."
That final point is the number one thing pushing me towards physics at the undergrad, which is that it, or something like it, is required for postgrad study in a STEM area. If I stayed in Classics, I would have to go all the way back. But, being uninterested in the lab/statistics side of things, engineering/science postgrad for me is probably not in the bag, in which case the physics undergrad would be also entirely for personal fulfillment purposes (and because its cheaper and quicker as of right now).

The Oxbridge I attend (remember I haven't revealed which one for anonymity purposes) does offer PPE, but neither that nor economics is part of my course.

"I see your interests are in physics, but are you sure that they are not in the classics? This is an important question, because the fact you like physcs is not equivalent to the fact that you dislike everything else. If you can enjoy the classics just as much you would physics, there is little use of transferring out."
This is an excellent question, because I do have serious interest in Classics, especially History and Latin. Thats part of why this is so hard. I could enjoy Classics as much, I just need to get over the constant thinking about how I could be studying physics, but that's just part of growing up I suppose, choosing one thing to the exclusion of others at certain points.

I also enjoy the part about physics being math applied to real world problems, but econ, or any other kind of applied math, is not part of a Classics degree. Although, many Classicists do go on to become bankers, stockbrokers etc...so I guess they are able to pickup that sort of thing on the job.

"And how do you like stuff such as philosophy, mythology, and Greek and Latin? Do you appreciate Homer, Virgil etc.?"
I love them. Where I'm torn though is whether or not it makes sense to pursue them as my academic degree at an expensive (but prestigious) school that is far away, instead of relegating them to hobby status.

As for a more general question: Which option would you all consider to be the better choice for a happy and fulfilling life and career? The Oxford experience and opportunity is much more than just the course, so I would be sacrificing a lot to leave there, and I just can't be sure which should carry the greater weight in my decision: Course content or the rest of the college experience?

 

[Bipolarity]

Construct a decision matrix, using appropriate weights. Only you can do this, because only you know which aspects of either school are more valuable to you.

Based on what I am learning about you, the Oxford option seems to be the better one, while supplementing your interests with books on physics etc. But ask yourself how much you like and know about physics.

But tell us more about Oxford's classics track; exactly what does it offer and more importantly, what doesn't it cover that you would like covered (i.e. physics??).

Consider what you want your job to be. Factor as much as you can into the matrix. Take notes. Don't make a decision without using the best of your ability to account for as much information as possible. It's a big big decision after all. Don't spend the world on this decision, but don't neglect it either. The decision making process should be spontaneous and organized.

Ask yourself what is the "safer" option and what is the "lottery" option here based on your instincts? What is the option that is in your mind based on images of physicists that are serving a representative heuristic? What is the option that you feel is based more on your "whims" and are subject to marked change? If it turns out that your decision was wrong, will you be able to live with it? What, if so, will be the consequences of this?

BiP

 

[Gabe123]

The Oxford option allows for study of latin, greek, literature, philosophy, history, archaeology and linguistics, which are all awesome, and would probably be the finest foundation in the humanities in the world, but which I feel perhaps I should relegate to the hobby/extra electives area of my life while devoting my college career to a degree which qualifies me for something. It does not cover math or physics outside of perhaps one or two classes ,or "modules", on philosophy of physics or math.

I have no idea what I want my job to be

The heuristic in my mind on the physicist track is simply one of pursuing how things work and scientific knowledge mostly for its own sake with few career ambitions in science or engineering. So perhaps its a fools errand I'm on in pursuing this.

The state school decision is the one based more on a whim, relatively anyway, because I have always loved the humanities and only began to turn a little towards science senior year of high school.

If the decision were wrong it would be very difficult to live with, knowing that I may have squandered everything I did working so hard to get here. The consequences could be a substantially altered life trajectory for the worse. :(

 

[chill_factor]

stay at Oxford. I'm telling you something you've been told before: You have a once in a lifetime opportunity. Do not waste it for romantic pursuit of physics. Physics is not romantic or philosophical. It is like agriculture (backbreaking work), except you can't eat the stuff you produce.

If you really want to do science that directly helps people, mechanical engineering or biomedical engineering is likely better than physics.

 

[Bipolarity]

Stay with Oxford if the decision is between the classics and physics. Physics doesn't really qualify someone to work in industry, certainly not just with a bachelor's degree. Industry level design work is usually the domain of engineers (at least in most developed countries).

As you study in Oxford, you may at some point realize that you need to pick up *certain* skills that the classics does not provide you with. That's okay. You can self-learn those skills easily (such as programming, statistics, economics, accounting etc.) For someone with strong analytical abilities and initiative, it is generally very easy to pick those things up independently. The only job sector that will likely be closed to you after you graduate is engineering, since engineering jobs usually always require an engineering degree. Everything else is still open provided you pick up the necessary skills.

You could also be a lawyer, since classics seem to be set up for law, but that's quite expensive and I don't know how it works in the UK. In the US, people go to law school after they graduate with their bachelors.

How much do you like mathematics? It is the staple diet of physicists and engineers, and almost anyone with professional interest in STEM.

BiP

 

[3.141592]

Maybe you're just getting cold feet and wanting someone to tell you that you're doing the right thing staying the course. I don't mean to trivialise your anguish (been there). I don't doubt your sincerity in liking physics. But you seem to have more passion for Classics, and have done for years, and are currently in perhaps the best place in the universe (whoever else is out there, I doubt they're studying Homer!) for Classics, and - rightly or wrongly - the place often thought of as the best university in the world. Whatever that is worth.

The humanities are a fine education. Classics is a fine degree. Oxford is a fine uni. Spending a few years of your life studying something you love under experts, surrounded by others who share your passion, is a tremendous experience. I don't know if I would throw that away on a last-minute panic about another interest, because you may or may not want a physics-related job down the line.

Remember: you do not need to wait for the permission of a university to learn something! There is a wealth of websites, youtube documentaries, tv shows, popular science books, science publications, journals, professional blogs, forums, textbooks, free online courses, astronomy clubs etc. out there that can, and probably will, more than satisfy your interest in physics.

P.S. Sorry, 'Oxbridge', not Oxford. But I think my point(s) still stand.

 

[Gabe123]

Thank you for the help and advice everyone, especially FalconOne. I truly appreciate your time and sincerity. I have chosen to stay at 'Oxbridge' and not pursue physics, which I think, due in no small part to you all, is the right decision.

Thanks Again,

Gabe