Theoretical Physics vs Math: Regrets of Scientists

[DavidWhitbeck]

I agree with the above posts as well. Job prospects are wayyyy better with a Math or Stats phD than with a theoretical physics degree. Plus math is just better. I minored in physics and I felt like there was way too much to memorize in terms of concepts/vocab/formulas (and too many damn symbols). With math, all you need are a few definitions, theorems, and you can go from there. If you enjoy Rudin, you are destined to go to Math grad school.

On the contrary there are only a few fundamental principles and equations in physics, and the rest are derivable from them. If you only saw physics as a disconnected mess, then you didn't study long enough to find it's beauty.

 

[ehrenfest]

On the contrary there are only a few fundamental principles and equations in physics, and the rest are derivable from them. If you only saw physics as a disconnected mess, then you didn't study long enough to find it's beauty.

I have heard that before but it really depends on what part of physics you are talking about. That is probably true for classical mechanics but it is definitely NOT true for something like condensed matter physics.

 

[ice109]

On the contrary there are only a few fundamental principles and equations in physics, and the rest are derivable from them. If you only saw physics as a disconnected mess, then you didn't study long enough to find it's beauty.

no i think it's you who hasn't studied for long enough. almost all of physics is phenomenology and by virtue of that a collection of formulas. yes someone did derive them all from one model but practicing physicists and apprentice physicists(students) don't. go ahead i dare you to derive the potential due to a sphere from gauge invariance. hence the wide use of formula sheets in physics classes.

math is no different though as far as that goes. every discipline uses reference books.

the actual difference between math and physics is that there are no contradictory theorems in math. in physics there are regions of accuracy for certain theories and outside those regions they contradict other theories.

the point is that one does not go to school to learn how to solve specific problems so the formulae themselves are irrelevant. one goes to school to learn how to learn effectively and solve general problems. of course one of the most effective problem solving techniques is to read the pertinent literature(look at the formulae).

 

[DavidWhitbeck]

almost all of physics is phenomenology and by virtue of that a collection of formulas.

That's extremely misleading. In theory the phenomenological results could be irreducibly complex, but that's not the case. And I never said one model, I said few.

And in the example that you brought forward to supposedly put me in my place-- what is more elegant than classical electrodynamics? How could you possibly give an example in the most elegant, concise beautiful theory in physics to show irreducible complexity?? Do you realize how absurd that even is!

Maxwell's Equations you use to derive potential due to a sphere, also the equations are manifestly gauge invariant. Two birds, one stone. There, satisfied?

You know, I'm surprised that you have to throw in more wrong headed things while you're at it. Saying that physics is filled with contradictions... it would be a contradiction if quantum mechanics was completely different from classical mechanics. Instead it is a logical extension of the theory, take the classical limit and guess what? you get back the old theory. How is that a contradiction?