Thinking about takeing physics in university but have a few questions

[Green Zach]

So here's the deal. Right now i am a high school student (age 17) and i am going off to uni in about a year and i really like physics. i want to take physics only in undergrad thou if i do end up taking it because i want to get to med school after 4 years.

so here are my questions...

How hard is undergrad physics compared to other undergrad science programs (only sciences! i think all of us on this forum can agree that artsy courses are not as interesting as science courses.. thou i do like art and i do like drawing but... ok I'm guessing your smart enough to get the point behind this statement by now lol)

How smart do you need to be to do well in uni level physics? (i know I'm smart... er than the average person. i am first in all my science classes and have an iQ in the 140 range but how smart is the average uni level physics student as far as iQ goes? and i want to retake the iQ test because last time i took it was a couple of years ago so does anyone know of a legit online one i can take? i know online iQ tests are usually BS but I'd image that some are less BS than others...)

Would physics be good to take before medical school?


My biggest concern is that i won't be able to get high enough marks to get into medical school if i take physics for undergrad. I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to compete with the geniuses taking physics so... i want to retake an iQ test as i said earlyer so please if you know any semi accurate ones online then let me know even thou last time i took a legit one i scored in the 140's. And what is the average iQ of a uni physics student so i can compare.

any comments will be greatly appreciated

 

[glueball8]

IQ doesn't matter at all... Feynman has a 123 IQ, I sure there's a million pple who have a higher IQ...

 

[rootX]

It's pretty high I think. (there's a thread in General discussion about IQs if you want to see how much people here have; search it)
It would help you far sure. You wouldn't need to do that too much work;
but if you rely only on your IQ then you would barely pass ;)

 

[Green Zach]

IQ doesn't matter at all... Feynman has a 123 IQ, I sure there's a million pple who have a higher IQ...

Thats true... i would rather have some rough idea of my intelegence even if its unrelyable in some cases. i was actualy watching a thing not that long ago on someone who was blind and an artists. its unusual and dosent make too much sense but he was actualy really good.

 

[Green Zach]

It's pretty high I think. (there's a thread in General discussion about IQs if you want to see how much people here have; search it)
It would help you far sure. You wouldn't need to do that too much work;
but if you rely only on your IQ then you would barely pass ;)

nah man I'm a prity hard worker. i don't need to work as hard to get strait A's as the average str8 A students that i compete with do thou

 

[rootX]

nah man I'm a prity hard worker. i don't need to work as hard to get strait A's as the average str8 A students that i compete with do thou

that's the only thing you need

I know my friend screwed because he relied too much on his brain powers lol; but he still had 90% average

 

[Green Zach]

that's the only thing you need

I know my friend screwed because he relied too much on his brain powers lol; but he still had 90% average

the problem is that hard work can only take you so far... you still need to be at liest a bit smart i am sure

 

[Green Zach]

oh that's *least* by the way... I'm sure u could figure that one out on your own thou

 

[glueball8]

Well you can't be hmm have a IQ (w/e that means) of 10. But if your average and work hard then you'll be fine. Isn't 140 quite high? since you beat feynman.. that doesn't mean your more of a genius than him of course...

 

[will.c]

oh that's *least* by the way... I'm sure u could figure that one out on your own thou

Of all the interesting spelling choices you've made thus far, that's the one you choose to correct?

 

[The|M|onster]

I think I finally understand why Feynman thought IQ tests were bs.

 

[will.c]

Because most "geniuses" would barely have been able to have a cup of coffee with him without making fools of themselves?

 

[TMFKAN64]

the problem is that hard work can only take you so far... you still need to be at liest a bit smart i am sure

Actually, no, success is almost all hard work.

Unless by "a bit smart" you mean "not mentally disabled". Then yes, you need to be a bit smart. Beyond that, it's all work.

 

[Johannes]

I would not say that, I am sure there is also a strong component of talent there, as well. It is just much easier for some people so solve complex problems. Fortunately we tend to like what we are good at, so if someone is interested in physics, it is much likely that he brings the "hardware basics". From what I have heard from many Professors ( in Germany though, where less than 50 % make it through the first few semesters) , most students quit because they are just not willing to put up with the workload. It surprisingly often hits the talented students who were used to never study for science classes at school and thought it was going to be the same in college.

Talking about Feynman, this is a bit off topic, but it seems that in popular culture, where we are constantly searching for superhuman heroes, the roles of the genius has become much overrated. Sure, people like Feynman, or other "brain beasts" like Einstein, Gödel, Turing had remarkable talent, but they were all also really hard workers. Considering it also a talent to be able to handle hours and hours of studying almost every day for years apparently does not fit in our time.

 

[The|M|onster]

Because most "geniuses" would barely have been able to have a cup of coffee with him without making fools of themselves?

aptly put.

Considering it also a talent to be able to handle hours and hours of studying almost every day for years apparently does not fit in our time.

I definitely agree with that. More and more, I notice my classmates bragging about how much they didn't have to study to pass a class, rather than how much they did.

 

[clope023]

nah man I'm a prity hard worker. i don't need to work as hard to get strait A's as the average str8 A students that i compete with do thou

you will :)

I know plenty of people with this attitude out of high school, ie they get A's without trying but they tend to get a rude awakening in college at least at some point in undergrad when the teachers actually force you to work, they don't like it lol, but if you're not afraid of hard work and a huge coffee bill it's worth it I think.

 

[Howers]

Having a high IQ really helps. How can anyone claim it doesn't? Just like height helps in sports, and appearance helps in entertainment. Feymann's IQ was "only" in the 120 range? Thats ~94th percentile. Hardly low. Obviously you will have to put in hard work to succeed at anything. But don't tell me you can get a mentally disabled retard with an IQ of 70 and tell him he can learn modern optics if he puts in the time.

A high IQ basically improves short term/working memory. So when reading a text, you can keep track of things better and won't need to re-read sections or refer back to pages. It also means you can absorb more from lectures, and get work done faster. It helps with efficiency most among other things. Alternatively, I've heard its harder for high IQ individuals to keep interest in anything for too long. They like to wander around a lot of different subjects. But once they get themselves together, they will outperform the class.

As for OP, I really doubt your IQ is 140... just by judging subtle things like your vocabulary, etc. I read in an article that 80% of people think their IQ is above 120... thanks in part to "feel good online tests". The closest thing to a real IQ test I've found is this, so you can prove me wrong:

http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf



Fortunately college is geared for the average person, otherwise they would not be in business. So aslong as your not disabled, you can succeed. Math is probably the hardest undergrad degree, and I'd place physics in second place. I wouldn't recommend it as a specialist degree, namely because your grades would be lower and it would not prepare you for medicine or the MCAT. You can for instance major or minor in physics, and take more chemistry/biology, which are more suited for your career goal. Take some arts courses like philosophy to make sure you can write good.

An A in high school means close to nothing. And do not think you can coast by with no effort. Even if your IQ were 200.

 

[glueball8]

Like I know pple who get 96-97% and some of them aren't smart. And then pple just say they aren't smart, but I think knowing to study is smart...

 

[Green Zach]

well i mean... if i was really smart in english i would study that. if i was really logical then i would take physics. if i was only more logical than i was good at language then i would take science but maybe not physics because its seen as beeing one of the harder sciences. I'm not saying IQ necesairly means anything... but usualy you can get a general idea if someone is smart or not even if its not compleatly accurate. i would be quite surprised to see someone studying physics that had an IQ of 90 even thou 90 is in the average range (although on the lower end of average) where someone with an IQ that feynman has, although it is not technicaly genius, would indicate that they are at least over average therefore possibaly much smarter than his IQ score could indicate. usualy IQ is at least a little significant thou, the deal with feynman seems to be unique becase the name keeps showing up as an example of how the IQ score of a person may not actualy reflect their intelegence. its unique because it isn't average therefore what is average would be that IQ scores are at least a bit of an indicator which is why i am interested. by the way did u know that the average IQ of a medical student is 110? that's not even above average! but i guess that sort of shows that hard work does play a major role

 

[Vid]

IQ is complete BS, in my opinion.

 

[AzonicZeniths]

I took that test that Howers put on, I got 112. But i have taken many and my scores have ranged from 109 to 142, so...I think I might be with Vid on this one.

Originally posted by Vid
IQ is complete BS, in my opinion.

 

[Shackleford]

I took that test that Howers put on, I got 112. But i have taken many and my scores have ranged from 109 to 142, so...I think I might be with Vid on this one.

It's after midnight, I had to pee pretty badly while taking the test, I only got to 34, I believe, and I'm talking to someone on AIM. I got a stupid 110. I'll take it again after I relieve myself.

 

[Lamoid]

I don't know how people expect a test to quantify intelligence which is such an abstract thing. I can't remember who said it but IQ tests are very useful for determining who is good at taking IQ tests.

 

[Howers]

It's after midnight, I had to pee pretty badly while taking the test, I only got to 34, I believe, and I'm talking to someone on AIM. I got a stupid 110. I'll take it again after I relieve myself.

Re-taking IQ tests is equivalent to re-taking a course. Its the first time that counts. Any re-attempt is basically a waste of time.

well i mean... if i was really smart in english i would study that. if i was really logical then i would take physics. if i was only more logical than i was good at language then i would take science but maybe not physics because its seen as beeing one of the harder sciences. I'm not saying IQ necesairly means anything... but usualy you can get a general idea if someone is smart or not even if its not compleatly accurate. i would be quite surprised to see someone studying physics that had an IQ of 90 even thou 90 is in the average range (although on the lower end of average) where someone with an IQ that feynman has, although it is not technicaly genius, would indicate that they are at least over average therefore possibaly much smarter than his IQ score could indicate. usualy IQ is at least a little significant thou, the deal with feynman seems to be unique becase the name keeps showing up as an example of how the IQ score of a person may not actualy reflect their intelegence. its unique because it isn't average therefore what is average would be that IQ scores are at least a bit of an indicator which is why i am interested. by the way did u know that the average IQ of a medical student is 110? that's not even above average! but i guess that sort of shows that hard work does play a major role

actually, i heard med students were closer to 120-130. and again, feymann's iq was not low. its just that people have a pre-concieved idea that every physicist has an iq over 160 like einstein. the funny story is that einstein's iq was not measured while he was alive, nor has any other revolutionary scientist.

 

[uman]

My advice is to start worrying less about your IQ and more about how to write correctly. For example it's "taking", not "takeing".

 

[Shackleford]

Re-taking IQ tests is equivalent to re-taking a course. Its the first time that counts. Any re-attempt is basically a waste of time.

Yes, I know. I just wanted to see if I could do a bit better when I didn't have to pee. I then only got a 118. It doesn't matter either way.

 

[faitswulff]

Intelligence is difficult to define, much less quantify. One might easily conceive of an English-based "intelligence test" that would put those more grammatically inclined as much more intelligent than those more numerically inclined. Perhaps ironically, the output of the test might best be expressed as a number.

If rank "intelligence" is to be tested, what is intelligence? Is it the ability to solve problems? Is this supposed to reflect the problem solving in the real world? If so, I'm fairly confident I know a few high-IQ level individuals who have not quite solved simple problems such as eating regularly or matching socks. Furthermore, all problems, mathematical or otherwise, require a certain modicum of creativity to solve (I think this was proven by a mathematician), which throws another variable into the mix.

For these reasons, and more, I, too, believe that IQ tests are bullcrap.

"The harder I work, the luckier I get."
-Samuel Goldwyn

"Genius is 99 percent perspiration."
-Thomas Edison

Here's a relevant website. May you never cite your research like this.
news . softpedia.com/news/Being-A-Genius-is-Due-to-Hard-Work-not-High-IQ-52170.shtml

 

[CaptainQuaser]

The closest thing to a real IQ test I've found is this, so you can prove me wrong:

http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf

Not sure about that, usually IQ tests have more than just image puzzles. I decided to try that link and I got a 180, whereas on the silly facebook one I got 140. I have also done about a dozen of the online ones for fun at random times and have ranged from 120 to 170. I personally don't think an IQ test has any correspondence to actual intelligence (I guess that is to be determined by defn) but at very least it seems not to correlate at all to achievement in University. All the top minds I know, the award winners etc, did so by spending 8-12 hours a day 7 days a week studying and extending their degree to 5 or 6 years instead of 4. I may be more intelligent than them, as determined by some silly Mensa test, but I do not achieve anything near their level of academics since I am not willing to sacrifice my time as they do.

 

[glueball8]

"I know a few high-IQ level individuals who have not quite solved simple problems such as eating regularly or matching socks."

Haha Einstein don't wear matching socks and Newton don't eat reglularly.

 

[bravernix]

Haha Einstein don't wear matching socks and Newton don't eat reglularly.

Well of course not, they're dead.

 

[Howers]

Online IQ tests are full of crap. I am in total agreement. The reason the geometry one I posted works is because it does not assume prior knowledge like many other ones do. It still is not something I would go telling friends about, but it is perhaps the closest one to the real thing - although still far off.

Real IQ tests are also flawed. But not to the degree I'm hearing some posters say. They have good validity and strong correlation (for a social science anyway) to success in academics. They may not be as strong as say a physical law, but they do successfuly measure some element of intelligence and help discriminate between smart and smarter. Simply put, you're better off with a high iq than a lower one.

 

[Choppy]

Getting back to the original question, it sounds like Green Zach is debating whether or not to pursue physics with the eventual goal of getting into medicine - taking into consideration that a physics program may result in lower grades as compared to other programs.

My advice would be not to worry too much about defining a major until after surviving a first year science program that incorporates the prerequisite courses necessary to get into medicine. High school introduces basic concepts, but you don't really get a feeling for what a subject is all about until you get through first year university - and even then you've really only been given an overview.

It also sounds like he is looking for some kind of predictor, such as IQ, that will indicate how well he will do. As many of the posters have already indicated, such a predictor does not exist. Performance in a university program is influenced by too many variables of which general intelligence is only one. Consider passion for the subject, creativity, the discipline to put in long hours, social factors (living on your own for the first time, new friends and lovers, parties, reaching the legal drinking age), health issues, economic factors (time spent working in a part-time job), etc.

 

[uman]

I never will understand all these posts asking "can I become a physicist if I study electrical engineering" or "can I become a doctor if I do physics" or what have you. It's not like someone is holding a gun to your head and forcing you not to do biology or pre-med or whatever if that's your passion. On the contrary, if physics is your passion, why become a doctor?

 

[will.c]

I never will understand all these posts asking "can I become a physicist if I study electrical engineering" or "can I become a doctor if I do physics" or what have you. It's not like someone is holding a gun to your head and forcing you not to do biology or pre-med or whatever if that's your passion. On the contrary, if physics is your passion, why become a doctor?

Although it reminds me of the part in "Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman" where he talks about the time he spent doing biology research, and in his first presentation he draws the 'map of a cat,' and points out all its muscles and organs... and the other students interrupt him to tell him that, duh, they already know all that. Which leaves Feynman to realize that it's no wonder he caught up to them so fast - they spent their undergrad years memorizing things he could copy from a diagram in a couple minutes.

I think training as a physicist prepares people to exercise a lot more of those creativity muscles than people give it credit for, especially compared to the way pre-med and engineering were taught at my school, at least.

On the other hand, if I had to get surgery, I'd kind of hope the surgeon is more into memorization than creativity. ;)

 

[Shackleford]

Although it reminds me of the part in "Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman" where he talks about the time he spent doing biology research, and in his first presentation he draws the 'map of a cat,' and points out all its muscles and organs... and the other students interrupt him to tell him that, duh, they already know all that. Which leaves Feynman to realize that it's no wonder he caught up to them so fast - they spent their undergrad years memorizing things he could copy from a diagram in a couple minutes.

I think training as a physicist prepares people to exercise a lot more of those creativity muscles than people give it credit for, especially compared to the way pre-med and engineering were taught at my school, at least.

On the other hand, if I had to get surgery, I'd kind of hope the surgeon is more into memorization than creativity. ;)

Wouldn't medical doctors need to be keen on improvisation?