To chancer, on physics in physical therapy

AI Thread Summary
Chancer, a physical therapy student, questioned the relevance of studying physics in their program. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding physics principles, particularly in relation to lifting techniques. It emphasizes that lifting objects at an angle requires more force due to the vector nature of forces, which is crucial for preventing injuries and ensuring patient safety. Additionally, Gary Chernack suggests that knowledge of physics may also relate to advanced treatments like ultrasonic therapies, further underscoring the significance of physics in physical therapy practices.
mathwonk
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
2024 Award
Messages
11,930
Reaction score
2,191
Today, someone on the forums calling self "chancer" made a question which I
have a response to; maybe you could relay this to the forum?
Chancer is studying physical therapy and is also required to study a physics
sequence. This is in the Academic and Career forum. Chancer is not sure why
physics will be useful or necessary. My suggestion is basically about
preventing patients from becoming patients, specifically about lifting objects as
they relate to the vector nature of forces. People who are not physics educated
may not yet understand why lifting an object straight up vertically is very
different from lifting the same object "at an angle". More force is needed to
lift that object at an angle other than vertical because at the angle, more the
person's force vertically is reduced in the vertical direction; and so the
person must apply more force at an angle than if he just needs to lift
vertically (at "no" angle).

I wish I could tell chancer this. Could you comment for me on the forum,
since I have not been able to successfully register?

Gary Chernack
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would suggest that it is more to do with ultra sonic treatments.
 
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...
Back
Top