Courses Upper atmosphere & space physics - expected course difficulty?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the anticipated difficulty of a 400-level astrophysics course focused on space plasma phenomena. The course requires a background in electromagnetic theory, specifically the first half of Griffiths' "Electrodynamics." Participants express that, as a 400-level course, it is expected to be challenging, but the actual difficulty can vary significantly based on the professor's teaching style, grading policies, and the specific content covered. Comparisons are made to other 400-level courses, highlighting that difficulty can differ widely even within the same level. Overall, without a syllabus or textbook, it remains difficult to gauge how this course will compare to other advanced physics classes.
quarky2001
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
I'm taking this 400 level astrophysics course next semester, and I'm not sure what sort of difficulty level to expect, since I'm unfamiliar with the material.

Any ideas?

The course listing in the calendar reads: "Basic space plasma pheonema: the Earth’s plasma and field environment; the solar cycle; generation of the solar wind; the interplanetary plasma and field environment; the solar-terrestrial interaction; magnetospheric substorms; the aurora borealis; magnetosphere-ionosphere interactions; effects of magnetospheric storms on man-made systems; use of natural electromagnetic fields for geophysical exploration."

The only listed prerequisite for the course is a 3rd year electromagnetic theory course, which at my school is basically the first half of Griffiths' "Electrodynamics" textbook.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is not a very meaningful question. Being 400-level, it will probably be fairly challenging. Wasn't that kind of obvious...?
 
fss said:
This is not a very meaningful question. Being 400-level, it will probably be fairly challenging. Wasn't that kind of obvious...?

Okay, well challenging relative to other courses... supposing I'm used to 400-level courses.

For example, two other 400-level courses I took were "Introduction to Condensed Matter Physics" and "Quantum Mechanics B". Needless to say, there was no comparison between the difficulty of the two.
 
Without a syllabus or textbook, it is difficult to judge the course difficulty. Ostensibly, one should have an understanding of electrodynamcis and magetodynamics, and perhaps the physics of interactions of radiation with matter, primarily gases and plasmas.
 
quarky2001 said:
Okay, well challenging relative to other courses... supposing I'm used to 400-level courses.

For example, two other 400-level courses I took were "Introduction to Condensed Matter Physics" and "Quantum Mechanics B". Needless to say, there was no comparison between the difficulty of the two.

I agree with you here. My advisers have told me many times that the core 400 level courses (E&M,QM,Thermal,etc) are more difficult than the introductory 500 level graduate courses like Nuclear Physics or Ion physics. If its an elective course, then it PROBABLY won't be as difficult as a core course. Other than that its hard to tell. It really really really depends on the professor and how they give tests/assignments, and most importantly, grade.
 
After a year of thought, I decided to adjust my ratio for applying the US/EU(+UK) schools. I mostly focused on the US schools before, but things are getting complex and I found out that Europe is also a good place to study. I found some institutes that have professors with similar interests. But gaining the information is much harder than US schools (like you have to contact professors in advance etc). For your information, I have B.S. in engineering (low GPA: 3.2/4.0) in Asia - one SCI...
I graduated with a BSc in Physics in 2020. Since there were limited opportunities in my country (mostly teaching), I decided to improve my programming skills and began working in IT, first as a software engineer and later as a quality assurance engineer, where I’ve now spent about 3 years. While this career path has provided financial stability, I’ve realized that my excitement and passion aren’t really there, unlike what I felt when studying or doing research in physics. Working in IT...
Hello, I’m an undergraduate student pursuing degrees in both computer science and physics. I was wondering if anyone here has graduated with these degrees and applied to a physics graduate program. I’m curious about how graduate programs evaluated your applications. In addition, if I’m interested in doing research in quantum fields related to materials or computational physics, what kinds of undergraduate research experiences would be most valuable?

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top