Programs What are some of the more exotic things you learn for a degree in physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Femme_physics
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Degree Physics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the intersection of advanced physics topics and engineering, particularly the potential for innovative engineering breakthroughs through the study of exotic physics subjects. It highlights the importance of pursuing knowledge in areas like quantum physics, which could lead to significant advancements such as quantum computing. The conversation emphasizes that engineers should focus on subjects that genuinely interest them rather than adhering strictly to traditional physics curricula. It points out that historical figures like Edison and Gates achieved success without extensive physics knowledge, suggesting that interdisciplinary studies, including cognitive science or sociology, might also be valuable. The potential of quantum computing is underscored, noting its implications for cryptography and complex problem-solving in fields like aerospace and astrophysics, making it a key area of interest for future engineers.
Femme_physics
Gold Member
Messages
2,548
Reaction score
1
Partly inspired by - https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=483456&page=2"

I'm curious, so putting mechanics/waves/fluids/gravity...basically all the fundamental learning material of physics, what are some of the more advanced or exotic subjects physicists study about for their physics degrees? Are there any fancy stuff that could possibly relate to engineering, or are way outside the realm of engineering?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
How could engineers have know that 19th century experiments on electricity and radiation could open up such lucrative branches of engineering? There's no knowing what physics/mathematics might be useful -any of it could be - which is why capitalist societies throw a lot of tax money at physics/mathematics and allow strange and exotic subject to be studied.

So the engineer wanting to study "more physics" is right - it might lead to really innovative engineering. It might be a way to become a new Tesla or Edison! My wild guess would be to study stuff that is strange, hardly understood, but might have a *big* impact on the world.

If I were an engineer wanting to be the new Edison/Gates I would be avidly looking at quantum physics to see if quantum computing could be brought to reality. I think it would be far better to read all you can on quantum computing (if that idea floats your boat...) rather than trying to learn all the physics that a physicist learns. Learning, beyond what you're forced to learn, should be driven by problems that interest you - not by an arbitrary desire just to learn wht the guy next door is learning. Where's the fun in that? What use is that? Did Edison try to learn everything that Einstein knew, or vice versa. Of course not! They had better and more useful, and more fun, things to do.

For instance, I can't see how General Relativity might lead to "the next big engineering feat", so why on Earth would I study that in the depth that a physicist might...

Interesting that Bill Gates and Tim Berners-Lee didn't need any physics to become the biggest cheeses in the cutting-edge engineering of their time! So maybe the potential Edison needs to study cognitive science, or linguistics, or sociology (facebook!), or... who knows? Then again, maybe it's time for physics to make a come back in engineering...
 
Reply of the year, mal4 :)

Curious to hear more feedback...

What's so special about quantum computing that it seems to be a focus of yours, if I may ask?
 
It is quite literally the future of computing. There is a lot of interest in this, partly because you can take over the world if you make the first quantum computer and factor the huge primes associated with modern encryption. Also, anyone who needs intense computations done to solve problems, like aerospace engineers or astrophysicists, will be interested in this as well.

There's more stuff, but I think the main thing is to help scientists and engineers develop better theoretical models and for the obvious crypto applications.
 
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