Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

What do you guys think of physics

  1. Yes. Physics is mathematical science.

    38 vote(s)
    88.4%
  2. No.

    5 vote(s)
    11.6%
  1. Mar 6, 2010 #1
    What do you guys think?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 6, 2010 #2

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Re: Physics

    Physics like other physical sciences are quantitative. In most applications, it is necessary to be have some level of proficiency in mathematics - the more proficient, the better.
     
  4. Mar 6, 2010 #3

    fluidistic

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Re: Physics

    In fact I'm not sure what you mean by "talented in mathematics". Also what do you mean by "good at physics"?
    If talented in mathematics means being able to understand and do the math required for solving physics problems that one encounters in undergraduate studies and if good at physics mean someone able to earn a university physics degree with a decent average (say more than 70%) then my answer would be yes.
    In my opinion, mathematic knowledge and application is a requirement for a physics degree. On the other hand you don't have to be a mathematician to be good at physics.

    If good at physics means being able to understand string theory or any other theory requiring a lot of mathematical knowledge then the math requirement is much bigger than the one needed for a bachelor's degree and in this case you're being closer to a mathematician I believe (but I'm not 100% sure, I'm only an undergrad student).

    Could you precise a little more the question?
     
  5. Mar 6, 2010 #4

    cronxeh

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Re: Physics

    Its not even about being able to add 2+2. I think it has everything to do with analytical thinking, sort of a blend between spacial orientation, ability to plot something 3 dimensional in your mind, and accounting for all the physical laws that apply or more importantly dont apply to a particular problem. Case in point, some wise guy asked what is the flux through a base of a tetrahedron with side of 10 cm laying above the electric field of 100 N/C inclined at 10 degrees. Obviously you need to know how to find a surface area of a tetrahedron's base. Then you need to know about dimensional analysis, i.e you gotta convert cm into m before you go chopping wood and plugging formulas. The result is 100*cos(10)*sqrt(3)/4*0.1^2. Whatever it is, its all very zen and if you dont quite see the solution, perturbate it :biggrin:
     
  6. Mar 6, 2010 #5
    Michael Faraday is considered the greatest experimentalist in the history of science. But, he didn't had interest in higher mathematics. What do you guys think about this, then?
     
  7. Mar 6, 2010 #6
    Re: Physics

    1) Physics was far different 200 years ago. You needed to know less in order to make new breakthroughs. Nowadays, what Faraday discovered is at a high school or early college level.

    2) James Clerk Maxwell says that Faraday was "a mathematician of a very high order -- one from whom the mathematicians of the future may derive valuable and fertile methods." There are other branches of mathematics other than calculus, and Faraday was very good with geometry and using lines of force to describe electromagnetics.
     
  8. Mar 7, 2010 #7

    brewnog

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Re: Physics

    I would say that I've never had an "interest" in mathematics, despite enjoying physics immensely during my studies. I treat maths as a necessary toolbox to facilitate the solution of engineering and physical problems. But to get the answers, you still need an aptitude for it.
     
  9. Mar 7, 2010 #8

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    Re: Physics

    Perhaps an experimental physicist does not need to be as talented/proficient at math as a theoretician, but then again, perhaps it depends on the type of experiment. These days, sophisticated experiments require a fair amount of mathematical work in their design. I suppose without math, one is more or less a technician.
     
  10. Mar 7, 2010 #9

    dx

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    Re: Physics

    "To those who do not know mathematics it is difficult to get across a real feeling as to the beauty, the deepest beauty, of nature ... If you want to learn about nature, to appreciate nature, it is necessary to understand the language that she speaks in. " - Richard Feynman
     
  11. Mar 7, 2010 #10
    Re: Physics

    My definition of talented is, "naturally more able to understand or perform the subject or activity more effectively, as defined by the majority of people, than most other people". No, I do not believe you have to be "talented" but you must understand the required mathematics and have a decent amount of intelligence to be an effective physicist. No, I won't give you a cool definition of 'decent'. :approve:
     
  12. Mar 7, 2010 #11
    Re: Physics

    How can you be a novelist if you're not good with grammar?
     
  13. Mar 7, 2010 #12
    Re: Physics

    If you do not LOVE mathematics, you will HATE physics.

    Even the experimental physicists need a lot of mathematics.
     
  14. Mar 7, 2010 #13

    Pythagorean

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I disagree. I don't love matematics or hate physics.
     
  15. Mar 7, 2010 #14
    Re: Physics

    If you want to do good physics,you need to know more math.Math is really important for physics.I agree with what fluidistic said.
     
  16. Mar 8, 2010 #15
    Re: Physics

    Write in the first person and get an editor to clean up any incomprehensible punctuation. Some of the best stories I've ever heard were in grammatically incorrect local and regional dialects.
     
  17. Mar 8, 2010 #16
    Re: Physics

    thats like being a really good carpenter right? just make really cool and unstable things, and have a better carpenter come and fix all of them? haha just poking a little fun. but he has a point, stories were oral long before they were written, and each has a place. but you can not be a good novelist without having correct grammar. you can be a fantastic storyteller though.:)

    the further you go into physics, the more integral mathmatics become. some people are good at classical mechanics because things are intuitive. but as you enter the realm of physics even more, things become less intuitive.
     
  18. Mar 8, 2010 #17
    Re: Physics

    About 40 people in my year do Physics, 10 of those do Further Maths, none of those 10 are in the top 10 Physicists. In my mind, Mathematical Ability does make the physicist, it is creativity that matters.

    Sure, maths may be useful if you want to use complicated rules that no-one cares about, but anyone with a decent grip of mathematics can do most of the useful calculations in physics. But, if you want to develop something new, you need that spark of creativity.
     
  19. Mar 8, 2010 #18
    Re: Physics

    All novelists have their stuff gone over by editors. My sister used to do this for a living.

    The 'grammar is to novels as math is to physics' analogy is not really a very good one.
     
  20. Mar 8, 2010 #19
    Re: Physics

    http://www.jstor.org/pss/2926968

    read on Emily Dickinson, and her "chaotic" grammar.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  21. Mar 8, 2010 #20

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Re: Physics

    You need to post the sources for this.
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook