Programs Where did all the “fundamentals-deepening” master’s programs go?

[ScipioAustrianus]

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:

• Electrodynamics II
• Classical Mechanics II (Hamiltonian/Lagrangian, rigid body theory)
• Analytical Mechanics
• Continuum/Fluid Mechanics
• Advanced Statistical Mechanics

When my father studied engineering, it was normal during the master’s-equivalent stage to revisit these subjects in depth. Today, though, physics MSc curricula seem designed almost entirely as research pipelines rather than as a deepening of fundamentals.


So my question is: are there still master’s programs in physics (or closely related fields) that function as a “bachelor’s deepening"?

 

[jedishrfu]

Yes this true. The fundamentals have been pushed into upper level undergrad to make space for cutting topics needed for dissertations.

If you needed it you could do an independent study one on one with a prof.

 

[gwnorth]

As @jedishrfu mentioned, those courses are often offered at the undergraduate level as part of bachelor's degrees.

 

[ScipioAustrianus]

Yes this true. The fundamentals have been pushed into upper level undergrad to make space for cutting topics needed for dissertations.

If you needed it you could do an independent study one on one with a prof.

My Bachelor program works in the following way:
A subject like electrodynamics will first be treated in an "experimental" course, and then a "theoretical" course. The first spin with the subject will have some math and a couple of derivations, but the focus will be on handwaving and cramming experimental facts. The second theoretical spin will focus entirely on the mathematics and the theoretical part. The thing is, this theoretical course is in no way a complete treatment of the subject at hand. I for example know how to compute some simple Lagrangians and Hamiltonians, but I have no real idea what they mean, I've never seen a theoretical treatment of a disippative Hamiltonian or even a velocity dependent force, I can't tell you what a Legendre transform really is, etc. I would not describe these as personal failures, this is part of the structure of the theoretical course, which is why would imagine that there has to be some second theoretical course.

I do not know if this is a thing specific to my university though.

 

[FactChecker]

In every subject, at every level, the curriculum is designed to cover what is needed to succeed at the next level.