Which subjects in theoretical physics do undergrads find most difficult?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the challenges faced by undergraduate students in theoretical physics, with a consensus that Electromagnetism (E&M) and Statistical Mechanics are among the most difficult subjects. Participants noted that E&M requires a solid grasp of mathematical rigor and intuition, while Statistical Mechanics often feels detached from real-world applications, making it hard to comprehend. Quantum Mechanics (QM) is also highlighted as complex, particularly due to its abstract nature and the mathematical techniques required. Overall, the difficulty of these subjects is influenced by teaching quality and the foundational knowledge students possess.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Electromagnetism (E&M) principles
  • Familiarity with Statistical Mechanics concepts
  • Basic knowledge of Quantum Mechanics (QM) fundamentals
  • Proficiency in differential equations and mathematical techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Griffiths' "Introduction to Electrodynamics" for E&M insights
  • Explore advanced topics in Statistical Mechanics using textbooks like "Statistical Mechanics" by Mandl
  • Learn about Quantum Mechanics techniques through "Quantum Mechanics: Concepts and Applications" by Nouredine Zettili
  • Investigate Classical Mechanics and its applications in modern physics
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for undergraduate physics students, educators in theoretical physics, and anyone seeking to understand the complexities of advanced physics subjects such as E&M, Statistical Mechanics, and Quantum Mechanics.

Which subjects in theoretical physics do undergrads find most difficult?

  • Classical Mechanics

    Votes: 9 12.0%
  • Quantum Mechanics/Intro solid state physics

    Votes: 16 21.3%
  • Thermal Physics/Statistical Mechanics

    Votes: 16 21.3%
  • Electromagnetism/Electrodynamics

    Votes: 21 28.0%
  • Optics

    Votes: 5 6.7%
  • Astrophysics

    Votes: 3 4.0%
  • Special Relativity

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Sub atomic/particle physics

    Votes: 5 6.7%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    75
  • #31
I just did stat physics and QM. I did maybe 10 times more work in stat physics then QM but pulled off smilar marks with a difference of 2 out of 100 in favour of QM. The reason was that I felt in QM the physical concepts are impossible to understand no matter how hard you try so all one needs is a good understanding of the maths. That actually meant less work as the maths in QM were relatively straight forward. Now I understand why Feynman said "No one in the world understands QM". One can only understand the maths of QM.

That is not the case with Stat mech. It is possible to understand Stat mech and quite an amazing theory one which I find deeply satisfying. To learn it one must be familar with the physics as well as the maths. Thats why I needed so much more time learning stat mech. It wasn't all just maths.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
629
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
718
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
37
Views
7K