Why do Physics programs not cover continuum mechanics?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the absence of continuum mechanics and fluid dynamics in physics programs, exploring the reasons behind this perceived gap in the curriculum. Participants reflect on the relevance of these subjects within the broader context of physics education and research.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that while continuum mechanics is relevant, it is often only briefly covered in lower-level classes, with limited focus on topics like the Navier-Stokes equations.
  • Others mention that courses in continuum mechanics or hydrodynamics may exist but are infrequently offered and typically at the graduate level.
  • One participant suggests that the lack of coverage may stem from a perception that continuum mechanics is too empirical compared to other areas of physics.
  • Another viewpoint highlights that many physics departments do not focus on continuum mechanics because it is more commonly associated with engineering disciplines, where it is taught as part of mechanical or aerospace engineering programs.
  • Some participants express a belief that the core curriculum of physics programs is primarily designed to prepare students for graduate studies, which may not include continuum mechanics as a focus area.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that continuum mechanics is not widely covered in physics programs, but there is disagreement on the reasons for this absence, with multiple competing views presented regarding its relevance and the focus of physics education.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention that the emphasis on atomic and molecular structures in research may contribute to the limited focus on continuum mechanics. Additionally, the discussion reflects varying opinions on the empirical nature of continuum mechanics compared to other physics topics.

Finkle
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
I've looked at a few Physics programs and none seem to cover any time of fluids or continuum mechanics in general. It seems to be a very relevant subject to cover but it's only slightly addressed in one of the lower level classes. In these classes they usually only going over Bernoulli's equation which while important, obviously doesn't reveal much about fluids. The Navier-Stokes equations come to mind for further study in fluid mechanics. During this class it was never really brought up.

Is there a specific reason why continuum mechanics in general isn't addressed in much detail?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I believe most prestigious places do have courses in continuum mechanics or hydrodynamics, but for example in my universities these courses are offered by the physics and applied maths departments, and they are offered only once in two-three years, not every year, and they are always at the graduate/3rd-4th year of UG.

I am myself taking such a course this semester.
 
Hm, I guess that basically makes my question invalid. Still I think it's interesting that it's not part of the regular curriculum in all programs. It seems to me just as important as electromagnetism... Okay maybe not that important but still it doesn't seem to get as much credit as it deserves.
 
I asked a friend of mine why our undergraduate/masters course didn't include this, and he said it was because it's too "empirical" - maybe that's the wrong word but perhaps you get what I'm trying to say. I'm not trying to sound derogatory about it here (I'm sure a lot of careful thought has gone into it) but he seemed to think it was more like a "stamp collecting" branch of science if you get what I mean by that - not based on enough "physics-ish" theory, if you know what I mean.
Here's where people are supposed to prove him dead wrong now...
 
Finkle said:
I've looked at a few Physics programs and none seem to cover any time of fluids or continuum mechanics in general. It seems to be a very relevant subject to cover but it's only slightly addressed in one of the lower level classes. In these classes they usually only going over Bernoulli's equation which while important, obviously doesn't reveal much about fluids. The Navier-Stokes equations come to mind for further study in fluid mechanics. During this class it was never really brought up.

Is there a specific reason why continuum mechanics in general isn't addressed in much detail?

Maybe because matter is made of atoms and in research people usually utilizes computers to go beyond continuum limit and study atomic-molecular structure of materials.

In my experience, continuum mechanics and thermodynamics are much more important for engineers and for branches of applied physics as atmospheric physics, hydrodynamics of Rias and so on.
 
jeebs said:
I asked a friend of mine why our undergraduate/masters course didn't include this, and he said it was because it's too "empirical"
As if solid state physics or elementary particle physics doesn't have it's share of "empiricism"? Most physicists are experimentalists. That is very much an empirical science.

Many physics departments don't teach this subject because physicists for the most part don't do research in this area. The primary goal of most undergraduate physics programs is to train their students with an eye toward being admitted to and then successful in a graduate physics program.

That knowledge and research has mostly passed from the domain of physics departments to mechanical and aerospace engineering. Most colleges require their undergraduates to take a core curriculum dictated by the students' majors augmented by technical electives that can be selected, within limits, by the students themselves. If your college has a good mechanical or aerospace program you can take a fluid dynamics class from them as a technical elective.
 
Continuum mechanics and fluid dynamics are generally offered under the engineering programs.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
936
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
818
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K