GR = “General Relativity” (hard core relativity)
Stat Mech = “Statistical Mechanics” (the physics of many particles and how measurable properties like temperature, pressure, etc. can change based on how atoms interact. Lots of overlap with thermodynamics.)
NMR = “Nuclear Magnetic Resonance” (I’m not even going to try to explain this one, as I don’t understand it that well myself. It’s a measurement technique.)
Sorry Qwerty about the abbreviations, you end up using them so often that you forget they’re not standard usage. Giraffe got them correctly. Actually NMR has some interesting theory behind it, a method to measure how nuclei respond to certain magnetic fields. It’s non-invasive way to determine the composition of biological and non-biological materials. It is the basis of MRI (magnetic resonance imaging). Stat Mech can also be really cool and can be combined with QM or even some relativity, pay a lot of attention to courses you take on it.
I didn’t mean to imply you were just looking at things that sound cool, I was relating personal experience. I was one of these people that went in thinking that the only interesting physics was astrophysics and other sexy topics. It took me a while to realize how many interesting areas there really are and if I had sooner, perhaps I would have paid more attention to them and gotten a broader education.
I’ve never actually used mathematica, I’m a U of Waterloo student so it would be heresy if I used anything other that maple, it was created here.
My name is FriendRob, and I’m a physicist. (Thanks, Cal!)
I agree with much of what’s been said: math is important, get a good grounding in it, doing it in college is different from doing it in high school (so you’re probably better off doing AB rather than BC calc).
Physics is great preparation for many fields: medicine, law, engineering, computer science, finance,…
In choosing schools, think carefully about what you want to do, and look closely if you can do it there. I went to Swarthmore, which was a great experience but I was interested in biophysics, and it turned out that if I took physics I couldn’t take bio until my junior year because the classes met at the same time. Of course things have probably changed since then but the point is you need to check out things like that ahead of time.
I did theoretical elementary particle physics - an area that should be avoided. Extremely competetive, and the theory is nowadays so far removed from experiments that it’s really more like doing pure math than physics.
I have colleagues in biophysics. They apply chaos theory to neural networks: model how a slice of brain tissue will behave. (No, not human brains!) The eventual goal is to be able to do something about abnormal brain states like epilepsy.
Summary: keep your options open, learn as much as you can about different fields, get some research experience as soon as possible to see if you like it.
Maple?
GAAAHHHHH!!! <runs screaming out of the room>
<peeks sheepishly around the doorframe>
OK, it wasn’t THAT bad, but sometimes it was a pain in the neck to get it to do the in-between steps in integration (partial fractions, substitution, etc.) and make it give you the same results as it did when it did the integration in one fell swoop. One of the girls who took it the year before I did told us going in that “Maple is EVIL!” Methinks she had worse experiences with it than I. 
Love this thread. So far, Giraffe, I find that it’s most satisfying when I understand the physics of what I’m doing instead of just memorizing how to do it by rote. As much as I can I try to learn the actual material–I’m in this to learn all this neat stuff, after all, not just to pass tests. So hopefully I will keep this up in future years.
Get into research early, Philbuck? OK, I will remember that…how does one do this, anyhow? Talk to professors, or what?
Balduran, I want to do computer stuff, learn how to program etc. So that’s cool that that’s actually a good idea, not just the inner geek in me talking (reason the first that I’m not cool: I think that geeks are cool and want to be one! :D)
I do tend to think that astrophysics and particle physics are the neatest ones and that the others are just boring. But since I don’t know much about any of the options, that’s a good piece of advice to keep an eye out for the studio musicians of physics. Thanks. But I still want to go to space!!! 
Sigh. I think I’ll have to wait for commercial space flight, though–and of course it’s a whole 'nother thread as to how soon that’ll be.
drewbert says:
Aha! So they DO offer actual courses in this some places? I have been wondering what the options are for someone who is good at both writing and science. I have been told that I’m a good writer, and that I can translate complicated technical stuff into normal language for people. I really like doing that, too. (As my mom, the artist/writer/NON-scientist, can attest–she got WAY more of that stuff thrown at her than she cared to!) My physics instructor this year really liked my lab reports. Said they were very professional, almost good enough for publication (if they had been original research I guess, instead of just out of the lab manual). So is there hope for me?
This thread is awesome, Qwertyasdfg. ;j (Will he do for an Einstein smiley right now? Wasn’t AE Jewish?) I have been feeling kind of down about going off to study physics–will I hate it after the first few hard classes? Am I nuts to be narrowing my studies down to physics? As opposed to, say, philosophy or psych or art or English or…all the other things I’m interested in. Conversations like this stoke my passion for the subject. Can I join Physicists Anonymous if I’m just a lowly freshman?
Oh, and do any of you guys know anything about the University of Victoria (BC, Canada)? That’s where I’m going, though I admit it was a bit of a “I like this one” completely right-brain choice than an inventory of the best science schools. I have heard that it has a pretty good reputation for research stuff, though. I keep wondering if I could or should switch to an American school later in my studies. Thoughts?
Although I won’t be going into Physics next year (I’m going into comp. eng.), I was just wondering, just how much should I familiarize myself with Mathematica? I’ve taken only high school calculus so far and, thus far, it’s been useful to me only to check my answers for homework, which is pretty basic stuff. Do I just need to know how to do basic calculations? And I also guess I’ll be switching over to Maple or Matlab next year, so is it much different?
I am going to start my 5th year of a five year program, working on a degree in Physics and one in civil engineering.
First of all, math is important, but it isn’t the be-all and end-all. I used to think I was awful at math, but the challenge was good for me and I ended up completely surprising myself. If you want specifics, my math courses so far have been three semesters of calculus, one of linear algebra, one of differential equations, one of statistics, and physics classes that used calculus.
I’d also advise you to keep your options open–think about what kind of physics you’d like to do. Some fields are pretty much pure math and theory, some are research-heavy, and some is application and almost nothing else. Or you could end up simply using physics as a base for a completely different career.
And now comes the part from my own experiences: forget about the snobby universities and consider a liberal arts education. A physics major who can read and write well is very valued. And since I didn’t have much faith in my math ability when I started, being at a smaller school made it easier for me to get help when I needed it. (Shameless plug: http://www.juniata.edu) Of course, your mileage may vary, but it’s something worth considering.
Oh yeah, and I love Maple! 
Magickly brings up some good points. A double degree with physics and another discipline can be very valuble. I started my first few years in engineering before switching to a double major in math and physics. Both of these other disciplines can be beneficial such as Engineering for their more practical approach to problem solving and math for their rigour. I have also known people who’ve done double majors in physics and computer science. It also gives you some flexibility in case you decide that you actually prefer computer science or math over physics. Some Canadian schools offer a program called “Engineering Physics” which is supposed to be quite good.
I’ve never used Matlab. By the time I’d heard of it, my Fortran skills and library of favourite math routines was built up enough that I found it faster and easier to write a Fortran code rather than use Matlab to solve the problems I’m interested in . I think either Maple of Mathematica are fine. I use them mainly for the linear algebra tools (solving simultaneous equations, matricies, reducing expressions), definite and indefinite integrals, graphing functions or data and for some of the numerical methods like Runge-Kutta. I approach it like a calculator, you shouldn’t use it in place of learning the mathematics but to speed up calculations. It can be a great time saver and a great way to visualise or approximate difficult equations and functions.
Nenya I don’t know much about UVic although I have heard of a couple hotshots coming from there. For most Canadian universites the basic undergraduate cirriculum is pretty standardized in terms of content and quality. Large undergrad schools such as UofT, UWaterloo and UBC can offer a broader range of extra courses. For instance, my undergrad did not offer courses in GR, I had to learn it by myself as a reading course. A benefit of the smaller schools is that you will have less people to compete against for national scholarships. Regardless of where you go, if you do well in your undergrad you can get into any Canadian grad school and many US schools if you also do well on the GRE (graduate requirement exam?).
Ok, so far very helpful, reassuring info so far. Thanks! Could someone provide a general overview of the different areas that physicists study? I already know the “sexy” topics like particle physics and astrophysics, what are the lesser known commonly studied topics?
Another Physics grad student checking in. I would break it down as so:
High Energy stuff (particle phyiscs, essentially)
Condensed matter physics really is the big area these days, it seems to me, but it’s really really broad, and studies all sorts of things ranging from superconductivity and superfluidity to various investigations of semiconductors and semiconductor devices. Quantum computing would probably fall in here as well, and biophysics, and much of chemical physics, and all sorts of other things. Giraffe can tell you a lot more about this than I, since it’s not really what I work in on a daily basis, and I assume he’ll be along to do that at some point.
Astrophysics and Cosmology, also as you mentioned
Mathematical physics (I sense this isn’t something you’ll want to do; I don’t really either, because so many people who do this have lost the “physics” part of the job description)
Chemical physics is the area I work in, which is basically applying quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics to describe the behavior of atoms and molecules. Parts of it fall under condensed matter, and parts of it don’t really.
These are all traditional research areas. What you’ll study in learning physics includes classical mechanics, electrodynamics and relativity, statistical mechanics, and quantum mechanics. Classical mechanics is the kind of thing you get in intro physics, although it’s actually a lot more advanced (and, I think, interesting) as you get along into it. Electrodynamics is the study of electricity and magnetism; optics tends to get worked in here as well, and also relativity. Statistical mechanics is the physics of vast numbers of particles, and quantum mechanics is the study of really small things.
I would really encourage scientific writing courses when possible also; one of the things that I hate most about the field is that so many people can’t write and make a coherent argument. Also try to get opportunities to make presentations about some of these things, especially if you can work with one of the profs and do some real research. Making presentations is a big part of doing research, and it’s another thing that many people can’t really do effectively. Not being great at math is definitely a drawback, but much more so if you want to go into theory than into experiment. For what it’s worth, I also did the AB calculus test, and I’m not having any problems with the math I need even though I’m in theory.
I have to do a fair amount of programming, and I hate it; try to learn some of this as an undergrad, because one of the reasons that not being the god of all mathematicians is okay is that a lot of equations get solved on computer these days anyway, and it’s the students who get stuck writing the code. Maple is my very best friend on some days, and on other days, I want very much to strangle the people who wrote the code. Learn LaTex if you have the chance; it’ll make writing papers a bajillion times easier, and not knowing it is my biggest regret.
Grad school is far in the future, but if you wish to stay in research as a theorist after you finish your PhD, you’re going to want to go to one of the schools that Giraffe listed, because a PhD in particle theory from, say, Kansas State is going to get you… a job at McDonald’s. Or any variety of other jobs, but probably not one doing particle theory.
Oh, and to answer Nenya’s question, the way to get in doing research with a prof is indeed just to go talk to them. There’s such a thing as an “REU” program, which is a research experience for undergrads thing that the NSF funds, so some profs can actually pay you to work for them as an undergrad. But talk to the profs whose classes you find especially interesting, try to build up a good relationship with them, and it’s entirely possible that they’ll give you little side projects.
And I wouldn’t say you’re nuts to narrow things down to physics; it’s fun and interesting! But it can be really hard at times, and it can be really discouraging, as well, so if you hate your first few hard classes, don’t give up. If you hate them because the subject matter bores you, that’s maybe not such a good sign, but if you hate them because they’re too much work and you’re not sleeping, or because the prof stinks (we get a fair number of those), you might want to stick with it a bit longer.
I am definitely saving this thread. You guys are so encouraging!
Is it just the scientists, or does everyone refer to astrophysics as “sexy”? (Or, do people just overuse the term “sexy”?)
For me the most useful news in this thread is that physics is useful for lots of things, whether in a physics career or another one, and that phyics +math, +English, and/or +computer science (all of which I want to do at some point) is not a bad idea. These aren’t earth-shattering ideas I guess, but it’s great to hear them since I wonder but don’t have a large advice pool to draw from here–I can’t understand my physics professor’s accent, and most of my other science-interested friends are amateurs and haven’t been through the practical side of things themselves.
As far as physics in other careers goes, my boss, a family & ER physician, used to sympathise with me over my math and physics homework this year. He had (or chose) to take a lot of that stuff when he was in school, and is really good with math and stuff, but he became a doctor instead. So maybe I’ll tell my mom that next time she wonders aloud if I’m going to be a doctor of medicine.
I’ve heard that making oneself known to one’s professors is a good tactic in any case, and in my limited experience has resulted in several happy acquaintainces and one or two good friends. If I can get over my shyness (“why would he want to talk to me? there’s two hundred and sixteen other students here!”) in a larger university, I will definitely try this again.
Told one of my friends last year that the only reason I’m in this is because when I graduate with my PhD in ten years or something I’ll get to wear one of those fancy PhD graduation gowns then and ever afterwards. However, I’ve since realized that it’s not as simple as that–I’ll have to pick the right school, because the colour combinations on some doctoral gowns are hideous! No fushia with bright green for me, thanks. (We had a guy give a speech at convocation last year, dressed in an outfit that honestly reminded me of a medieval court jester.)
Oh, and g8rguy, call me up the week before finals next year, eh, and tell me to stick it out. That’s when it hits, when I’ve got a project due and am sorely lamenting my lack of study skills.
What the hell are study skills anyway, I ask?
Wow. Incredible advice. If you have any more, keep it coming. I already feel renewed and ready to redouble my efforts towards a career in physics. Giraffe, do you have any specific advice on obtaining a career in that national lab category you mentioned?
I am in the same situation as Qwerty, except I am crazy enough to have signed up for BC calc. I am also very fortunate to have been accepted to Boston U’s Research Internship Program. For six weeks this summer, I will be an intern working under Professor Glynn Holt on the rheology of acoustically levitated foams. Since I have been focusing my interests on particle physics, this summer will be an interesting break and will also show me what the rest of physics is like.
And Nenya, how does one go about saving a thread?
No, it’s just the astrophysicsts and those who don’t know any better who call astrophysics sexy… (And yes, people do overuse the term.)
Yes, definitely a good tactic, and the thing to remember is that most of the profs who seem to like teaching love talking to students, too. (If you’ve got a prof who obviously is only there to go through the motions, talking to him is generally pointless.) And if you mention that you’re gasp actually interested in physics, your physics profs will probably be all over you, because, well, there aren’t a lot of people who are.
Yes, the gowns are a plus, but you definitely have to pick your school more carefully than me. The orange and blue abomination that I’ll have to deal with is providing me with a good reason to stay out of academia when I finish my degree… And at some schools (like, say, mine), you have to buy the gowns, because they don’t give them to you automatically. My advisor rents his every time he needs one, and this last time, they accidentally gave him a master’s gown instead… :eek: I’d never heard him use some of those words before…
Study skills: the ability to do homework and read (often incredibly boring) books in lieu of having a social life. Going to college in a small town worked wonders for my study skills.
I think saving the thread, majinborg, just means bookmarking it? And other advice… umm… Enjoy your summer research? And don’t pigeon-hole yourself into particle physics; the stuff I’m most interested in is quantum gravity, but I’ve long since realized that there are other interesting areas in physics out there which are more likely to result in a successful career in physics. Particle physics is really great stuff, and I like it, but it’s also harder to get paid to do it. I don’t want to discourage you from trying to do it at all, but definitely have a back-up plan in mind.
Well, when I said saving the thread, I meant keeping it somehow for future reference but didn’t think HOW I’d do that. I’m gonna bookmark it, but I suppose I could always copy & paste it into a word processor too. Don’t think there’s a special SDMB function for such, at any rate, though I could be wrong.
Are we really that rare, those of us who like this stuff? I do seem to be getting a good reaction from professors when I mention that I find it fascinating. It does mean that I have to actually do well in the class, though, because “I love this!” doesn’t mean much if I’m not actually putting in the work.
Do I need to get straight A’s to get into grad school etc, or will my current crop of half A’s and half B’s do me fine, or what? In other words, can I still be an active Net surfer and Doper during university, or should all that free computer access be going to waste?
On gowns: I’m imagining the irate doctor dressed as master right now, and getting a good grin. It seems that (at least at this college) teachers who have a CGA or other non-academic designation have to wear just bachelor’s gowns at functions, which I always thought was a little unfair, though I can’t think of a better alternative. Who, by the way, decides gown design and protocol? The university or some larger regulatory body? (That’s a hijack, though, so off to Google or GQ, I guess.)
Hmm… I suppose one could always just try literally saving the html or something. I mean, there has to be SOME reason they have the “save” feature in my stupid web browser. I suppose I could have thought of that earlier. [making excuses]But I was concentrating too hard on physics to think of anything else, really![/making excuses]
We actually are pretty rare, truth to be told. A lot of people are interested, mind you, but then they see that they have to do such complicated math as, say, algebra, and they get frightened off.
True story: I was teaching a discussion section, and in order to solve a particular type of problem, the students needed to know the quadratic formula. So I reminded them of it and spent 15 minutes on how one uses the damn thing, just in case, even though they all assured me they all knew how to do it. And in the review session before the test, I spent another 15 minutes on it. So then the test comes, and most of the students are stuck. “How do you solve this equation? Can I just take the square root of both sides?” 
You don’t really need straight A’s to get into grad school, although having good grades is certainly important if you want to get into the best schools. I’m not really the best person to be asking about this, since I actually applied to grad school in chemistry and switched over to physics about 2 months later when I realized that chemistry as a grad student bored me stiff. For what it’s worth, though, I had no problem getting into several really good schools with half A’s and half B’s, but I also had the advantage of going to a university with an excellent reputation in chemistry. So I guess this is a definite maybe. Just get all your A’s in math and physics and so forth and save your B’s for postmodern fiction and the like; it worked for me.
I have no idea who decides gown design and protocol; I imagine it’s pretty much traditional by now, though, and all PhD gowns look the same. The hood colors are bound to be the school’s colors (hence, pick a school with an attractive football uniform and your hood will also probably be bearable).
And Rod (the professor) was pretty irate by the time I talked to him. I was way up in the back recording the ceremony because there were a pair of people in my research group who were getting their degrees, and I couldn’t really see him from my perch about 500 rows back. By the time I ran into him again at his party a couple of hours later (he left graduation early, while I had to stick around to provide transportation), he was less than entirely coherent (even dignified senior professors get wasted at times like this), but I gathered pretty readily that he was displeased.
majinborg, getting a job at a national lab is very similar to getting a job in academia. You have to do good research and publish papers to get a research position in either case. Opportunities at national labs depend very much on your research field. A lot of the jobs are for high energy and nuclear physics, although more and more are opening up for condensed matter and biological applications. You can go to the web pages of some of the big labs (Sandia National Lab, Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore, Lawrence Berkeley) and look and see what research is being done. I should point out that I’m only a postdoc, so I can’t give you specific pointers for obtaining a long-term position. Yet.
I actually recommend against doing a double major in undergrad, if you want to be a physicist. Take other classes, absolutely. Computer science, math, chemistry, biology, writing, or random off the wall things that interest you. But a double major takes a lot more time, and I don’t think it greatly improves your chances of getting into grad school. To get into grad school, you need to do well on your GREs, to have good grades (A’s and B’s), and good letters of recommendation. Talking to professors and doing research as an undergrad is really important for this last one.
As for computer stuff, I like Mathematica the best (it’s the most widely used, in my experience), although I’ve heard good things about Maple. Skills to acquire when you have the opportunity: Unix, Fortran and/or C/C++, Latex, Powerpoint. Not needed so much during undergrad, but you’ll need them eventually, so learn them when you have the chance.
Lastly, although physics is dominated by both undergrads and grad students from the big-name schools I mentioned, a few of the better grad students I have known did their undergrad at small, nearly-unknown schools. You really do need to go to a well-known grad school for physics, if you want to land a good research position, but it’s not such a big deal in undergrad.
A note for Canadian students, most Canadian grad schools do use GRE’s just like we don’t use SAT’s although some of the bigger ones may use them for extra info, look into the specific schools you are interested in to see their requirements.
I suggested a double major because I’ve known people doing math/phys and comp/phys who went the other way for grad school instead of physics cause they decided they liked it better. If you are going to do a whole bunch of courses in another field, you may as well get credit for them. Keeps your options open.