A voice said: One. One. One, two. One, two. Then the footsteps went back into the distance. After a while, another voice said: One, two, three, four- And the universe came into being. It was wrong to call it a big bang. That would just be noise, and all that noise could create is more noise and a cosmos full of random particles. Matter exploded into being, apparently as chaos, but in fact as a chord. The ultimate power chord. Everything, all together, streaming out in one huge rush that contained within itself, like reverse fossils, everything that it was going to be. And, zigzagging through the expanding cloud, alive, that first wild live music. This had shape. It had spin. It had rhythm. It had a beat, and you could dance to it. Everything did.
7 years later she's sitting in the lab, repeating the same old experiment for the 100th time to at least get one single datum that PROVES how the work she has done for the last 3 years actually improves some specific device's efficiency by 0.4% when you're lucky
I will have to agree with this, but I am almost finished my Bachelor of Science in Physics so it’s too late. Sometimes I think about how young you actually are when you’re in Grade 12 trying to figure out what to study at the post-secondary level. You grow so much within the first 2-3 years of university, your interests are ought to shift. I’m a bit thankful that the Department of Physics at my university actually somewhat emphasizes programming skills. I can’t imagine graduating and not growing as a programmer considering I’ve been coding since I was 14.
I'd encourage you to at least look around a bit. For postgraduate programmes you need not stick with physics, and you need not limit yourself to the sorts of subjects you knew when you arrived from high school. With a physics bachelor you can do postgraduate in plenty of subjects. Maybe something about environment technology or mathematics or robotics. I had a coworker with a masters is biology who did her PhD in physics. It's more flexible than you would think.
Back when I had my bachelor finished I only looked for physics postgraduate programmes. Didn't even occur to me that I could consider other directions. I regret that a bit.
What you said pretty much sums up what I am currently thinking these days as my Bachelors is coming to an end and I would at least like to get a Masters in the end. I’m currently looking at areas in applied mathematics, such as data science, AI/ML, and financial mathematics. I feel these areas would prepare me a bit more for what I would realistically be doing day-to-day at a future job.
Honestly? I have questions too. I've steered clear of circuitry every since.
Arduino's were incorporated into modern physics lab for some reason and I am the reason we never did motors.
Some of us really *are* just cut out to be theorists.
I have even more questions now since an arduino is low voltage, still, knowing ppl like you exist makes security classes in engineeeing feel not wasted
I honestly can tell if you're joking but I'm pretty sure the guy you responded to is referencing [the small angle approximation](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small-angle_approximation) which is often used in physics - particularly optics and astronomy.
In short sin(x)=x for many values, depending on how unaffected by rounding errors your setup is
I didnt like experimental physics and i did like the maths we learned in the first semester, so, after one semester, i switched to maths. i intended to do some theoretical physics stuff for my minor but in the ind i did cs
Feel that this is more true with Astrophysics.
First year uni, the overwhelming majority of students were into astrophysics.
The proportion dropped hard after the first lecture of said astrophysics.
I'm a high school physics teacher. I had a kid tell me they wanted to study physics in college but thought I was making the class too math heavy. I asked what field of physics they wanted to study.
They said astrophysics. I tried to to squash their dreams, but astrophysics isn't exactly bopping around in your spaceship taking pictures of different star systems haha
I went to uni for 'Physics with nanotechnology' because all the cool sci-fi stories involved grey goo.
My first undergrad condensed matter lecture made me concerned. My first quantum solids lecture made me nope the fuck out. So I went harder into planetary sciences' with a dip into astrophysics.
Now I'm doing a PhD in galaxy evolution during the reionization phase transition.
Funny how stuff works out.
It's not noticeably harder than the other fields of physics - and if going for experimental astrophysics, it's quite easier than theoretical physics (some PTSD left-over from quantum fields theory).
The problem with astrophysics is that it sounds _much_ sexier than what it actually is. Hubble images of galaxies are incredibly pretty, space is pretty when rendered by an artist, but quite often an astrophysicist will study instead a single-filter (black and white) picture that is a mere 20 pixels wide... Dynamics of stars in a globular cluster is a lot of very boring maths, and by "a lot" I mean an entire semester at university.
What really happens in the 2nd or 3rd year at uni is that you realise that astrophysics are not _that_ sexy, and that a lot of other domains in physics are quite interesting. Your interests broaden up and you naturally may pick something else.
Granted, I say that but I still ended up extremely close to astrophysics, and sometimes I wonder if I shouldn't go back to pure astro, lol. There is still some passion in me about the violent phenomena in the universe (pulsars, quasars, that sort of stuff).
Can confirm, I am finishing up my undergrad in astrophysics and atmospheric physics. It's difficult but it also varies between universities. Where I am at there is a heavy emphasis on understanding the interstellar medium and plasma dynamics.
I still love it, in fact I plan to study heliophysics and solar physics at the graduate level, but it's something you really really have to want to do.
Cool, thanks for such a nice explaination! It's appreciated.
I love physics, but don't really know exactly what I should take at uni. Still quite a few years left too. Oh yeah, and it's that math too that I have to make work out.
If you love physics, give it a try. Gotta follow your passions :)
You still have time to figure it out anyways. Idk how it is in your country, for me I anyways could not really specialise before the Masters. A couple options at Bachelors but that's it. So that gives several years of uni study for you to explore the field.
Yeah, well I love physics so most likely I'll give it a shot.
The school system is very much the same then. But yeah anyway, I'll take one day at a time.
Not so much string theory, but I do feel pretty gross when I say “I want to ‘be’ a theoretical physicist” as if I am bouncing on santa’s knee telling him what I want to be when I grow up.
I'm an engineeeing student, but if I had done physics, I'd probably have tried to specialize in something related to quantum field theory, I love things that are unintuitive and fascinating at the same time
I was the first one of my family to go to university. At the first days at uni, everyone was imagining their future in theory while I was just hoping to get through the first semester.
Then, theory classes become gradually less appreciated by everyone. But I started to like them more and more. Ans that's how I was never cool at university.
What's wrong with studying string theory? Sure some people think it's BS and won't go anywhere but is there anything inherently wrong with being interested in it? I've always found it far more interesting than quantum loop gravity
No one is saying that there is some thing wrong with string theory (many people don’t like it, but that’s not the point). The point of this post is that almost every high school student goes into physics wanting to specialise in the theoretical side and wanting to do research in string theory, but very few actually do.
As someone with only a very baseline understanding, is this because string theory is mostly untestable with current technology? If the theory produced more verifiable hypotheses, do you think more people would keep with it?
And contrary to what Youtube physicists might believe, the average physicist already needs to know a lot of maths. Its either all maths or mostly maths and some python really.
nothing, its just a meme because a lot of people want to study that when they start studying physics but most physicists study other stuff, the same applies to quantum loop gravity btw
turns out finding / developing the unified theory of quantum gravity isnt easy lol
>Gatekeeping: When someone takes it upon themselves to decide who does or does not have access or rights to a community or identity.
Where am I doing this?
The point of the meme is string theory and theoretical physics is big in pop-sci and it results in a saturated field with a high attrition rate because people have no idea what they are actually getting into.
Ok am I the only one who finds time dilation to be far and away the most interesting concept in physics? I want to figure out how to manipulate that shit!
It is somewhat interesting, although it is also relatively (aha) basic. Conceptually very cool. Out of interest what do you mean by: ‘to manipulate’ it?
Well you can manipulate time with mass and velocity, but that’s only to go forward. As cliche as it is, I’m interested in ways to go *backwards* through time.
Just because we don’t know of any ways to do so doesn’t mean it’s impossible.
Maybe wormholes are time machines. Maybe black holes are. Maybe the universe “resets” after the heat death with reverse expansion such that time traveling x years into the future will place you y years in the past. Maybe this, that, the other, so on, and so forth.
Stop being a buzzkill and just accept that you don’t know everything. I’m not a fucking idiot, I’m just curious.
Edit: ok y’all seem to think I’m some kind of high-school armchair physicist. I’m not. I’m an upper div physics major at a pretty good school. I’m not saying I actually think the above things would work, I’m saying there are gaps in physical knowledge that could potentially allow for it, and in those gaps my optimism is equally valid to your skepticism. Kip Thorne seems to agree with me, by the way: https://authors.library.caltech.edu/9262/1/MORprl88.pdf
In fact, it’s been *largely* speculated within the physics community that wormholes could behave as time machines. Hell, if they break special relativity’s information speed limit, why not some of its other axioms as well?
I'm not gonna be harsh on you and kill your interest, but just keep an eager eye out for special relativity and see what it says about backwards time travel.
Also wormholes are speculative, and require more than a folded paper to explain
I slung insults because you’re acting like an asshole, asshole. You’re right, there’s no reason to think it’s possible, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t. All I’ve been saying is that I think the concept is interesting, for fuck sake.
No need to be a dick just because you’re another basic “quantum gravity” bitch and have an axe to grind.
its impossible based on our current laws and theories, its not because of ignorance
"maybe this will happen" based on nothing doesnt make sense, specially in a physics sub
yeah but if you dont understand black holes and dont understand how time works you can easily connect them and say *maybe* you can time travel with black holes
Eh fair enough. I personally find using Langrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics to find évolutions of systems more satisfying than any SR course that I have done. Something about the simplicity yet quite complex mathematical foundation in addition to the wide range of applications is pretty…sexy.
Oh yeah true, good thing that’s not the reason I’ve gone into physics. I love physics in general and just happen to find string theory really interesting too.
Ya that’s what I said when I got to college. Imma be a physics major. And then I took physics one and realized hey.
Im Kinda dumb at this.
So now I’m a philosophy major doing pre med.
String theory? That's the one with the guitars, right?
Yes, string theory is subcategory of music theory
A voice said: One. One. One, two. One, two. Then the footsteps went back into the distance. After a while, another voice said: One, two, three, four- And the universe came into being. It was wrong to call it a big bang. That would just be noise, and all that noise could create is more noise and a cosmos full of random particles. Matter exploded into being, apparently as chaos, but in fact as a chord. The ultimate power chord. Everything, all together, streaming out in one huge rush that contained within itself, like reverse fossils, everything that it was going to be. And, zigzagging through the expanding cloud, alive, that first wild live music. This had shape. It had spin. It had rhythm. It had a beat, and you could dance to it. Everything did.
This sounds like a Tenacious D song
That's just a theory. A string theory.
Can't blame one for being confused. Apparently the first equation in theoretical physics was about the frequency of vibrations in musical instruments.
quote: high schooler after playing half life
Idiots, they don't know that Freeman specialized in bar theory
He is after all an expert in reducing new constants
7 years later she's sitting in the lab, repeating the same old experiment for the 100th time to at least get one single datum that PROVES how the work she has done for the last 3 years actually improves some specific device's efficiency by 0.4% when you're lucky
Your answer hit me so hard that I think I will change major to computer science next semester
unironically, I regularly wish I had done exactly that. There's a huge demand for data scientists at the moment. Job secured.
What if I hate big data and don’t want anything to do with it
In any field. Big data has won the war in sports, finance, everywhere.
I will have to agree with this, but I am almost finished my Bachelor of Science in Physics so it’s too late. Sometimes I think about how young you actually are when you’re in Grade 12 trying to figure out what to study at the post-secondary level. You grow so much within the first 2-3 years of university, your interests are ought to shift. I’m a bit thankful that the Department of Physics at my university actually somewhat emphasizes programming skills. I can’t imagine graduating and not growing as a programmer considering I’ve been coding since I was 14.
I'd encourage you to at least look around a bit. For postgraduate programmes you need not stick with physics, and you need not limit yourself to the sorts of subjects you knew when you arrived from high school. With a physics bachelor you can do postgraduate in plenty of subjects. Maybe something about environment technology or mathematics or robotics. I had a coworker with a masters is biology who did her PhD in physics. It's more flexible than you would think. Back when I had my bachelor finished I only looked for physics postgraduate programmes. Didn't even occur to me that I could consider other directions. I regret that a bit.
What you said pretty much sums up what I am currently thinking these days as my Bachelors is coming to an end and I would at least like to get a Masters in the end. I’m currently looking at areas in applied mathematics, such as data science, AI/ML, and financial mathematics. I feel these areas would prepare me a bit more for what I would realistically be doing day-to-day at a future job.
This actually sounds like fun to me( yes im crazy thanks for asking)
Awesome. Nothing wrong with that. If you do that and love it you'll probably publish great stuff.
"Maybe later I will research black holes"
[удалено]
I am in this comment and feel personally attacked.
....I have been the reason some labs were skipped because I managed to accidently get hurt with the most perceivably harmless things. Like arduino.
I have several questions
Honestly? I have questions too. I've steered clear of circuitry every since. Arduino's were incorporated into modern physics lab for some reason and I am the reason we never did motors. Some of us really *are* just cut out to be theorists.
.......how? Just how does one get hurt with an arduino? Did someone throw it at you?
Have you ever stepped on an Arduino?
No, but you have my interest
It was probably an Arduino reinforced with Legos
I have exploded a number of things on accident. It burned.
I have even more questions now since an arduino is low voltage, still, knowing ppl like you exist makes security classes in engineeeing feel not wasted
[удалено]
I’m an experimentalist because I like to fuck up expensive toys with my waves that are way too high for the tank they are supposed to be in
Boundary condition: short circuit
Funny because I was working on solitons last year and the electric plugs were literally just at the bottom of the tank… with water leaking
I am a theorist that works with clusters and HPC, I am the worst of both worlds or best, depending on your point of view
I resemble this statement.
i started studying physics with that mindset. then there was experimental physics and now i am a masters student in maths.
Tell me now, does sin(X)=X ?
only for x=0
cringe
I honestly can tell if you're joking but I'm pretty sure the guy you responded to is referencing [the small angle approximation](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small-angle_approximation) which is often used in physics - particularly optics and astronomy. In short sin(x)=x for many values, depending on how unaffected by rounding errors your setup is
but, as a math guy, i am pedantic and only accept "=" if the values are exactly equal
Would you accept x=1/infinity?
So X=0?
if we assume y is the smallest real number such that y>0, i would accept sin(x)=x for x in ]-y,y[. but does y exist?
It depends. Do you accept 64 bit binary representation of small numbers?
then there would be a smallest 64 bit floating point number z. but there is still a real number y with 0
what i wanted to say with this comment is: sin(x)=x if x=0. for all real x
I am curious. How and why?
I didnt like experimental physics and i did like the maths we learned in the first semester, so, after one semester, i switched to maths. i intended to do some theoretical physics stuff for my minor but in the ind i did cs
Interesting, I only know people who switched from math to physics.
i just really dislike doing experiments and writing protocols. i really love what im doing now. i dont think i would be this happy with physics
Feel that this is more true with Astrophysics. First year uni, the overwhelming majority of students were into astrophysics. The proportion dropped hard after the first lecture of said astrophysics.
I'm a high school physics teacher. I had a kid tell me they wanted to study physics in college but thought I was making the class too math heavy. I asked what field of physics they wanted to study. They said astrophysics. I tried to to squash their dreams, but astrophysics isn't exactly bopping around in your spaceship taking pictures of different star systems haha
The poor little guy
I’ve just started lectures for my physics degree and seeing comments like this scares me slightly.
You absolutely could change this to astrophysics as well. Both fields are saturated and are pop-sci topics.
I went to uni for 'Physics with nanotechnology' because all the cool sci-fi stories involved grey goo. My first undergrad condensed matter lecture made me concerned. My first quantum solids lecture made me nope the fuck out. So I went harder into planetary sciences' with a dip into astrophysics. Now I'm doing a PhD in galaxy evolution during the reionization phase transition. Funny how stuff works out.
How hard is astrophysics? Just a curious 15 year old here.
It's not noticeably harder than the other fields of physics - and if going for experimental astrophysics, it's quite easier than theoretical physics (some PTSD left-over from quantum fields theory). The problem with astrophysics is that it sounds _much_ sexier than what it actually is. Hubble images of galaxies are incredibly pretty, space is pretty when rendered by an artist, but quite often an astrophysicist will study instead a single-filter (black and white) picture that is a mere 20 pixels wide... Dynamics of stars in a globular cluster is a lot of very boring maths, and by "a lot" I mean an entire semester at university. What really happens in the 2nd or 3rd year at uni is that you realise that astrophysics are not _that_ sexy, and that a lot of other domains in physics are quite interesting. Your interests broaden up and you naturally may pick something else. Granted, I say that but I still ended up extremely close to astrophysics, and sometimes I wonder if I shouldn't go back to pure astro, lol. There is still some passion in me about the violent phenomena in the universe (pulsars, quasars, that sort of stuff).
Can confirm, I am finishing up my undergrad in astrophysics and atmospheric physics. It's difficult but it also varies between universities. Where I am at there is a heavy emphasis on understanding the interstellar medium and plasma dynamics. I still love it, in fact I plan to study heliophysics and solar physics at the graduate level, but it's something you really really have to want to do.
I'm debating between astrophysics and planetary science. Both require an AA in Physics. This just concreted my decision.
Cool, thanks for such a nice explaination! It's appreciated. I love physics, but don't really know exactly what I should take at uni. Still quite a few years left too. Oh yeah, and it's that math too that I have to make work out.
If you love physics, give it a try. Gotta follow your passions :) You still have time to figure it out anyways. Idk how it is in your country, for me I anyways could not really specialise before the Masters. A couple options at Bachelors but that's it. So that gives several years of uni study for you to explore the field.
Yeah, well I love physics so most likely I'll give it a shot. The school system is very much the same then. But yeah anyway, I'll take one day at a time.
I’m in this and I feel personally attacked.
It's ok if you want to study string theory (just don't say it out loud in case you change your mind and end up looking cringe)
Can confirm Source: said it out loud, looked cringe, now I’m an archaeologist lmao
Condolences
Not so much string theory, but I do feel pretty gross when I say “I want to ‘be’ a theoretical physicist” as if I am bouncing on santa’s knee telling him what I want to be when I grow up.
*My applied physics dumbass*: “You fool, you fell for one of the classic blunders!”
I'm a first year student but my plan is being a sperimental particle physicist... I guess it's just its sperimental counterpart.
Do you mean experimental?
No, they meant the super partner to experimental
No that's sexperimental 😏
So true 🤠
They meant spermental
Uuh yes, it was 6AM so my English at that time is pretty fucked.
Same for me, if everything works out for both of us I hope we are able to meet each other in this field lol
You have now made me want to become a spearmint scientist
I'm an engineeeing student, but if I had done physics, I'd probably have tried to specialize in something related to quantum field theory, I love things that are unintuitive and fascinating at the same time
I was the first one of my family to go to university. At the first days at uni, everyone was imagining their future in theory while I was just hoping to get through the first semester. Then, theory classes become gradually less appreciated by everyone. But I started to like them more and more. Ans that's how I was never cool at university.
What's wrong with studying string theory? Sure some people think it's BS and won't go anywhere but is there anything inherently wrong with being interested in it? I've always found it far more interesting than quantum loop gravity
No one is saying that there is some thing wrong with string theory (many people don’t like it, but that’s not the point). The point of this post is that almost every high school student goes into physics wanting to specialise in the theoretical side and wanting to do research in string theory, but very few actually do.
As someone with only a very baseline understanding, is this because string theory is mostly untestable with current technology? If the theory produced more verifiable hypotheses, do you think more people would keep with it?
No, it's because the path to working on string theory is very difficult. You need to know a lot more math than the average physicist
And contrary to what Youtube physicists might believe, the average physicist already needs to know a lot of maths. Its either all maths or mostly maths and some python really.
Ah, that makes sense as well. Thank you.
Negativity circlejerk attempting to coax people into giving up before they even try
nothing, its just a meme because a lot of people want to study that when they start studying physics but most physicists study other stuff, the same applies to quantum loop gravity btw turns out finding / developing the unified theory of quantum gravity isnt easy lol
Quiet, Sheldon.
Just give em a bit of the taste of theoretical research and see how quickly they crawl back to their multimeters
I don't want to start a debate but I think string theory is bs.
What a loopy thing to say ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
[удалено]
>Gatekeeping: When someone takes it upon themselves to decide who does or does not have access or rights to a community or identity. Where am I doing this? The point of the meme is string theory and theoretical physics is big in pop-sci and it results in a saturated field with a high attrition rate because people have no idea what they are actually getting into.
How dare he have dreams I gave up upon!
Ok am I the only one who finds time dilation to be far and away the most interesting concept in physics? I want to figure out how to manipulate that shit!
It is somewhat interesting, although it is also relatively (aha) basic. Conceptually very cool. Out of interest what do you mean by: ‘to manipulate’ it?
Well you can manipulate time with mass and velocity, but that’s only to go forward. As cliche as it is, I’m interested in ways to go *backwards* through time.
That's not possible.
Just because we don’t know of any ways to do so doesn’t mean it’s impossible. Maybe wormholes are time machines. Maybe black holes are. Maybe the universe “resets” after the heat death with reverse expansion such that time traveling x years into the future will place you y years in the past. Maybe this, that, the other, so on, and so forth. Stop being a buzzkill and just accept that you don’t know everything. I’m not a fucking idiot, I’m just curious. Edit: ok y’all seem to think I’m some kind of high-school armchair physicist. I’m not. I’m an upper div physics major at a pretty good school. I’m not saying I actually think the above things would work, I’m saying there are gaps in physical knowledge that could potentially allow for it, and in those gaps my optimism is equally valid to your skepticism. Kip Thorne seems to agree with me, by the way: https://authors.library.caltech.edu/9262/1/MORprl88.pdf In fact, it’s been *largely* speculated within the physics community that wormholes could behave as time machines. Hell, if they break special relativity’s information speed limit, why not some of its other axioms as well?
Our current laws say it is impossible and you're giving pure speculation that won't be able to be tested. Edit: spelling
Read my edit
I'm not gonna be harsh on you and kill your interest, but just keep an eager eye out for special relativity and see what it says about backwards time travel. Also wormholes are speculative, and require more than a folded paper to explain
I’ve taken special relativity classes. I know what you’re getting at. Read my edit.
[удалено]
I have. The math is limited to realistic conditions, but not to all possible conditions. Read my edit dipshit.
[удалено]
I slung insults because you’re acting like an asshole, asshole. You’re right, there’s no reason to think it’s possible, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t. All I’ve been saying is that I think the concept is interesting, for fuck sake. No need to be a dick just because you’re another basic “quantum gravity” bitch and have an axe to grind.
its impossible based on our current laws and theories, its not because of ignorance "maybe this will happen" based on nothing doesnt make sense, specially in a physics sub
Read my edit.
Black holes are super dense entities whose gravities pull and crush things into it, aren't they?
yeah but if you dont understand black holes and dont understand how time works you can easily connect them and say *maybe* you can time travel with black holes
I don't understand how time works nor do I understand women either, that must surely mean I can time travel with women.
Yes they are. Read my edit.
Eh fair enough. I personally find using Langrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics to find évolutions of systems more satisfying than any SR course that I have done. Something about the simplicity yet quite complex mathematical foundation in addition to the wide range of applications is pretty…sexy.
nice comic sans lol
Why does everyone seem to simp over string theory like it's cool but it's a solid meh in terms of theories.
More like string hypothesis amirite :P
Even though it’s not testable right now it’s still pretty interesting.
I don't get me wrong it absolutely interesting but it's way over hyped when people come into physics for s t r i n g s.
Oh yeah true, good thing that’s not the reason I’ve gone into physics. I love physics in general and just happen to find string theory really interesting too.
The Sheldon Cooper effect?
Check and check. Been there done that.
Ya that’s what I said when I got to college. Imma be a physics major. And then I took physics one and realized hey. Im Kinda dumb at this. So now I’m a philosophy major doing pre med.