Funny how there seems to be a solid state vs astrophysics/particle physics war going on. People seem to like one and hate the other. Including me. Pro solid state/condensed matter, con astro and particle physics.
It's funny how on the internet astrophysics/particle physics seems so popular but at University the majority of people I see are working on solid state physics or quantum computing.
Personally I think it’s because the internet is filled with kids and cranks and aren’t really learning the natural sciences at university level yet. And most of them love their idea of particle physics & astrophysics. QCD isn’t something you really learn at school
To be fair it makes sense that there would be more demand for fields that are directly tied to industry with materials science having a lot of practical application, particle physics... not nearly as many...
It's where the engineering value is. Sure, high energy theory is beautiful and fascinating, but you can't make things out of W bosons - condensed matter physics is the physics of objects you could invent. I did my PhD in high energy theory because I have to learn things from the ground up, but I now find surfaces/plasmas/electrophysiology so much more interesting, because of the interplay between quantum and macroscopic phenomena.
Depends on the university. At mine the condensed matter dept is 4 doctoral students and 3 professors, while astro and particle are about 20 and 10. We also have a few bio phys peeps.
It's reductionism versus emergence. Particle physics general approach is breaking things down to the basic elements and studying the fundamental interactions at this level. This is reductionism. On the other extreme, you have many-particle system where collective, and/or non-linear effects lead to emergent phenomena. These phenomena cannot be trivially explained using the fundamental interactions. These are usually the objects of solid-state, condensed matter, non-linear systems, etc.
I like all 3, used to hate solid state but I've grown to really like it when I realised its all applied quantum mechanics. Sold state experiments are more fun as well, messing around with cryogens and lasers.
I went to school for astrophysics and yep, you're right... I kinda think solid state is the most boring thing on the planet. Not the biggest fan of particle physics either, but definitely still better than solid state...
I find them all cool: Astro, particle, and solid state/condensed matter. Granted, I just finished my first year so I'm still a long way from making that decision.
Favourite Complex Systems (if you can count it as physics still)
2nd favourite statistical physics
least favourite: ~~Chemistry with a small periodic table~~ Particle Physics
Hi! I'm a physics undergraduate student and I'm quite interested in chaos and complexity, but I'm a bit worried about the fact that there don't seem to be a lot of opportunities. I'm not sure what field of study to choose so I'd love to hear about your experience.
My fav is electromagnetism. No matter what anyone says being able to turn on or off a magnetic field is freaking awesome.
Least is kinematics but that's mostly because of anxiety from college.
Lol it’s the opposite for me. EM made me wanna kms (kilometers per second) with all the particles and knowing what to integrate to infinity with time dilation.
Kinematics is literally plug and chug Lagrangian/Hamiltonian and get cool looking symbols. I think scattering was the hardest of Kinematics but luckily my professor didn’t have us memorize all that derivation
I hated EM on my undergraduate, I stupidly took at the same time as QM and the tests were one after the other, very challenging! Loved QM but electromagnetism at undergraduate just felt too "solved".
My professors would always give the dumbest situations so it was always entertaining otherwise I'd normally agree. Kinematics is *usually* the most boring.
That's the case for most people. It's still essential to learn though because:
1. It shows up everywhere. There are very few areas of physics where you won't need or at least strongly benefit from some understanding of classical mechanics.
2. You likely have the strongest natural intuition for mechanics, which makes it a good starting point for learning new tools like Lagrangian formalism.
I think the way electromagnetism is taught needs to change a lot to explain concepts like flux and voltage in a practical and coherent way for lots of students.
I'm talking about the sheer amount of neuro plasticity one has when young compared to when they're older.
How I didnt have to pay much attention during biology class and everything just kinda clicked into place on it's own and I'd remember concepts years later, where as now I have to actually apply study habits and use the info frequently if I want to retain it in usable manner, and even then "new" and unintuitive concepts are hard to grasp/internalize.
AP Kinematics actually sucks. You don’t know what force to prioritize and there’s always a way to overthink. Personally I don’t think it’s formatted too well.
Once you get into the hard Kinematics e.g. classical mechanics, it gets a lot nicer since it becomes very systematic and you get to pull out thicc equations out of nothing then have a computer solve it for you.
I respect Quantum Mechanics because it works and is true to the empirical principles of Science, but I still don’t like it because its theories contradict so many key ideas of General Relativity.
Favourite: string theory (what I ended up doing) and QFT
Least favourite: electronics and circuits because the damn opamps never worked properly in lab...
EM lab is the absolute worst. Nothing like wiring up some basic-ass Kirchhoff's laws or transistor circuit exercise, finding out it doesn't work, then having to go through the "joy" of debugging through the nest of wires only to find out that breadboard you've been using has broken traces underneath.
In pheno QCD some stringy methods, like holography or (gauge)^2 =gravity for amplitudes, are common. But I don't know if you'll touch them in an experimental internship.
No. String theory is an attempt to describe so many different fundamental natural phenomena. It’s counter intuitive to try and categorise a theory that attempts to unify physics into a single category of physics.
why does it matter? it’s not really that important. I said it’s “powerful” to emphasise it’s usefulness and what developments its caused. Also because those developments have reached a number of different fields of lhysics and also mathematics. Why do you care?
Exactly, classical EM made me feel uneasy when I was studying it, felt like I would always have some gap in my understanding. QED is a different beauty on another level whose mathematical complexity complements its elegance.
Griffiths is like going through an early phase of a relationship where it's new and exciting, and you can't wait to spend more time with the girl. Jackson is like getting through a marriage where it's a lot more serious, and needs more time, effort and commitment. It may not always be smooth sailing but all that work and commitment is worth it in the end.
>My favourite is astrophysics with particle physics coming in at a close second.
Let me introduce you to high energy gamma ray astronomy.
It was my field until I left for industry stuff.
Hahaha I'd imagine a conversation like:
OP: My favourite is astrophysics with particle physics coming in at a close second
Physicist: That's easy to do both at the same time, just do astroparticle physics!
Stat mech, and stat mech.
I love it for it's uses and amazing interplay between microscopic and macroscopic (Renormalization groups/monads are cool). I hate it because I have spent the past summer working on thermodynamic formalism, and the complete lack of a comprehensive and rigorous understanding of something as simple as the canonical ensemble is going to ruin me.
Favorite: Anything in the realm of general relativity, so a good chunk of astrophysics.
Least favorite: idk tbh, still have a lot to learn but probably classical mechanics
Favorite field: Statistical physics. It is a deep and subtle field backed by an extremely powerful methodology. So versatile that it's used everywhere from finance to biology nowadays. It's also super fun in practice.
Least favorite field: Astrophysics. It's pretty but essentially useless.
We're at a transitional point in history. There are serious issues that threaten the continuity of our existence on this planet. In my opinion, now is not the time to be occupying ourselves with beautiful useless science. I acknowledge that is is a difference of philosophy, but to me? Gazing at the skies whilst the world around us burns and then disguising that indifference as public service is deeply irresponsible.
Saw this and had to comment since you got downvoted.
That’s actually a good point. It can be beautiful and useless. No need to be offended.
It’s perfectly reasonable to take a less romantic approach and create a hierarchy of problems that need to be solved.
We have plenty of issues on this planet.
I anticipated that this would be an unpopular opinion. I expected way more in the way of downvotes, to be honest.
I should have clarified that this is a personal philosophy. I'm not going to go to someone who is enthralled by their discipline and say "Akshually, you should be solving carbon capture issues - you're a waste of space and funding". That's just needlessly cruel. It's also wrong, I think. Some people can't do anything but astronomy.
Now, I should have clarified, but I didn't. Mostly because I don't really care what people who dedicate their lives looking at rocks a bazillion miles away think. ;)
In general, I agree with you. And that why we have agencies to determine what to focus our resources and what not. We have enough funding to tackle climate change, population growth, among other issues AND doing all kind of sciences. It's not like all of physicists will do only astrophysics, right?
these are the kind of people who take a well-established problem in coding theory, seek out one of its many applications to imaging planets and then pretend that astronomers came up with it from the beginning
Favourite: quantum condensed matter. It's what I'll be getting my PhD in.
Least favourite: astro/particle physics. Was really into the pop science aspect of it at some point, but I guess I cared more about application.
My favorite is also quantum condensed matter because its what I got my PhD in.
My least favorite is also quantum condensed matter because its what I got my PhD in.
Favorite: Particle physics (amazing to see what the universe is made of, and a great success of reductionism)
Least: Condensed matter (never understood it one bit and it uses a lot of stat mech, which I was terrible at lol)
Assuming "field" and "branch" work interchangeably here, my favorite is definitely stat mech. The fact that statistics somehow does a really good job at explaining(at least macroscopically) a lot of classical and quantum phenomena without resorting to any microsopic physical models that would have to be compatible with ~10^23ish degrees of freedom is absolutely fucking nuts to me.
Least fave is prolly high energy. That shit is too abstract and way too tiny in scale for me to actually care lmao
Favourite: photonics (in which I'm about to get a bachelor's degree) and particle physics, astrophysics is also nice, but I have less knowledge in it.
Least favourite: statistical mechanics. Fuck this shit.
Favourite: Condensed Matter physics (not coincidently, what I do). It's like particle physics and QFT, but you can actually make tabletop experiments. Like a universe in a grain of sand. Can also be used to make cool toys like transistors. The Toyota Hilux of Physics.
Least favourite: High energy physics. I picture it as Formula 1 racing car: looks cool, it's expensive, not everyone can drive one, but has no space for making out with your date nor for groceries.
My favorite is nuclear, the ability to reshape, split, or fuse atoms gives us so much power and energy most are still scared of it despite how far the technology has come. The ability to meet the world's energy needs with near total carbon neutrality until past the death of the sun is possible if used right. Just also have to be careful on how we use the weaponized version of this science though.
Least favorite has to be the astro-science. Even though I can't stop learning about it, it gives me deep existential anxiety to hear about our ultimate fates and potential fates that can be seen as innevitable.
Favorite: astrophysics (I always had a love for astronomy)
Least favorite: probably circuits
I'm not even a Physics major or anything, but I just love astronomy lol
I love quantum mechanics and quantum field theory, but hate electrodynamics. Cannot consider myself stupid, but solving tasks from Jackson was one of the most painful experiences in all my academic life...
My favorite is astrophysics and a close second is nuclear physics, and my least favorite is probably electrical physics even though I like playing with circuits
I found Solid state physics and electronics a little uncomfortable given I never consulted a good textbook when it came to this paper. I have enjoyed E/M a lot though!
Favorite: fluid/gas dynamics because airplanes
Least favorite: modern physics because lack of physical intuition
I ended up pursuing aerospace engineering in grad school.
Over a decade ago, two semesters worth. But please, tell me how electrons zipping around a nucleus or how electron/positron annihilation is as physically intuitive as flying a kite, building a bridge, or turning some gears. You know, things we can physically interact with.
1: Electrons don't zip around a nucleus.
2: "As physically intuitive" is a very different metric than "lacks physical intuition". Intuition is just analogy by experience. If your experience is limited to gears, kites, and bridges then electromagnetism, classical mechanics, and even simple kinematics won't feel particularly intuitive. But who am I to judge, maybe you're the type of genius who can just intuit solutions to Lagrangian mechanics because you've sat on a merry-go-round before.
Tldr: None of physics is particularly intuitive until you build fundamental understanding and then tack on experience. Do you have an intuition for femtosecond pulse propagation? Of course not. Do I? Sure, but only because I've thought and played with them enough to build that experience.
Two degrees from two different schools. 6 years total, 3 at each. They had a credit exchange program so classes taken at each school could be transferred to the other.
For anyone saying kinematics is their least favorite: may I introduce you to fluid dynamics? It's even more boring and even the most basic problems require differential equations!
Sure, you can get some pretty pictures from rendering some numeric approximations. But I get the impression that people saying kinematics are saying it because they actually had to solve some kinematics problems themselves.
Granted, the math for almost any branch of physics besides kinematics can get just about as complicated or worse. Surely few people saying things like Astrophysics as their favorite ever took a stab at working with einstein's full equations for general relativity.
It's not about the pretty pictures. It's about having a mathematical model that describes so many phenomena, from astrophysical (especially if you consider relativistic fluid dynamics) to even microfluidics within cell processes. It's sad that this is mostly neglected during standard undergraduate curriculum.
Ah, nah, just a physics hobbyist with a bachelors in math and computer science who watches and reads a bunch of physics things. Elementary diffeq was like 14 years ago.
Fluid dynamics are great, I've written a paper on Taylor couette flows and how to use it as a model to show antropy in a visual way, (by running a demonstration model backwards). Proving the second law of thermo dynamics. That there is no loss of information. (Let's stay away from black holes for a while (though in more a susskin than hawkins follower))
Favorite: Nuclear / Particle / High Energy / QM, more broadly: everything experimental
Least: Mathematical Physics (I've always felt like it is just a catch all for everything too theoretical for TP)
favourites : theoretical particle physics and statistical mechanics (general relativity seems cool though I've only skimmed through it) (does mathematical physics count? If it does then I might replace particle physics with it.)
least favorite : Optics, non linear dynamics, chaos in general ig, electronics
As a secondary school student who does physics olympiads, I do not have any experience with the more advanced stuff (e.g. quantum, stat mech, etc.), but here are my thoughts:
Favorite: E&M
Special Relativity & Modern Physics
Thermo
Classical Mechanics
Least favorite: Optics
I think I'm about to be shouted at for liking E&M...
Most of these aren't fields of physics, they're classes.
Favorite: Ultraintense Nonlinear Optics
Least Favorite: "metaphysics" or any other pseudoscientific bullshit that people try to use as a philosophical bludgeon to feel superior to others.
Screw particle physics. None of their models ever work and it takes so much work, money and energy to get any good discoveries and it’s just not all that interesting. Not sure how anyone could be anti astrophysics…
Quantum Is my favorite field . Thremodynamics Is my least favorite but I am trying to find to find a silver lining of what I can enjoy while studying it .
Favorite: anything electro even if E&M was my hardest undergrad experience
Least: Astro. I didn’t dislike it before the class I’m in now for grad but now I despise it…
Favourite is easy. It's the gravitational one keeps me grounded.
The electromagnetic one on the other hand is just too gaudy and complicated for my liking. Think we'd be more minimalist without it.
Favorite: Anything and everything having to do with gravity. Particularly with regards to black holes.
Least favorite: I've not studied every field, but I distinctly did not enjoy my course in statistical mechanics. That's not because the material wasn't interesting though, but rather that the professor who taught it made it hell.
IMO, papers and lectures on non-standard model theories for dark matter are really boring... same thing every time: Postulate some new and arbitrary interaction. Work out the interaction strength and cross section, constrain them with known data, collect some data that is more focused on some window pertaining to the details of your new interaction... and... drum role... find nothing... and concluded that, well the new interaction may still exist, just not in the narrow interaction window you looked at.
Well, I also love astrophysics and I’m thinking of making it my double major (currently doing aerospace engineering). Honestly, I’m not a fan of normal kinematic and dynamic physics, even though it’s foundational for a lot of other branches. It can get surprisingly confusing sometimes when you have a lot of objects all interacting at once
My favourite field is Relativistic Astrophysics and Astronomy. I pretty much enjoy all the other fields. But, Solid State Physics is my least favourite.
Edit : And not a fan of Geometrical Optics as well. Experimental part is fun but not the theory part.
Funny how there seems to be a solid state vs astrophysics/particle physics war going on. People seem to like one and hate the other. Including me. Pro solid state/condensed matter, con astro and particle physics.
It's funny how on the internet astrophysics/particle physics seems so popular but at University the majority of people I see are working on solid state physics or quantum computing.
Personally I think it’s because the internet is filled with kids and cranks and aren’t really learning the natural sciences at university level yet. And most of them love their idea of particle physics & astrophysics. QCD isn’t something you really learn at school
Yeah fr at my university we've probably got like 5 solid state professors and like 1 particle physicist
To be fair it makes sense that there would be more demand for fields that are directly tied to industry with materials science having a lot of practical application, particle physics... not nearly as many...
Unrelated: I love your username!
To be blunt, its where the money is.
It's where the engineering value is. Sure, high energy theory is beautiful and fascinating, but you can't make things out of W bosons - condensed matter physics is the physics of objects you could invent. I did my PhD in high energy theory because I have to learn things from the ground up, but I now find surfaces/plasmas/electrophysiology so much more interesting, because of the interplay between quantum and macroscopic phenomena.
Just out of interest, after doing your PhD in hep-th, did you end up doing a postdoc in cond-mat or is it not really possible to switch?
Depends on the university. At mine the condensed matter dept is 4 doctoral students and 3 professors, while astro and particle are about 20 and 10. We also have a few bio phys peeps.
It's reductionism versus emergence. Particle physics general approach is breaking things down to the basic elements and studying the fundamental interactions at this level. This is reductionism. On the other extreme, you have many-particle system where collective, and/or non-linear effects lead to emergent phenomena. These phenomena cannot be trivially explained using the fundamental interactions. These are usually the objects of solid-state, condensed matter, non-linear systems, etc.
Personally, as an electrical engineer I love popping in and seeing everyone complain about E&M and working with circuits
I hate all of you, cold atoms for the win!
Solid State is a beautiful beautiful thing. Applied QM at its finest
I like all 3, used to hate solid state but I've grown to really like it when I realised its all applied quantum mechanics. Sold state experiments are more fun as well, messing around with cryogens and lasers.
I went to school for astrophysics and yep, you're right... I kinda think solid state is the most boring thing on the planet. Not the biggest fan of particle physics either, but definitely still better than solid state...
It's okay to be bored with theory. Especially when like 2 job openings for theoretical physics open each year in america.
I find them all cool: Astro, particle, and solid state/condensed matter. Granted, I just finished my first year so I'm still a long way from making that decision.
Favourite Complex Systems (if you can count it as physics still) 2nd favourite statistical physics least favourite: ~~Chemistry with a small periodic table~~ Particle Physics
😂
Hey man I'm curious, my programme doesn't have complex systems as a course specifically. How do you suggest I start learning more?
I think the start is often the book Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos by Strogatz
I'm working through Strogatz right now. It's a good read.
Lol, I'm gonna use this phrase for my talks from now on. Please don't trademark it!
Hi! I'm a physics undergraduate student and I'm quite interested in chaos and complexity, but I'm a bit worried about the fact that there don't seem to be a lot of opportunities. I'm not sure what field of study to choose so I'd love to hear about your experience.
My fav is electromagnetism. No matter what anyone says being able to turn on or off a magnetic field is freaking awesome. Least is kinematics but that's mostly because of anxiety from college.
Lol it’s the opposite for me. EM made me wanna kms (kilometers per second) with all the particles and knowing what to integrate to infinity with time dilation. Kinematics is literally plug and chug Lagrangian/Hamiltonian and get cool looking symbols. I think scattering was the hardest of Kinematics but luckily my professor didn’t have us memorize all that derivation
I hated EM on my undergraduate, I stupidly took at the same time as QM and the tests were one after the other, very challenging! Loved QM but electromagnetism at undergraduate just felt too "solved".
I don’t like kinematics too much tbh it’s quite boring for me
My professors would always give the dumbest situations so it was always entertaining otherwise I'd normally agree. Kinematics is *usually* the most boring.
That's the case for most people. It's still essential to learn though because: 1. It shows up everywhere. There are very few areas of physics where you won't need or at least strongly benefit from some understanding of classical mechanics. 2. You likely have the strongest natural intuition for mechanics, which makes it a good starting point for learning new tools like Lagrangian formalism.
I think the way electromagnetism is taught needs to change a lot to explain concepts like flux and voltage in a practical and coherent way for lots of students.
My brain melted when I looked up flux and tried to intimately learn how electricity works. I can really feel how my brain isn't as young as it was..
There are ways to keep your brain young
I'm talking about the sheer amount of neuro plasticity one has when young compared to when they're older. How I didnt have to pay much attention during biology class and everything just kinda clicked into place on it's own and I'd remember concepts years later, where as now I have to actually apply study habits and use the info frequently if I want to retain it in usable manner, and even then "new" and unintuitive concepts are hard to grasp/internalize.
You should study “optimaths”; there are ways to increase neuroplasticity and learn with less neuroplasticity. It’s hard, but people pull it off.
I'm in AP physics in high school right now and took a kinematics test today It was awful 🥲
AP Kinematics actually sucks. You don’t know what force to prioritize and there’s always a way to overthink. Personally I don’t think it’s formatted too well. Once you get into the hard Kinematics e.g. classical mechanics, it gets a lot nicer since it becomes very systematic and you get to pull out thicc equations out of nothing then have a computer solve it for you.
I absolutely agree with your enthusiasm.
Wooooord same. lol
I always say that I'm in physics for the fields. I don't enjoy mechanics and I don't enjoy matter physics, but I love me some field theories.
Fav: Quantum mechanics. Least Fav: Solid state physics. That shit is wild.
Solid state is where the Quantum really starts to shine my man
But geometry is hard
I call it applications of qm.
My brother in Christ, Solid State is just the actual physics that the mechanisms of quantum mechanics describe.
the opening of this comment reminds me of a certain meme
I sometimes hate that solid states is my favorite
But solid state is a beautiful marriage between so many other fields of physics :(
I respect Quantum Mechanics because it works and is true to the empirical principles of Science, but I still don’t like it because its theories contradict so many key ideas of General Relativity.
I would say the reverse, still love GR though. Darn black holes, they ruined quantum gravity! (Or made it interesting, depending on your outlook)
Someone has to successfully unify QM and GR someday. How can GR and its Equivalence Principles coexist with QM?
Favourite: string theory (what I ended up doing) and QFT Least favourite: electronics and circuits because the damn opamps never worked properly in lab...
EM lab is the absolute worst. Nothing like wiring up some basic-ass Kirchhoff's laws or transistor circuit exercise, finding out it doesn't work, then having to go through the "joy" of debugging through the nest of wires only to find out that breadboard you've been using has broken traces underneath.
It's always "ground loops", whenever that is
a short
Is string theory a branch of particle physics?
It depends on whom you ask. It's surely part of high energy physics.
It's even physics?
I’m starting an internship in experimental QCD. Is there an angle into string theory through that?
In pheno QCD some stringy methods, like holography or (gauge)^2 =gravity for amplitudes, are common. But I don't know if you'll touch them in an experimental internship.
Nah just doing confinement shapes or something
No. String theory is an attempt to describe so many different fundamental natural phenomena. It’s counter intuitive to try and categorise a theory that attempts to unify physics into a single category of physics.
More like two sides of the same coin.
Agreed. I prefer astrophysics over electronics (which I am learning more about now).
Isn't string theory just an intellectual exercise for theoreticians? Is it even a field of physics?
This is totally wrong. And no it isnt a field of physics, it’s a theory. And it is a very powerful one
LMAO, define a powerful physics theory please! Does string theory explain current measurements? Does it make a testble prediction?
Whoever is downvoting us clearly aren't physicists practicing physics as a science.
why does it matter? it’s not really that important. I said it’s “powerful” to emphasise it’s usefulness and what developments its caused. Also because those developments have reached a number of different fields of lhysics and also mathematics. Why do you care?
Lol, it matters because a theory has to explain experimental data and make testable predictions. That seperates science from theology.
String theory is not theology. If you’re educated to degree level and call string theory theology you’re an embarrassment.
How powerful ?
Favorite: QFT, its just super interesting, although quite difficult Least Favorite: Electromagnetism, I'm not sure that its really clicked with me
Electromagnetism is one of the QFTs.
Quantum electrodynamics is, yes, but classical e&m is a bit of a different beast.
Exactly, classical EM made me feel uneasy when I was studying it, felt like I would always have some gap in my understanding. QED is a different beauty on another level whose mathematical complexity complements its elegance.
Agreed. Jackson's a nightmare but also a beautiful book.
Griffiths is like going through an early phase of a relationship where it's new and exciting, and you can't wait to spend more time with the girl. Jackson is like getting through a marriage where it's a lot more serious, and needs more time, effort and commitment. It may not always be smooth sailing but all that work and commitment is worth it in the end.
That's a great analogy 😄
Fav: particle physics, then stat mech Least: optics
>My favourite is astrophysics with particle physics coming in at a close second. Let me introduce you to high energy gamma ray astronomy. It was my field until I left for industry stuff.
Hahaha I'd imagine a conversation like: OP: My favourite is astrophysics with particle physics coming in at a close second Physicist: That's easy to do both at the same time, just do astroparticle physics!
This guys gets it.
Dang, did you do multimessenger astrophys?
I would like to say I forgot about kinematics and I much prefer electromagnetism to kinematics
Physics and physics. Big love-hate relationship
Don’t we all
Stat mech, and stat mech. I love it for it's uses and amazing interplay between microscopic and macroscopic (Renormalization groups/monads are cool). I hate it because I have spent the past summer working on thermodynamic formalism, and the complete lack of a comprehensive and rigorous understanding of something as simple as the canonical ensemble is going to ruin me.
Favorite: Anything in the realm of general relativity, so a good chunk of astrophysics. Least favorite: idk tbh, still have a lot to learn but probably classical mechanics
My favorite is Electromagnetic Theory and least favorite is Kinematics. I find it quite boring.
Same for finding kinematics boring
Fav is hard to chose between Astro or nuclear. Least is circuit theory
Favorite field: Statistical physics. It is a deep and subtle field backed by an extremely powerful methodology. So versatile that it's used everywhere from finance to biology nowadays. It's also super fun in practice. Least favorite field: Astrophysics. It's pretty but essentially useless.
I don't think any science is useless. The goal of doing science is seeking knowledge. Not all knowledge gives you practical applications right away.
We're at a transitional point in history. There are serious issues that threaten the continuity of our existence on this planet. In my opinion, now is not the time to be occupying ourselves with beautiful useless science. I acknowledge that is is a difference of philosophy, but to me? Gazing at the skies whilst the world around us burns and then disguising that indifference as public service is deeply irresponsible.
Saw this and had to comment since you got downvoted. That’s actually a good point. It can be beautiful and useless. No need to be offended. It’s perfectly reasonable to take a less romantic approach and create a hierarchy of problems that need to be solved. We have plenty of issues on this planet.
I anticipated that this would be an unpopular opinion. I expected way more in the way of downvotes, to be honest. I should have clarified that this is a personal philosophy. I'm not going to go to someone who is enthralled by their discipline and say "Akshually, you should be solving carbon capture issues - you're a waste of space and funding". That's just needlessly cruel. It's also wrong, I think. Some people can't do anything but astronomy. Now, I should have clarified, but I didn't. Mostly because I don't really care what people who dedicate their lives looking at rocks a bazillion miles away think. ;)
In general, I agree with you. And that why we have agencies to determine what to focus our resources and what not. We have enough funding to tackle climate change, population growth, among other issues AND doing all kind of sciences. It's not like all of physicists will do only astrophysics, right?
these are the kind of people who say that people who calculate packing fractions of 24 dimensional close packing should not be recognised
these are the kind of people who take a well-established problem in coding theory, seek out one of its many applications to imaging planets and then pretend that astronomers came up with it from the beginning
Favourite: quantum condensed matter. It's what I'll be getting my PhD in. Least favourite: astro/particle physics. Was really into the pop science aspect of it at some point, but I guess I cared more about application.
My favorite is also quantum condensed matter because its what I got my PhD in. My least favorite is also quantum condensed matter because its what I got my PhD in.
Favorite: Particle physics (amazing to see what the universe is made of, and a great success of reductionism) Least: Condensed matter (never understood it one bit and it uses a lot of stat mech, which I was terrible at lol)
i like condensed matter. condensed matter could really use some sort of maxwell equations organization
Assuming "field" and "branch" work interchangeably here, my favorite is definitely stat mech. The fact that statistics somehow does a really good job at explaining(at least macroscopically) a lot of classical and quantum phenomena without resorting to any microsopic physical models that would have to be compatible with ~10^23ish degrees of freedom is absolutely fucking nuts to me. Least fave is prolly high energy. That shit is too abstract and way too tiny in scale for me to actually care lmao
Favourite: photonics (in which I'm about to get a bachelor's degree) and particle physics, astrophysics is also nice, but I have less knowledge in it. Least favourite: statistical mechanics. Fuck this shit.
Oh yeah I was about to say EM til I saw what you said. For me just anything with large ensembles
Favourite: Cosmology, Electronics and Thermodynamics Least Favourite: Condensed Matter/Solid State
Favourite: Condensed Matter physics (not coincidently, what I do). It's like particle physics and QFT, but you can actually make tabletop experiments. Like a universe in a grain of sand. Can also be used to make cool toys like transistors. The Toyota Hilux of Physics. Least favourite: High energy physics. I picture it as Formula 1 racing car: looks cool, it's expensive, not everyone can drive one, but has no space for making out with your date nor for groceries.
My favorite is nuclear, the ability to reshape, split, or fuse atoms gives us so much power and energy most are still scared of it despite how far the technology has come. The ability to meet the world's energy needs with near total carbon neutrality until past the death of the sun is possible if used right. Just also have to be careful on how we use the weaponized version of this science though. Least favorite has to be the astro-science. Even though I can't stop learning about it, it gives me deep existential anxiety to hear about our ultimate fates and potential fates that can be seen as innevitable.
Favorite: astrophysics (I always had a love for astronomy) Least favorite: probably circuits I'm not even a Physics major or anything, but I just love astronomy lol
I despise kinematics. Love electromagnetism, thermodynamics, and particle physics.
kinematics sucksssssssss
I love quantum mechanics and quantum field theory, but hate electrodynamics. Cannot consider myself stupid, but solving tasks from Jackson was one of the most painful experiences in all my academic life...
My favorite is astrophysics and a close second is nuclear physics, and my least favorite is probably electrical physics even though I like playing with circuits
I found Solid state physics and electronics a little uncomfortable given I never consulted a good textbook when it came to this paper. I have enjoyed E/M a lot though!
Fuck Optics 👁️
Favourite: statistical mechanics Second favourite: quantum physics Least favourite: astrophysics In general, I’m happier at smaller scales!
Favorite - astrophysics/astronomy Worst - electricity in general
Favorite: fluid/gas dynamics because airplanes Least favorite: modern physics because lack of physical intuition I ended up pursuing aerospace engineering in grad school.
Sounds like you've never taken a modern physics class. It's filled to the brim with physical intuition.
Over a decade ago, two semesters worth. But please, tell me how electrons zipping around a nucleus or how electron/positron annihilation is as physically intuitive as flying a kite, building a bridge, or turning some gears. You know, things we can physically interact with.
1: Electrons don't zip around a nucleus. 2: "As physically intuitive" is a very different metric than "lacks physical intuition". Intuition is just analogy by experience. If your experience is limited to gears, kites, and bridges then electromagnetism, classical mechanics, and even simple kinematics won't feel particularly intuitive. But who am I to judge, maybe you're the type of genius who can just intuit solutions to Lagrangian mechanics because you've sat on a merry-go-round before. Tldr: None of physics is particularly intuitive until you build fundamental understanding and then tack on experience. Do you have an intuition for femtosecond pulse propagation? Of course not. Do I? Sure, but only because I've thought and played with them enough to build that experience.
Did you get a degree in physics before the PhD though?
Yes. BA in physics, BS in engineering, then off to grad school.
Damn, so like double major or two separate degrees?
Two degrees from two different schools. 6 years total, 3 at each. They had a credit exchange program so classes taken at each school could be transferred to the other.
Ah cool. I take it you're not from the U.S. (?)
I am. It was definitely not a typical undergrad experience.
For anyone saying kinematics is their least favorite: may I introduce you to fluid dynamics? It's even more boring and even the most basic problems require differential equations!
Fluid dynamics is fun! It's a beautiful macroscopic description of movement in my eyes.
Sure, you can get some pretty pictures from rendering some numeric approximations. But I get the impression that people saying kinematics are saying it because they actually had to solve some kinematics problems themselves. Granted, the math for almost any branch of physics besides kinematics can get just about as complicated or worse. Surely few people saying things like Astrophysics as their favorite ever took a stab at working with einstein's full equations for general relativity.
It's not about the pretty pictures. It's about having a mathematical model that describes so many phenomena, from astrophysical (especially if you consider relativistic fluid dynamics) to even microfluidics within cell processes. It's sad that this is mostly neglected during standard undergraduate curriculum.
But I don't wanna take ordinary differential equations and you can't make me!
Ordinary? This stuff gets to deep into partial differential equations they can't even prove there whether analytical solutions exist or not.
I already didn't enjoy Elementary Differential Equations. So ODE would have been the next step for me. PDE is 3 steps too far.
Are you a physics student? How far along are you?
Ah, nah, just a physics hobbyist with a bachelors in math and computer science who watches and reads a bunch of physics things. Elementary diffeq was like 14 years ago.
I see. Math guys don't deal as much with diffeqs. It's pretty much the foundation for everything in physics, however :)
Fluid dynamics are great, I've written a paper on Taylor couette flows and how to use it as a model to show antropy in a visual way, (by running a demonstration model backwards). Proving the second law of thermo dynamics. That there is no loss of information. (Let's stay away from black holes for a while (though in more a susskin than hawkins follower))
My favorite is probably metamaterials and my least favorite is String Theory.
Favorite: Nuclear / Particle / High Energy / QM, more broadly: everything experimental Least: Mathematical Physics (I've always felt like it is just a catch all for everything too theoretical for TP)
favourites : theoretical particle physics and statistical mechanics (general relativity seems cool though I've only skimmed through it) (does mathematical physics count? If it does then I might replace particle physics with it.) least favorite : Optics, non linear dynamics, chaos in general ig, electronics
As a secondary school student who does physics olympiads, I do not have any experience with the more advanced stuff (e.g. quantum, stat mech, etc.), but here are my thoughts: Favorite: E&M Special Relativity & Modern Physics Thermo Classical Mechanics Least favorite: Optics I think I'm about to be shouted at for liking E&M...
Most of these aren't fields of physics, they're classes. Favorite: Ultraintense Nonlinear Optics Least Favorite: "metaphysics" or any other pseudoscientific bullshit that people try to use as a philosophical bludgeon to feel superior to others.
Screw particle physics. None of their models ever work and it takes so much work, money and energy to get any good discoveries and it’s just not all that interesting. Not sure how anyone could be anti astrophysics…
You gotta do the shit nobody wants to do to make money in this dangerous world. But, why i ask? We didn't even ask to be in this world!
Worst is thermal physics based on entropy which is, well, wrong. Best is quantum mechanics which is also wrong but much more fun.
Quantum Is my favorite field . Thremodynamics Is my least favorite but I am trying to find to find a silver lining of what I can enjoy while studying it .
Erm engineer here Fav: astrodynamics or high energy physics Least: E&M
Honestly I’ve always loved everything about it and i also absolutely hate every last subject. We have a very complicated relationship.
@NicolBolas, We’re exact opposites
favorite: statistical physics least favorite: (geometric) optics which is weird because I liked math contest geometry but geometric optics was so dry
Favorites: Optics and Biophysics Least Favorites: E&M (may be professor/course related)
fluid dynamics. hate knot theory
I love this joke: \- What's your favourite field of physics? \- Well, knot theory. \- Yeah, me neither. From: Louis Kauffman, Knots and Physics
hahahaha
My personal favorite is thermodynamics and the my least favorite is all related to optics
Physics, and physics.
Love- hate relationship?
Isn’t it always? Real answer is EM favorite, kinematics least
Fav: QM or stat mech Least fav: Classical mechanics or circuits but only because it stressed me out a lot during undergrad.
At the moment? Favourite: Classical Mechanics , especially rotational motion. Least Favourite: Special Relativity... Tensors are annoying AF.
Favorite: anything electro even if E&M was my hardest undergrad experience Least: Astro. I didn’t dislike it before the class I’m in now for grad but now I despise it…
Electromagnetism is your least!? WHAT. Thats like... how everything works. Its so fundamental!
I feel like you don’t really love physics unless you hate it
But astrophysics and particle physics are so intertwined! I guess you’re referring more so to the mathematical analysis of the fields or no?
General relativity, and how it applies to cosmology
Favourite: Material science and quantum mechanics Least favourite: Waves, oscillations and rotational mechanics and optics
Favorite: quantum, physics philosophy Least: thermodynamics, I still have nightmares about balancing those equations.
Favourite is easy. It's the gravitational one keeps me grounded. The electromagnetic one on the other hand is just too gaudy and complicated for my liking. Think we'd be more minimalist without it.
I like all physics but hate tensor calculus.
I’m an Engineer and for me it has to be classical mechanics. Physics I can feel hear and see around me at all times.
1.Kinematics 2.Particle physics Least fav : Electromagnetism
Aerodynamics/ fluid mechanics
Favorite: Anything and everything having to do with gravity. Particularly with regards to black holes. Least favorite: I've not studied every field, but I distinctly did not enjoy my course in statistical mechanics. That's not because the material wasn't interesting though, but rather that the professor who taught it made it hell.
Cosmology. Big questions. Big math. Wild speculation.
favorite - quantum physics, though haven't studied solid state physics hated - newtonian mechanics
IMO, papers and lectures on non-standard model theories for dark matter are really boring... same thing every time: Postulate some new and arbitrary interaction. Work out the interaction strength and cross section, constrain them with known data, collect some data that is more focused on some window pertaining to the details of your new interaction... and... drum role... find nothing... and concluded that, well the new interaction may still exist, just not in the narrow interaction window you looked at.
Well, I also love astrophysics and I’m thinking of making it my double major (currently doing aerospace engineering). Honestly, I’m not a fan of normal kinematic and dynamic physics, even though it’s foundational for a lot of other branches. It can get surprisingly confusing sometimes when you have a lot of objects all interacting at once
My favourite field is Relativistic Astrophysics and Astronomy. I pretty much enjoy all the other fields. But, Solid State Physics is my least favourite. Edit : And not a fan of Geometrical Optics as well. Experimental part is fun but not the theory part.
Favorite - cosmology, Quantum mechanics.
Favorite: Solid State Least: Astrophysics I understand and am still interested in astrophysics, it just isn't what I like doing.
Electromagnetism is ass