Imperial Physics low student satisfaction

The same topics are taught to a certain point, but options may vary, and the exact order and format of teaching can vary a lot. I gather Imperial revamped their physics structure recently though - @Sinnoh may be able to advise more on that (and perhaps the student satisfaction angle).

That said I would note in general, larger unis, more "prestigious" unis, and London based unis tend to have lower student satisfaction results (and Imperial is all 3) in general for a variety of reasons.

What about the core modules? Surely they are to the same standard as any other universities. Even if it goes further into depth, it can’t be overwhelmingly harder than for example birmingham physics.

Also UCL physics has around 70ish student satisfaction whereas imperial has around 50. In terms of prestige they are quite close and yet the student satisfaction differs this much. It’s not even an imperial thing as well. When I look at other courses at imperial for example chemistry or aeronautical engineering, their student satisfaction is high.

Read the IOP accreditation requirements. They allow for a lot of flexibility. Some unis don't have the quantum harmonic oscillator as core content for physics. Some teach Lagrangian mechanics as core, some don't. These are pretty big differences.

As for student satisfaction - at this point I'm not really sure. The course is undeniably better than it was 4 years ago when scores were similar. Workload is reduced and more evenly distributed across the years (rather than 2nd year being absolute hell), the physics building itself has had a minor revamp and the department has been trying harder to listen to students. Also certain unpopular lecturers aren't teaching now.
They did **** up this year though when they announced that they'd no longer allow physics students to take the Methods In Data Science module from the maths dept and gave a pretty shoddy excuse for it. So now they might be making an equivalent module for future 4th years.

So core content can vary?

What would you consider that is a hard core content that Imperial has that most places doesn’t? Surely, other top universities like Manchester, UCL and bath have similar physics courses because of their rankings.

Between unis with high entry requirements, core content will vary within the specific module details. You can usually find detailed descriptions on the websites if you look hard enough.
Usually they'll teach things at different times. Much of 1st-year classical mechanics at Imperial is 2nd year at Southampton, but they do some thermo and a bit of quantum in 1st year and we don't. Our first year is definitely more maths-heavy.

The one thing that's definitely unique to Imperial is the Comprehensives module. It consists of a large group project and two exams that cover all the core content from the first two years. The point is to get good at problem solving and bringing together different parts of the course.
Third year used to have mandatory modules on fluid dynamics, molecular physics and cosmology but not anymore. Some of that's been moved to other modules, some of it has just been cut from the course. Those were probably not core content elsewhere, but then again they probably shouldn't have been in the first place.
The thing I mentioned about the QHO not being core, I specifically had Surrey in mind.

Would you happen to know how good Manchester is in terms of rigour? I got an offer from them but I really don't know how good the uni and the course there is. It's a big uni so it improves it's ranking score is what I've heard.

I don't, but if you want rigour, study maths.

Ah ok, and why maths? Sorry I don't mean rigour as in thoroughness I meant I want, how do I explain it, the course where I'll be learning more. So of course oxbridge tops it in that regard.