Warwick vs Durham. Hit me with everything you've got.

Which produces graduates that end up being successful? Both will have lots of successful graduates

Which has more serious people? No way of knowing

Which has more ambitious people? Both will have lots of ambitious people same as all unis

Which is full of people there just for the partying? Both, you will find this wherever you go, just dont make friends with them if you dont want to

Which helps student projects more? no way of telling as most people wont of studied at both and depending on the scenario is more reliant on the lecturer than the uni for project support

Which has better links to industries? no idea, guess it depends on what industry

Which makes it easier to switch courses? (Important for me because I no longer want to do the sub-course I applied for in either) no one can say, you will have to email and ask each department

I want to open an engineering / tech startup and I'm applying to physics so that I can be well versed in science in general, and understand everything that my business does.

So I am looking for a university with people I can do something crazily ambitious with, and receive potential help from the university for our projects, and give us more freedom to work on things ourselves than be forced into a rigid structure and find employment / internships.

Both unis will have the things you are looking for, you just have to seek them out (pure luck I guess on getting on with the ambitious people), going to career centre for the employment/internships, project wise it depends on what you mean by project?

Give me all of the ugly truth you have (but make sure it's actually true). Hit me.

If you think you want to work in something related to engineering then study engineering. What you study in a physics degree and what you study in an engineering degree are very different.

Want traditional go for durham, want contemporary go for warwick, warwick's got a pretty promising upcoming startup scene.

How much so?

Not sure how to quantify it. Enough so that most engineering past papers (beyond the maths papers) are incomprehensible to me.

Just asking because I'm considering a future in engineering but planning on reading mathsphys at Warwick as it is a broader course!

If you plan to go into engineering do engineering, almost everything you do within your course will be irrelevant to engineering

Theres a reason that people who want to be an engineer do an engineering degree, because thats where you gain the most skills required to be one. All the important topics covered in engineering like manufacture and design, processing, thermofluids, system design, materials, CAD work, electronics etc (these arent all of them just a few from various disciplines but what is relevant will vary) is not covered at all in a physics or maths degree

the main things you cover in physics in later years are (dependent on what you chose)
- particle phyiscs
- quantum mechanics
- condensed matter physics
- medical physics
- astrophysics
- advanced mechanics (not relevant to engineering)
- QTF
- general relativity
- magntism

None of this remotely is relevant to engineering neither will the maths you cover in later years be

So the maths and physics is broader but teaches you nothing that an engineering role requires knowledge wise

@http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/member.php?u=213123 will be able to give more advice from a engineers point of view (I am a physics student who once considered engineering as a degree and career before deciding it wasnt for me)

Solid advice no doubt however I don't know whether I'd actually like to be an engineer, just said that it was a possible career of interest. Both my parents are in the finance business so I might follow in their footsteps - there's a lot of maths in that as well which would suit. But as for the whole choice of degree argument, I don't think it's too wise to pin your hopes just on the basis of what you think you might do in your later life..

Not sure how to quantify it. Enough so that most engineering past papers (beyond the maths papers) are incomprehensible to me.

If you plan to go into engineering do engineering, almost everything you do within your course will be irrelevant to engineering

Theres a reason that people who want to be an engineer do an engineering degree, because thats where you gain the most skills required to be one. All the important topics covered in engineering like manufacture and design, processing, thermofluids, system design, materials, CAD work, electronics etc (these arent all of them just a few from various disciplines but what is relevant will vary) is not covered at all in a physics or maths degree

the main things you cover in physics in later years are (dependent on what you chose)
- particle phyiscs
- quantum mechanics
- condensed matter physics
- medical physics
- astrophysics
- advanced mechanics (not relevant to engineering)
- QTF
- general relativity
- magntism

None of this remotely is relevant to engineering neither will the maths you cover in later years be

So the maths and physics is broader but teaches you nothing that an engineering role requires knowledge wise

user 'smack' will be able to give more advice from a engineers point of view (I am a physics student who once considered engineering as a degree and career before deciding it wasnt for me)

LOOOL please elaborate, good sir.

Which produces graduates that end up being successful?

Which has more serious people?

Which has more ambitious people?

Which is full of people there just for the partying?

Which helps student projects more?

Which has better links to industries?

Which makes it easier to switch courses? (Important for me because I no longer want to do the sub-course I applied for in either)

I want to open an engineering / tech startup and I'm applying to physics so that I can be well versed in science in general, and understand everything that my business does.

So I am looking for a university with people I can do something crazily ambitious with, and receive potential help from the university for our projects, and give us more freedom to work on things ourselves than be forced into a rigid structure and find employment / internships.

Give me all of the ugly truth you have (but make sure it's actually true). Hit me.

I'm doing my A levels next year and i was wondering the same thing, except I want to know which of the top 10 is best for Drama/theatre studies. I lean more towards Warwick than any of the others, but apparently Lancaster (not top 10, but damn close) is pretty good too. I'm not smart nor committed enough for Oxbridge, so which of the others? Also, seems like there's an argument going on in here, I'm staying out of that.