The Student Room Group

Theoretical Physics vs Physics and Mathematics

At all of the open days I have been to, nobody has been clear about what the difference is between a course in Theoretical Physics and a joint honours in Physics and Mathematics - so I cannot tell which one I should be pursuing! :confused:

Does anybody have any pointers on how the course content is different, and which one would suit different types of academic personalities? At the moment I am looking at Birmingham, Manchester, ICL, Bristol and Southampton, if that is any help :smile:

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Do pure Theoretical physics! It's quicker that way!
Original post by jazzynutter
At all of the open days I have been to, nobody has been clear about what the difference is between a course in Theoretical Physics and a joint honours in Physics and Mathematics - so I cannot tell which one I should be pursuing! :confused:

Does anybody have any pointers on how the course content is different, and which one would suit different types of academic personalities? At the moment I am looking at Birmingham, Manchester, ICL, Bristol and Southampton, if that is any help :smile:


If you want to take physics further, scrap maths. Theoretical physics is a better choice
Original post by Type 052D
Do pure Theoretical physics! It's quicker that way!


Original post by Caitlan
If you want to take physics further, scrap maths. Theoretical physics is a better choice


Do you mind elaborating on why you think this? I'm hearing people say things such as "Go for it!!!" for both courses without hearing how they actually differ, plus in the course descriptions they're usually described in too similar a way :confused:
Reply 4
Original post by jazzynutter
Do you mind elaborating on why you think this? I'm hearing people say things such as "Go for it!!!" for both courses without hearing how they actually differ, plus in the course descriptions they're usually described in too similar a way :confused:


One word: Michio Kaku :P
Original post by jazzynutter
Do you mind elaborating on why you think this? I'm hearing people say things such as "Go for it!!!" for both courses without hearing how they actually differ, plus in the course descriptions they're usually described in too similar a way :confused:


They are very similar courses hence people often find it hard to distinguish between the two. However, I would choose theoretical on the grounds that It is more respected. Also, you go further into scientific concepts. A joint honours often means you miss out on some very interesting topics
Reply 6
I can give my opinion :h:

From doing modules from both departments, you find that the main difference is that you have a different approach to problems especially from a maths perspective. If you did theoretical physics (under the maths department) you find that although the content you would cover will have more proof behind it whereas in the physics department I personally found that it's a "here's an equation, no reasoning behind it".

Essentially you need to ask yourself do you want any proof? If so, I would do maths and physics :yep:
oh my god i basically just asked this question and have no replies :frown:
Original post by cpdavis
I can give my opinion :h:

From doing modules from both departments, you find that the main difference is that you have a different approach to problems especially from a maths perspective. If you did theoretical physics (under the maths department) you find that although the content you would cover will have more proof behind it whereas in the physics department I personally found that it's a "here's an equation, no reasoning behind it".

Essentially you need to ask yourself do you want any proof? If so, I would do maths and physics :yep:


I am quite a workings/problems person - the answer to a question doesn't bother me anywhere near as much as the argument does (e.g. I enjoy books on philosophy etc just for the points made, and I enjoy sudoku puzzles for the process I have to go to in order to fill in the numbers rather than for the pride in completing it). Are you saying that this mentality would lead me more towards the joint honours, and to what extent do the two courses really differ in this way?

Original post by Caitlan
I would choose theoretical on the grounds that It is more respected.


How is it a more respected degree? Would the two courses really lead me to different professions? I don't know what I want to do as a career whatsoever!
Original post by jazzynutter
I am quite a workings/problems person - the answer to a question doesn't bother me anywhere near as much as the argument does (e.g. I enjoy books on philosophy etc just for the points made, and I enjoy sudoku puzzles for the process I have to go to in order to fill in the numbers rather than for the pride in completing it). Are you saying that this mentality would lead me more towards the joint honours, and to what extent do the two courses really differ in this way?



How is it a more respected degree? Would the two courses really lead me to different professions? I don't know what I want to do as a career whatsoever!


In my opinion anyway. Other people will think otherwise. It won't have a massive change on your potential career. Either course would be fine though. It's not that much of a big deal
Original post by Caitlan
It's not that much of a big deal


Something I intend to spend many, many thousands of pounds on certainly is a big deal! :eek:
Original post by jazzynutter
Something I intend to spend many, many thousands of pounds on certainly is a big deal! :eek:


I really worded that badly... Whatever you choose to study will be a big deal. However, the difference in courses isn't that major. I was trying to suggest that if you choose one, you're not going to spend the rest of your life regretting that choice.

Hopefully that clears things up
Original post by jazzynutter
I am quite a workings/problems person - the answer to a question doesn't bother me anywhere near as much as the argument does (e.g. I enjoy books on philosophy etc just for the points made, and I enjoy sudoku puzzles for the process I have to go to in order to fill in the numbers rather than for the pride in completing it). Are you saying that this mentality would lead me more towards the joint honours, and to what extent do the two courses really differ in this way?



How is it a more respected degree? Would the two courses really lead me to different professions? I don't know what I want to do as a career whatsoever!


Be an Physicist by doing PhD. It will be frustrating and long when you are an graduate student and you may have to be an assistant reseacher, but it will be worth it. The world needs your brain :smile:!
Original post by Type 052D
Be an Physicist by doing PhD. It will be frustrating and long when you are an graduate student and you may have to be an assistant reseacher, but it will be worth it. The world needs your brain :smile:!


I am considering doing a PhD and I am looking into research careers, but there's nothing that's grabbing me by the shoulders and shaking me awake!! All I know is that I love the mathsy side of physics (with as little lab as possible :colondollar:), and luckily that's a respectable place to start :smile: I'm just worrying over the fine print as I don't know exactly what I'm looking for with all of these "withs" and "ands" that you have to make decisions on so early in the application process!
Reply 14
Original post by jazzynutter
At all of the open days I have been to, nobody has been clear about what the difference is between a course in Theoretical Physics and a joint honours in Physics and Mathematics - so I cannot tell which one I should be pursuing! :confused:

Does anybody have any pointers on how the course content is different, and which one would suit different types of academic personalities? At the moment I am looking at Birmingham, Manchester, ICL, Bristol and Southampton, if that is any help :smile:


I was doing Theoretical Physics for the first two years of my Physics degree at Manchester, so am hopefully in some position to explain this.

First and foremost, joint honours Maths and Physics is not, as you've picked up, the same as Theoretical Physics.

A joint honours degree is exactly that. 50% Maths modules, 50% Physics modules (which may or may not include Theoretical Physics options). Due to timetable restrictions, you may not get as much choice in which modules you study from either department, so you may end up missing out on Theoretical Physics courses.

The mathematics modules will be the core pure and applied mathematics modules that undergraduate mathematicians do - so your first year would be things like calculus, differential equations, linear algebra, real/complex analysis, group theory, sets, number theory, logic etc. - some of these areas are very relevant to theoretical physics, but they'll be taught from a mathematical standpoint. You would then do much of the physics core as well so you'd do mechanics (if you weren't doing it in the maths department), electromagnetism, quantum physics, optics, relativity, laboratory work (you'd probably about the same amount of lab work as Theorists).

As a theoretical physicist, the vast majority of your time would be in the physics department. You'd do all the core physics courses that single-honours physics would do, but you'd probably have a reduced lab content, which would be replaced by lectures/projects in areas of theoretical physics.

Theoretical Physics modules are often more mathematically sophisticated than normal physics courses, but they are not designed to be maths courses. You may (depending on where you go to uni) do some relevant modules in the maths department, but most of your maths teaching will probably be done by physicists.

Typical theoretical physics modules you'd study (going on my experience at Manchester) would be:

- Random Processes in Physics (basically probability applied to physical systems)
- Advanced Dynamics (further topics in Newtonian mechanics and Special Relativity beyond core physics)
- Lagrangian/Hamiltonian Mechanics (a different approach to classical mechanics without ever writing F = ma ever again - you'd probably also study a branch of maths called the calculus of variations in this course, as it underlies Lagrangian mechanics)
- Some sort of mathematical introduction to quantum mechanics - so learning about linear algebra and vector spaces as applied to quantum mechanics, you'd probably get an introduction to Dirac notation here)
- More advanced courses in quantum mechanics building on the previous one.
- Nonlinear dynamics and chaos
- Electrodynamics (an advanced Electromagnetism course, where you'd probably also get some exposure to the formal presentation of special relativity using things called tensors so you'd look at Electromagnetism and Relativity, and it'd also help to prepare for the type of maths you'd need in General Relativity)
- General Relativity
- Quantum Field Theory

You'd also do a couple of advanced mathematical methods courses which cover mathematical techniques in theoretical physics and you may also do some additional programming work (everyone will be taught to program - but at Manchester, 2nd year Theorists replace half of their lab content with a computing project which will involve some programming and mathematical modelling)

The main difference between Maths/Phys and Theoretical Phys is that in Maths Phys you may not get the opportunity to study (m)any of the theoretical courses I've described above. Of course, if the University you end up going to has theorists in their maths department, you may be able to study some then. What options you'll be offered exactly will depend on where you go and the things that the department does research in, particularly in the later years. Course structures will vary between universities so it's hard to generalise too much.

Manchester puts their student handbook on the department website I've linked to the page with syllabuses here. The courses marked (M) are the Theoretical options.

http://www.physics.manchester.ac.uk/undergraduate/courses/course-handbook/10_syllabuses/

If you also click this link you can look at the structure of the degree course, semester-by-semester so you can compare how Maths/Phys and Phys/Theory differ (at Manchester, at least...)

http://www.physics.manchester.ac.uk/undergraduate/courses/course-handbook/7_programme_structure/

Hope this helps. Theoretical Physics is a great subject, it's also very very hard :p:

Also, Manchester ftw :biggrin:
Original post by -G-a-v-

Typical theoretical physics modules you'd study (going on my experience at Manchester) would be:

- Random Processes in Physics (basically probability applied to physical systems)
- Advanced Dynamics (further topics in Newtonian mechanics and Special Relativity beyond core physics)
- Lagrangian/Hamiltonian Mechanics (a different approach to classical mechanics without ever writing F = ma ever again - you'd probably also study a branch of maths called the calculus of variations in this course, as it underlies Lagrangian mechanics)
- Some sort of mathematical introduction to quantum mechanics - so learning about linear algebra and vector spaces as applied to quantum mechanics, you'd probably get an introduction to Dirac notation here)
- More advanced courses in quantum mechanics building on the previous one.
- Nonlinear dynamics and chaos
- Electrodynamics (an advanced Electromagnetism course, where you'd probably also get some exposure to the formal presentation of special relativity using things called tensors so you'd look at Electromagnetism and Relativity, and it'd also help to prepare for the type of maths you'd need in General Relativity)
- General Relativity
- Quantum Field Theory

You'd also do a couple of advanced mathematical methods courses which cover mathematical techniques in theoretical physics and you may also do some additional programming work (everyone will be taught to program - but at Manchester, 2nd year Theorists replace half of their lab content with a computing project which will involve some programming and mathematical modelling)

The main difference between Maths/Phys and Theoretical Phys is that in Maths Phys you may not get the opportunity to study (m)any of the theoretical courses I've described above. Of course, if the University you end up going to has theorists in their maths department, you may be able to study some then. What options you'll be offered exactly will depend on where you go and the things that the department does research in, particularly in the later years. Course structures will vary between universities so it's hard to generalise too much.

Manchester puts their student handbook on the department website I've linked to the page with syllabuses here. The courses marked (M) are the Theoretical options.

http://www.physics.manchester.ac.uk/undergraduate/courses/course-handbook/10_syllabuses/

If you also click this link you can look at the structure of the degree course, semester-by-semester so you can compare how Maths/Phys and Phys/Theory differ (at Manchester, at least...)

http://www.physics.manchester.ac.uk/undergraduate/courses/course-handbook/7_programme_structure/

Hope this helps. Theoretical Physics is a great subject, it's also very very hard :p:

Also, Manchester ftw :biggrin:



I went to Manchester's open day last week - WHY was I never given these option tables? These are so useful!!!! :eek: I was given similar tables at Birmingham, where actually their Maths and Phys & Theoretical Phys options seem incredibly similar. (If I upload a photo of the first and second year module options, would you mind telling me the main differences between the courses judging by the content? Would it be similar to what you have just detailed above?) It's so infuriating how different universities seem to have different definitions of a joint Physics and Maths course!!
Reply 16
Original post by jazzynutter
I went to Manchester's open day last week - WHY was I never given these option tables? These are so useful!!!! :eek: I was given similar tables at Birmingham, where actually their Maths and Phys & Theoretical Phys options seem incredibly similar. (If I upload a photo of the first and second year module options, would you mind telling me the main differences between the courses judging by the content? Would it be similar to what you have just detailed above?) It's so infuriating how different universities seem to have different definitions of a joint Physics and Maths course!!


General open days are different to course-specific ones. If you apply to Manchester and they want to give you an offer, they'll invite you to an interview/visit day (the interview is pretty informal and is really more about an open day than assessing your application). You will most likely be given a copy of the latest student handbook at that visit day.

I applied to Birmingham (for Physics and Astrophysics at the time) but I seem to remember them doing a Theoretical Physics degree but also a 'Theoretical Physics and Applied Mathematics' combined degree, they probably do a 'normal' Maths and Physics degree too, I'm not sure.

But yeah, post up the info they gave you on here or via PM and I'll have a look.

It's because universities can sat their own syllabus, within reason - they have to cover a certain common core to be accredited by the relevant professional bodies (Institute of Physics, for example) but beyond that they can offer whatever they like - it'll generally be based around what the research interests of the department are. It'll also depend on things like student take-up. Before now, Manchester have offered Physics with Technological Physics, Physics with Photonics and Physics with Business and Management (amongst others), but I think they have since been withdrawn as they weren't popular options.

If you're interested - this is what the IoP say should be covered in a Physics degree as a bare minimum https://www.iop.org/education/higher_education/accreditation/file_43311.pdf
Original post by -G-a-v-
General open days are different to course-specific ones. If you apply to Manchester and they want to give you an offer, they'll invite you to an interview/visit day (the interview is pretty informal and is really more about an open day than assessing your application). You will most likely be given a copy of the latest student handbook at that visit day.

I applied to Birmingham (for Physics and Astrophysics at the time) but I seem to remember them doing a Theoretical Physics degree but also a 'Theoretical Physics and Applied Mathematics' combined degree, they probably do a 'normal' Maths and Physics degree too, I'm not sure.

But yeah, post up the info they gave you on here or via PM and I'll have a look.


Ah, why would they do that when you've already applied for your course though! Although there would be the possibility to change, I'd rather be looking into it now whilst I have the time.

Yes, the joint honours there is Theoretical Physics and Applied Mathematics - again, it is hard to try and distinguish this from their straight Theoretical Physics course. Both say things such as "This programme is designed for students who want to study physics with a mathematical emphasis" in their course descriptions, not just at B'ham but everywhere else I've looked at!

Here are the B'ham tables - what do you think I'd be gaining and/or losing by taking either TP (which will most likely be the 'no lab' route for me :tongue:) or TPAM?
bham options y1-2.png

I also intend to apply for ICL (who don't offer this joint course and therefore are making my life much simpler!), but other than that I'm still hunting around for something that takes my fancy.

Original post by -G-a-v-

It's because universities can sat their own syllabus, within reason - they have to cover a certain common core to be accredited by the relevant professional bodies (Institute of Physics, for example) but beyond that they can offer whatever they like - it'll generally be based around what the research interests of the department are. It'll also depend on things like student take-up. Before now, Manchester have offered Physics with Technological Physics, Physics with Photonics and Physics with Business and Management (amongst others), but I think they have since been withdrawn as they weren't popular options.

If you're interested - this is what the IoP say should be covered in a Physics degree as a bare minimum https://www.iop.org/education/higher_education/accreditation/file_43311.pdf


Naturally because of the grades required for any decent physics course, I'm also looking at Oxbridge - but according to Unistats, their degrees aren't accredited by the IoP. Does this mean that they don't have to meet these requirements? Why wouldn't they want to? Is this also the reason that they can't offer a year abroad with a scheme such as Erasmus - because their subject matter and/or credits don't match up? :confused:
Reply 18
Original post by jazzynutter
Ah, why would they do that when you've already applied for your course though! Although there would be the possibility to change, I'd rather be looking into it now whilst I have the time.


Partly so they can interview you and get an idea of who you are and what you're interested in - they might also use it if you miss your offer (they do at Manchester anyway) as information beyond what's on your UCAS form. Partly so they can do physics specific things for most of the day, so talks about the courses, tours of the department/teaching labs, meet current physics students (the first people Manchester Physics applicants speak to when they arrive for the interview/visit day are current undergrads over lunch, parents have a separate program as well so you can ask what really needs asking about uni life etc too :p: I remember when I went on a general open day I got a bit of info from the admissions tutor, had a talk about the physics course - but the rest was looking around the campus and then just went into Manchester for the afternoon, lol.

Yes, the joint honours there is Theoretical Physics and Applied Mathematics - again, it is hard to try and distinguish this from their straight Theoretical Physics course. Both say things such as "This programme is designed for students who want to study physics with a mathematical emphasis" in their course descriptions, not just at B'ham but everywhere else I've looked at!

Here are the B'ham tables - what do you think I'd be gaining and/or losing by taking either TP (which will most likely be the 'no lab' route for me :tongue:) or TPAM?
bham options y1-2.png


A 'no lab' option sounds awesome, lab was far and away my least favourite part of my degree (relatively easy marks though...)

It looks like on TP your maths courses will be maths for physicists, so will be more about mathematical methods and less about formal proofs. For TPAM, your maths courses will be done in the maths department, so may be more formal and probably a bit more rigorous, but even then they'll be applied maths courses, so you'll do them from a mathematicians point of view rather than a physicists. You may have fewer options to choose from on TPAM as you'll have maths department courses - with TP you'll be able to choose some physics option modules (although to be honest, the option choices on the year 1 and 2 tables don't look too exciting anyway) Do you have the equivalent tables for years 3 and 4?

I also intend to apply for ICL (who don't offer this joint course and therefore are making my life much simpler!), but other than that I'm still hunting around for something that takes my fancy.


Imperial offer a degree taught in the maths department BSc Mathematics with Applied Mathematics and Mathematical Physics but no MSci degree in it, so you could probably ignore that :p:



Naturally because of the grades required for any decent physics course, I'm also looking at Oxbridge - but according to Unistats, their degrees aren't accredited by the IoP. Does this mean that they don't have to meet these requirements? Why wouldn't they want to? Is this also the reason that they can't offer a year abroad with a scheme such as Erasmus - because their subject matter and/or credits don't match up? :confused:


Unistats lies :p:

https://www.iop.org/education/higher_education/accreditation/file_38818.pdf

Oxford Physics and Cambridge NatSci are both accredited by the IoP :smile:

I'm not sure why they don't offer a year abroad, I don't think they operate a modular/credits system like most unis these days, perhaps that has something to do with it. You'd have to get in touch with them and ask.
Original post by -G-a-v-
Partly so they can interview you and get an idea of who you are and what you're interested in - they might also use it if you miss your offer (they do at Manchester anyway) as information beyond what's on your UCAS form. Partly so they can do physics specific things for most of the day, so talks about the courses, tours of the department/teaching labs, meet current physics students (the first people Manchester Physics applicants speak to when they arrive for the interview/visit day are current undergrads over lunch, parents have a separate program as well so you can ask what really needs asking about uni life etc too :p: I remember when I went on a general open day I got a bit of info from the admissions tutor, had a talk about the physics course - but the rest was looking around the campus and then just went into Manchester for the afternoon, lol.


I was at the Manchester general open day on the 22nd - other than attending the physics talk/tour and asking questions at the physics stand, I spent most of my time devouring bacon butties in the SU :tongue: A departmental open day would have been more useful, but I was in B'ham the previous day and I live so far away that I couldn't miss out on the opportunity to tie both days into one journey! It sounds like this interview/applicant day would give me a lot more insight into the structure of the course, perhaps for deciding which offers to keep/reject though rather than to inspire me to pick up a particular course.

Original post by -G-a-v-
A 'no lab' option sounds awesome, lab was far and away my least favourite part of my degree (relatively easy marks though...)

It looks like on TP your maths courses will be maths for physicists, so will be more about mathematical methods and less about formal proofs. For TPAM, your maths courses will be done in the maths department, so may be more formal and probably a bit more rigorous, but even then they'll be applied maths courses, so you'll do them from a mathematicians point of view rather than a physicists. You may have fewer options to choose from on TPAM as you'll have maths department courses - with TP you'll be able to choose some physics option modules (although to be honest, the option choices on the year 1 and 2 tables don't look too exciting anyway) Do you have the equivalent tables for years 3 and 4?


If I'm honest, I do quite like proofs :redface: Due to its name, however, I get the feeling that TPAM is not a standard joint maths & physics course, and I certainly haven't seen anything like it anywhere else (although this doesn't necessarily make it better!).

I didn't originally include Y3&4 as they are mainly options columns, but here they are:
bham options y3-4.png
I'm not sure how many options I'd get to choose, but I could hazard a guess that each one listed is 10 credits..?

As for Y1&2, if I break them down into my opinion....

Semester 1: TPAM and TPnl seem highly similar, and that computational module seems like it could be fairly useful. The only thing I'd seem to be missing out on with TPAM is the MOMD, which is only available for the first year anyway and surely can't be worth more than 10 credits.

Semester 2: I doubt I'd take any of those orange blocks on the left anyway - other than Chaos and Non-linear Systems, which is compulsory for TPAM and for some reason is missing from TPnl :confused: Again, the compulsory maths modules for TPAM seem useful rather than completely separate core material and in fact - just as you pointed out! - simply cover some of the earlier modules but from a maths point of view (e.g. Classical Mechanics and Relativity has clearly been replaced by Elementary Mechanics).

Semester 3: I don't believe I can see a single significant difference between TPAM and TPnl here, other than the additional maths (which is listed as applied maths anyway) and the previous idea of module 'replacement'.

Semester 4: Taking TPAM over TPnl would mean that I wouldn't get the option module of Structure in the Universe, which sounds kinda interesting. However, I am getting more maths in - and I intend to work/study/have experience in Europe, where I know that their physics is far more mathematically based.

Overall, it really doesn't seem like there is much difference other than the matter of viewpoint concerning the mathematical content - which is mainly why I am so confused! This is why without seeing another options table I originally assumed that a 'normal' joint honours in Physics and Maths would pose the same problem, but I believe your first post in this thread has cleared that up a little.....

Back to my original question about joint P&M. Would you say that the following is about right in regards to that?

physline.png
...And if this is at all correct, what would be the significance of this? Would it be the same as your original post in that I will simply have core modules from each discipline without them really interlinking? As you might be able to tell, I am leaning towards TPAM at B'ham - but this doesn't mean that I am leaning to P&M over TP everywhere else (including Manchester!) due to this concern about my content 'meeting in the middle'. What I really want the maths modules to do is to enhance and reinforce my understanding of the physics modules, and not to feel so much like a separate subject.

Original post by -G-a-v-

Imperial offer a degree taught in the maths department BSc Mathematics with Applied Mathematics and Mathematical Physics but no MSci degree in it, so you could probably ignore that :p:

Unistats lies :p:

https://www.iop.org/education/higher_education/accreditation/file_38818.pdf

Oxford Physics and Cambridge NatSci are both accredited by the IoP :smile:

I'm not sure why they don't offer a year abroad, I don't think they operate a modular/credits system like most unis these days, perhaps that has something to do with it. You'd have to get in touch with them and ask.


Yeah, I saw that course, but I instantly ignored it - not just for the BSc factor (Although it's early to be thinking this far ahead, I do have a PhD in mind), but because the focus is clearly on maths rather than on physics.

Oxbridge really do think that they're in their own little bubble, don't they! I haven't heard anything or anyone even mention credits there at all... I think that their exam material is 'lumped' into one or two papers, so it wouldn't necessarily work on a credits-based system. I used to be a lot more enthusiastic about the prospect of applying there until I read the small print of their Physics & Physics and Philosophy courses - although I'm sure that I would be happy there and would do well there, their course structure hasn't changed since circa 1960 and so it does feel a little behind.

Quick Reply

Latest