This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Physics or engineering degree??
- Mathematics with physics or natural sciences (physical) at Cambridge?
- Masters in Electrical/Electronic Engineering with a BSc in Theoretical Physics
- Chemistry or Biochemistry?
- Physics Degrees
- Employability: Glasgow or St Andrews?
- How much of the course do labs take up for Chemistry at Imperial College London
- Is the open university really 'two-thirds' of a brick uni degree?
- Maths or Chemistry Degree?
- Edinburgh BSc CS,CS+AI or CS+math for getting into AI in the future?
- Career change from Physics to Finance/Healthcare?
- Degree Choices
- Choosing A-levels for Computer Science, Law, and Medicine
- Confused for A-level choices... politics or physics?
- A-Levels for Russel groups
- Career confusion ?!
- ...
- Biology or physics
- Merton Oxford or St John's Cambridge
- UCL vs UoM vs Uni of Southampton for physics
Best Degree for a Career in Theoretical Physics
Scroll to see replies
I recall asking a theoretical physicist the same question at a similar
stage in my career; the answer was 'do a degree in either maths
or physics at the best possible uni'. I am a theoretical physicist these
days, and the advice still seems about right.
For more detail, maybe it's best to work backwards from your goal,
which is really to get a PhD place with the best possible supervisor
(and choosing him/her is a whole other story!) while having the
appropriate knowledge.
On both these counts you really need to do the course content
of an MSc in Particles and Fields, or similar. IC, Durham and King's
London run them; perhaps a few others. The classic equivalent is
to do the Cambridge CASM ('Part 3', the 4th year of the maths course).
I'm quite surprised that a friend of yours from NatSci Physics was not
allowed to do this; it's a classic route into the field.
To get there you could do either NatSci or Maths at Cambridge. There
are plenty of top theoretical physicists who've come through each route,
and many from equivalent degrees elsewhere. (My impression is that,
among the very best, the Physicists perhaps shade it over the Mathematicians,
of whom I am one. The benefits of a good education in Physics are perhaps
slightly greater than those in Maths, much of which one can teach oneself later.)
If you're not at Cambridge then the key things are
1. be at a uni where there's a continuum of research interests
across the maths/physics divide. This usually means a uni with
strong theoretical physics in the maths depts. Durham is the UK's
leading example - and several prominent academics started their
careers there. You can tell by looking at staff research interests
and the range of final year modules and projects available.
Don't go somewhere that really has no modern, fundamental
theoretical physics research. You can easily identify these.
2. be among the best possible peers. Other things being equal,
the unis with the strongest students can teach the most advanced
material. Look for unis where the last year of any four year course
you choose includes modules in QFT and GR. These should be the
core of your final year: other physics (cosmology, condensed matter,
astroparticle stuff,... ) and maths (diff geom, Lie algebras, ...) are
less crucial. That will mean that you can cover about half of the
Pt3 year. Less than this and you may be lagging too far behind;
getting on one of the aforementioned MScs thereafter then becomes
your only realistic way forward.
3. get a first class degree, and preferably be among the top few
of your year. This will help you get the best PhD supervisor. To be
frank, if you don't reach this level, you'll have a very great deal
to prove in your PhD (actually everyone has, anyway), and you'll
be a remarkable person indeed if you do so! (There are a few -
people who were deep thinkers but who perhaps didn't have the
speed for exams.)
Hope this helps.
stage in my career; the answer was 'do a degree in either maths
or physics at the best possible uni'. I am a theoretical physicist these
days, and the advice still seems about right.
For more detail, maybe it's best to work backwards from your goal,
which is really to get a PhD place with the best possible supervisor
(and choosing him/her is a whole other story!) while having the
appropriate knowledge.
On both these counts you really need to do the course content
of an MSc in Particles and Fields, or similar. IC, Durham and King's
London run them; perhaps a few others. The classic equivalent is
to do the Cambridge CASM ('Part 3', the 4th year of the maths course).
I'm quite surprised that a friend of yours from NatSci Physics was not
allowed to do this; it's a classic route into the field.
To get there you could do either NatSci or Maths at Cambridge. There
are plenty of top theoretical physicists who've come through each route,
and many from equivalent degrees elsewhere. (My impression is that,
among the very best, the Physicists perhaps shade it over the Mathematicians,
of whom I am one. The benefits of a good education in Physics are perhaps
slightly greater than those in Maths, much of which one can teach oneself later.)
If you're not at Cambridge then the key things are
1. be at a uni where there's a continuum of research interests
across the maths/physics divide. This usually means a uni with
strong theoretical physics in the maths depts. Durham is the UK's
leading example - and several prominent academics started their
careers there. You can tell by looking at staff research interests
and the range of final year modules and projects available.
Don't go somewhere that really has no modern, fundamental
theoretical physics research. You can easily identify these.
2. be among the best possible peers. Other things being equal,
the unis with the strongest students can teach the most advanced
material. Look for unis where the last year of any four year course
you choose includes modules in QFT and GR. These should be the
core of your final year: other physics (cosmology, condensed matter,
astroparticle stuff,... ) and maths (diff geom, Lie algebras, ...) are
less crucial. That will mean that you can cover about half of the
Pt3 year. Less than this and you may be lagging too far behind;
getting on one of the aforementioned MScs thereafter then becomes
your only realistic way forward.
3. get a first class degree, and preferably be among the top few
of your year. This will help you get the best PhD supervisor. To be
frank, if you don't reach this level, you'll have a very great deal
to prove in your PhD (actually everyone has, anyway), and you'll
be a remarkable person indeed if you do so! (There are a few -
people who were deep thinkers but who perhaps didn't have the
speed for exams.)
Hope this helps.
Wow. martika and feuerbachian - your advice is greatly appreciated. 
martika: I can now see why doing Mathematics and Physics would be more suitable. As I said to Cexy before though, I am still quite keen to find out how much pure maths at uni is about concepts as opposed to methods. Could you shed any light on this?
feuerbachian: Thanks so much for your input - it was certainly helpful. So, all other factors equal (and donig everything you've said), a maths or physics degree is OK. However:
if you do a theoretical physics degree instead of just straight physics/maths or maths and physics, would you then not get a combination of both the maths side of it, plus the physical intuition (according the course contents, TP degrees just swap the practical element in physics with extra maths)? I'm guessing that practical physics isn't needed in TP much. thus, would the former surely not be more advantageous than the latter?
also, what would be your view on deciding between maths&physics or just straight physics at Warwick?
martika: I can now see why doing Mathematics and Physics would be more suitable. As I said to Cexy before though, I am still quite keen to find out how much pure maths at uni is about concepts as opposed to methods. Could you shed any light on this?
feuerbachian: Thanks so much for your input - it was certainly helpful. So, all other factors equal (and donig everything you've said), a maths or physics degree is OK. However:
if you do a theoretical physics degree instead of just straight physics/maths or maths and physics, would you then not get a combination of both the maths side of it, plus the physical intuition (according the course contents, TP degrees just swap the practical element in physics with extra maths)? I'm guessing that practical physics isn't needed in TP much. thus, would the former surely not be more advantageous than the latter?
also, what would be your view on deciding between maths&physics or just straight physics at Warwick?
Feynstein
what would be your view on deciding between maths&physics or just straight physics at Warwick?
I study straight maths @ Warwick. And I strongly suggest you go for the joint honours maths+physics. The straight physics degree really lacks in truly rigorous mathematics, something you will definitely need if you want to do theoretical physics. The joint honours here is a good degree, basically you pretty much have 50% of your modules in the maths department (an will taking the same modules as maths students) and 50% in the physics dept (and will be studying with physics) although of course you can dramatically change the weighting, especiallly after your 1st year (i.e mostly do physics modules/maths modules/take modules from any other department). Hope that helps.
The Orientalist
I study straight maths @ Warwick. And I strongly suggest you go for the joint honours maths+physics. The straight physics degree really lacks in truly rigorous mathematics, something you will definitely need if you want to do theoretical physics. The joint honours here is a good degree, basically you pretty much have 50% of your modules in the maths department (an will taking the same modules as maths students) and 50% in the physics dept (and will be studying with physics) although of course you can dramatically change the weighting, especiallly after your 1st year (i.e mostly do physics modules/maths modules/take modules from any other department). Hope that helps.
I see, and I agree with what you say.
looking at whats in both courses I noticed that most of the fourth year physics courses available in the joint-honours course are available in the mphys, bar some. how is it possible to do this is the physics degree programme lacks the maths needed for TP?
is it one of those things where they say it's possible but you're making it harder for yourself if you do... sort of thing?
Feynstein
is it one of those things where they say it's possible but you're making it harder for yourself if you do... sort of thing?
is it one of those things where they say it's possible but you're making it harder for yourself if you do... sort of thing?
Yeah there you go. I was being a bit harsh when I said that straight physics lacked the maths to go on to do TP. But like you said, you're just making it harder for yourself by doing so and it would thus be a much wiser choice to do the joint Maths+Phys degree.
so is imperial good for theoretical physics (and UCL?) I know Cambridge and Warwirk are, aren't they? Where else? For some reason I haven't looked at Durham, maybe I should
Related discussions
- Physics or engineering degree??
- Mathematics with physics or natural sciences (physical) at Cambridge?
- Masters in Electrical/Electronic Engineering with a BSc in Theoretical Physics
- Chemistry or Biochemistry?
- Physics Degrees
- Employability: Glasgow or St Andrews?
- How much of the course do labs take up for Chemistry at Imperial College London
- Is the open university really 'two-thirds' of a brick uni degree?
- Maths or Chemistry Degree?
- Edinburgh BSc CS,CS+AI or CS+math for getting into AI in the future?
- Career change from Physics to Finance/Healthcare?
- Degree Choices
- Choosing A-levels for Computer Science, Law, and Medicine
- Confused for A-level choices... politics or physics?
- A-Levels for Russel groups
- Career confusion ?!
- ...
- Biology or physics
- Merton Oxford or St John's Cambridge
- UCL vs UoM vs Uni of Southampton for physics
Latest
Trending
