The Student Room Group

This discussion is no longer active so you won't be able to reply.Check out other Related discussions

Smartest group(s) among these...

Poll

who are the smartest ??

Who do you consider the smartest among these groups ??

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Physicists and Mathematicians are way more smarter
its between these two
Doctor/surgeons are dumb af . should not be even mentioned in same sentence as other two lol
Evidence for either? You are posting about science after all :colone:
Original post by Messi10Munna
what evidence??
On my case , i've gone through both medical books and books of higher physics. I can pretty much understand a huge portion of medical books if not all, whereas physics ones blows my head.
As for him, he's biased i feel

As in do you have data on a number of outcomes you can compare the two degrees with? Otherwise it's just opinions.
LOL @those who 'd think its doctor. Medicine is important and requires loads of hardwork and practice. But Physics especially at higher level is just something else.
Physicists are way smarter than your doctor/surgeons . Even medical scientists, i'd say are smarter than doctors/surgeons but still behind physics.
Anyone with enough idea about two fields will agree with me.
This should be hard to answer. Doctors are smarter than general population but compared with the other two i don't think doctors should be in this comparision.
Its Physicist>Mathematician >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Doctor
Or Mathematician >Physicist>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Doctor
Anyways,since i'd have to go with one, i'll go with Physicists .
Physicists and mathematicians are the same thing, depending on how the maths is applied.
physicists can also include extra stuff on top of the maths though, so i'de say physicists are smarter; as the practical and theoretical aspects of their work and study are essentially Maths + Mechanics of all types(orbital,"thermo",fluid,engineering shizz) + the Lovecraftian horror that is quantum physics + Space stuff.
whereas maths is Maths + Mechanics(fewer than physics) + Statistics.

i think for either you can take modules and options of the other.
Original post by FAZE Phluid
Physicists and mathematicians are the same thing, depending on how the maths is applied.
physicists can also include extra stuff on top of the maths though, so i'de say physicists are smarter; as the practical and theoretical aspects of their work and study are essentially Maths + Mechanics of all types(orbital,"thermo",fluid,engineering shizz) + the Lovecraftian horror that is quantum physics + Space stuff.
whereas maths is Maths + Mechanics(fewer than physics) + Statistics.

i think for either you can take modules and options of the other.


I'd hardly call QM a "lovecraftian horror". It's just more applied maths, and is one of the more well understood areas of modern physics in fact (compared to the fact in classical mechanics anything involving more than three bodies immediately becomes a problem that can only be approximated...). Also physicists generally don't do much if any fluid mechanics, which generally covered in maths degrees or, if relevant, engineering courses. Fluid mechanics research tends to be primarily done in maths departments.

Anyway, the fundamental difference is that the kind of maths mathematicians do is vastly different to the kind of maths physicists do. Writing (especially novel) proofs about e.g. commutative rings is imo conceptually a lot more difficult than doing essentially a lot of trumped up calculus as physicists do. The concepts mathematicians work with are extremely abstract and quite unintuitive often, whereas physics more or less all draws on the marrying of physical intuition with mathematical methods.

Any maths a physicist does a mathematician will do; most physics degrees and indeed working physicists will not touch the vast majority of maths a maths degree student will do (to begin with, anything in abstract algebra beyond groups and vector spaces/linear algebra, any proper analysis usually, any measure-theoretic probability, all topology/geometry except maybe differential manifolds, etc, etc...). Even among those exceptions I noted, that will be quite unusual and only the relatively small set of physicists doing theoretical physics work in HEP, GR, or quantum theory will likely cover any of those areas.
(edited 3 years ago)
Original post by artful_lounger
I'd hardly call QM a "lovecraftian horror". It's just more applied maths, and is one of the more well understood areas of modern physics in fact (compared to the fact in classical mechanics anything involving more than three bodies immediately becomes a problem that can only be approximated...). Also physicists generally don't do much if any fluid mechanics, which generally covered in maths degrees or, if relevant, engineering courses. Fluid mechanics research tends to be primarily done in maths departments.

Anyway, the fundamental difference is that the kind of maths mathematicians do is vastly different to the kind of maths physicists do. Writing (especially novel) proofs about e.g. commutative rings is imo conceptually a lot more difficult than doing essentially a lot of trumped up calculus as physicists do. The concepts mathematicians work with are extremely abstract and quite unintuitive often, whereas physics more or less all draws on the marrying of physical intuition with mathematical methods.

Any maths a physicist does a mathematician will do; most physics degrees and indeed working physicists will not touch the vast majority of maths a maths degree student will do (to begin with, anything in abstract algebra beyond groups and vector spaces/linear algebra, any proper analysis usually, any measure-theoretic probability, all topology/geometry except maybe differential manifolds, etc, etc...). Even among those exceptions I noted, that will be quite unusual and only the relatively small set of physicists doing theoretical physics work in HEP, GR, or quantum theory will likely cover any of those areas.

to be honest
i cant argue.

but on the topic of the question, i believe we both missed the point.
They are asking about the TOP end of each subject. Any GCSE science student could say they are a physicist, compared to someone with a doctorate, they may not be as smart.
in which case giants like hawking, Einstein or Bohr come to mind.
who have there roots in both subjects, and are primarily credited as physicists.

i wont pretend i have that much experience in either area (especially anywhere above A level) but it looks like the best of the best, "the smartest", turned there focus towards towards physics.
A bit tongue in cheek, but it's well know that the highest form of life on the planet is the theoretical physicist, as (s)he combines both maths and physics. When you meet one do remember to get on your knees, bow and recite we are not worthy.
Original post by FAZE Phluid
in which case giants like hawking, Einstein or Bohr come to mind.
who have there roots in both subjects, and are primarily credited as physicists.

i wont pretend i have that much experience in either area (especially anywhere above A level) but it looks like the best of the best, "the smartest", turned there focus towards towards physics.


Stephen Hawking originally planned to study mathematics, he only studied natural sciences (eventually specialising in physics) because maths wasn't offered by the college he planned to apply to...sort of making the opposite point to what you are intending.

Also your argument is only based on your own knowledge of "big name" individuals in the field, which inevitable speaks to your own bias in what you have learned about and choose to learn about. Additionally your methodology of choosing the "best of the best" on the basis of achievement doesn't reveal anything about their potential. Many of the "best of the best" did very well because they were born into an environment which enabled them to do well. Which particular field they ultimately went into was irrelevant because they would've likely excelled in any field they chose.

As a counterexample, Emmy Noether was not only more or less founded the field of modern algebra, but also made one of the most important contributions to modern theoretical physics. She was a mathematician. The Bernoullis were mostly mathematicians. Gauss and Euler were among the mathematicians to end all mathematicians in terms of the breadth of their work, and both also made extensive contributions to the development of modern physics. The history of mathematics is littered with mathematicians who not only made seminal developments in mathematics, but also in the sciences and particularly physics. However most were considered primarily to be mathematicians, for whatever it matters.

In any case, I am basing my argument on my experiences of undergraduate maths and physics courses. Abstract algebra is harder to "do" than quantum mechanics, in my opinion - certainly QM is more intuitive than abstract algebra, once you suspend your preconceptions of things having to behave classically.
For the three people who voted Doctor in the poll ,lol.
They are biased prolly and don't even have a clue how hard pure mathematics and theoretical physics is !
Original post by ralph_dagger
For the three people who voted Doctor in the poll ,lol.
They are biased prolly and don't even have a clue how hard pure mathematics and theoretical physics is !

I feel more sorry for the dumb schmucks who think there actually is an answer to this 'question', rather than being able to appreciate that each one requires high levels of different types of intelligence.
Original post by Drewski
I feel more sorry for the dumb schmucks who think there actually is an answer to this 'question', rather than being able to appreciate that each one requires high levels of different types of intelligence.

LOL, butthurt ??? high intelligence for mathematicians or Physicists ok ? for doctors????HAHAHA
Rote learners and memorizers lol. All that is nothing but stamp collecting.
Original post by ralph_dagger
LOL, butthurt ??? high intelligence for mathematicians or Physicists ok ? for doctors????HAHAHA
Rote learners and memorizers lol. All that is nothing but stamp collecting.

Exactly. A different kind of intelligence.

The ability to act when, literally, someone's life is at risk.
To get instant decisions right when there's no safety net.
How to tell someone that their loved one is going to die.

When do mathematicians have to know how to deal with that kind of pressure?

Nobody's saying that any of those people aren't intelligent.
Original post by FAZE Phluid
the comparison here is souly on intellectual level

Also try not to just insult someone when making an argument. You dumb *****.

Is it? The OP didn't specify.

And I'd be wary of wading into any debate on intelligence whilst being unable to spell.

Further, I didn't insult anyone. I may have alluded to something, but any insult has been invented in your mind. You're the one who's resorted to insults.
Original post by Drewski
Is it? The OP didn't specify.

And I'd be wary of wading into any debate on intelligence whilst being unable to spell.

Further, I didn't insult anyone. I may have alluded to something, but any insult has been invented in your mind. You're the one who's resorted to insults.

ok that insult was ironic, thank you TSR gods for understanding and deleting the post.
Reply 17
Original post by ralph_dagger
For the three people who voted Doctor in the poll ,lol.
They are biased prolly and don't even have a clue how hard pure mathematics and theoretical physics is !

I assume you don't either if you make a comment like this. :lol:
Original post by Napp
I assume you don't either if you make a comment like this. :lol:

I very well about all these fields. LOL .I am assuring you :wink:
Doctors are probably the 2nd most important people of the society behind farmers & alongside teacher.
However when it comes intelligence, Physicists and Mathematicians are from a different planet. Even biomedical researcher are smarter than doctors
Original post by Drewski
Exactly. A different kind of intelligence.

The ability to act when, literally, someone's life is at risk.
To get instant decisions right when there's no safety net.
How to tell someone that their loved one is going to die.

When do mathematicians have to know how to deal with that kind of pressure?

Nobody's saying that any of those people aren't intelligent.

Soldier who fights in a war, militaries, police etc also have to more pressure and take decision lol.
Don't bring stupid logic here please.
Memorization -any can do if he/she tries hard . I will always rate ability to think deeply , abstract reasoning as higher form of intelligence than memorization. !!

Latest