Science or TP?

Fringe · 05-02-2009 12:15am #1

Hey, I'm in 6th year right now and at first, I was pretty much set on Science. I was planning on doing Maths, Physics and Chemistry and either go with Physics or Chemistry in the end. At the moment, I'm leaning more towards the Physics side so that leads me to the question of whether I should do TP or not. Is there a huge difference between them? From what I can see, if I go down the TP route, it'd be more specific which would probably be more helpful in the long run. Whereas if I do Science, I would get to do Chemistry and I could also end up liking it so much that I specialise in that instead.

PurpleFistMixer · 05-02-2009 12:24am

TP is more maths than physics for the first 2 years, keep that in mind. You almost (ie one module is different) the same physics as those doing general Science, but instead of the other things they're doing, you do all maths, which is shared with the pure maths people. So you really have to like maths.
As far as specialising goes... well, in 3rd year of Science you specialise, so I wouldn't say TP is more specific. There's just less options.

Podge_irl · 05-02-2009 1:11am

You can transfer into Physics from TP up until the end of 3rd year (I know one person who did it during the summer break between third and fourth year). You'll be hard pressed to transfer into TP from Science after Christmas and won't be able to at all after first year. Just something to bear in mind.

You have to really really like maths to do TP, as you will find yourself getting bogged down in maths quite often. The Nat Sci course will give you a good range of options in third year and give you a good grounding in physics, but you would find it very difficult to do anything on the purely theoretical side of things. It really depends on what you want from a physics degree - the Science option probably gives you more "physicsy" career options. TP will leave you with academic research or a myriad of
business/consultancy/finance as options when you leave, so you will be by no means overly restricted, but you're unlikely to end up jumping into a lab (though again some people do).

If you are dead set on doing physics then I would recommend TP as it is easy to go from there to experimental physics. If you are iffy on the maths or still want to consider Chemistry then Nat Sci might be a better route. I'm afraid there is no definitive answer.

piby · 05-02-2009 11:08am

Science! I'm biased but I think it gives you more options and doesn't force you to choose straight away and you can always pick physics as your specialty in 3rd year.

Fringe · 05-02-2009 9:21pm

Thanks for the replies. The maths shouldn't really be a problem since I do like the subject and I'm interested in doing it. That's one of the things though that makes TP seem better than Science since there's a lot more maths. I've heard that the maths in Science is more geared towards applying which sounds alright but I woudn't get the full share of maths. I'm still stuck though. It's a really annoying decision I'll have to make. The whole transferring thing does make TP sound better as well.

What are the career options anyway? I've been told about business/finance but I don't really see the point because if I want to work in that area, I'd pick a business course. I can see myself ending up in academic research at the moment.

Brian · 05-02-2009 9:39pm

You may like Maths at school, but it's a whole different level of horribleness at university. Also, doing TP makes you consider eating carrots without peeling them.

Jonathan · 05-02-2009 10:12pm

/obligatory go do engineering instead response.

EyesLeft · 05-02-2009 10:25pm

If you are interested in physics because you want to invent a smaller magnet, do physics, if you are interested in physics because you want to know how the universe began, do TP. If you are interested in physics because it might help you get a job, either works.

Brian · 05-02-2009 11:01pm

jmccrohan wrote: »

/obligatory go do engineering instead response.

No way, Engineering don't do any theoretical maths stuff, it's only practical applications like the proof of integration!

PurpleFistMixer · 05-02-2009 11:56pm

Phh, proving the theory behind integration is the most practical thing we've done in maths all year. : p

And well, yes, maths at college is far more hardcore than school maths. One realises how the LC is actually merely a test of "use this formula to find the answer to this", and you're not required to prove anything original as it were. But I don't want to put you off, it's much more satisfying, it's just quite difficult. I easily spend twice as long doing maths assignments than I do physics... the physics element is like a pleasant breather on the side.

I'd tentatively say that the main career options from TP are academics, but I'm sure you could work your way into other things, and there's always the transferring option before you graduate.

Podge_irl · 06-02-2009 1:58am

PurpleFistMixer wrote: »

I easily spend twice as long doing maths assignments than I do physics..

I easily spent infinitely more time on my maths assignments, cause I didn't actually do my physics ones. If you like maths and you are more interested in physics then I would definitely recommend TP. It doesn't restrict you to TP - almost half my class ended up changing to either pure maths or pure physics. It will however give you an idea of what is involved in theoretical physics (a lot of maths) and what is involved in exp physics. If you do go down the TP route just be sure to give it a fair shot. It will be terrifying at first and you will probably be exceptionally confused, but you will get on top of it eventually. I had no idea what was going on for the first 6/7 months in first year, and I've managed to get myself into Cambridge in the mean time so I haven't done too badly for myself. If ultimately you decide that TP isn't for you then you can always transfer into experimental physics (just bear in mind, its not easier, its just different).

ApeXaviour · 09-02-2009 11:43pm

Y'know... as someone who faced the exact same dilemma as you, oh about 6 years ago (and ended up choosing science), I'd actually say listen to this guy:

jmccrohan wrote: »

/obligatory go do engineering instead response.

Btw I specialised in physics and am currently doing a phd in in it, with the school of physics in trinity.

I'm not sure what weird ass stigma I had associated with engineering at the time of my CAO, something about monkeys with calculators. Anyway, after meeting many the postgrad engineer, I can safely conclude that engineering is science, but with a purpose. And electronic engineers are a lot more hireable than most other graduates, even as phd students.

In terms of the subjects as you know them now and how you will know them in college, I entreat you to bear in mind the following rule of thumb... In college:

Biology becomes chemistry
chemistry becomes physics
physics becomes maths
and
maths becomes some weird mix of philosophy and logic

I will not knock TP, because it genuinely is a really good, and venerable course. Whether it's right for you I'm not sure. To do TP I think you really really have to want to do TP. If you're unsure, then I'd suggest science (or engineering?) as it gives you more leeway. The only thing science might hinder against is if you wanted to do a theoretical research postgrad in the school if maths (here or elsewhere). But if you really really wanted to do that, you can get around it by doing a masters etc. There were one or two very talented classmates of mine who went that route in cambridge and oxford after their physics degree through natural science.

Also if you quite like chemistry there is always the Advanced Materials degree, into which one can jump from science in 3rd year (if you study maths chemistry physics) I had a few friends who did that (and a few who jumped from it) and again i envy them. The inorganic chemistry they learned would have been invaluable to me in my phd research, since mine is somewhat materials based, if on a very fundamental level.

I wish you luck, and remember, whatever you choose it should be something you like and think you can excel in. A II-1 degree in chemistry is a lot better than a III in TP. And there is a LOT of leeway in the job market and even in postgraduate research. Sometimes even the latter will advertise for graduates to simply have a "technical degree" with a good grade.

Brian · 10-02-2009 12:33am

ApeXaviour wrote: »

In terms of the subjects as you know them now and how you will know them in college, I entreat you to bear in mind the following rule of thumb... In college:

Biology becomes chemistry
chemistry becomes physics
physics becomes maths
and
maths becomes some weird mix of philosophy and logic

Jesus. That is absolutely right. Apart from the Maths bit; it just becomes indecipherable.

TheAmateur · 10-02-2009 5:20pm

ApeXaviour wrote: »

Biology becomes chemistry
chemistry becomes physics
physics becomes maths
and
maths becomes some weird mix of philosophy and logic

If there was any justice in the world this'd be on the cao. In rainbow blinkies.

Fad · 10-02-2009 5:32pm

Is Maths in Science really that bad?

eeek my one problem with TCD common entry science is that I have to drop one of the subjects I love, as I wanna take Maths.

So who's up for defending their chosen discipline?

skregs · 11-02-2009 1:33am

Maths Methods is the way to go.

2x = 4
Solve for x

Science or TP?

Comments