Maths and Theoretical Physics Course Thread TR031 TR035

antiselfdual

You should always try to know everything! (For exam values of everything.) But yeah it was back in the old system. The issue with the IFT was more that it had never been asked ever before, and was horrible, so it seemed like there was no chance it would ever come up. Then (2/3s of) it did. Was so happy to see it...

asdfghjz

For someone who likes pure maths and doesn't like theoretical physics, and has to take one of the following to make up credits, which would you recommend, differential geometry, stat phys, classical field theory or quantum mechanics?

CJC86

asdfghjz wrote: »

For someone who likes pure maths and doesn't like theoretical physics, and has to take one of the following to make up credits, which would you recommend, differential geometry, stat phys, classical field theory or quantum mechanics?

Differential geometry all the way. That's about as pure maths as they come. The rest are very much TP courses.

asdfghjz

CJC86 wrote: »

Differential geometry all the way. That's about as pure maths as they come. The rest are very much TP courses.

I heard Taylor teaches it like a TP course though?

CJC86

asdfghjz wrote: »

I heard Taylor teaches it like a TP course though?

Well, he's a physicist so that makes sense. If you like pure maths, it should still be far closer to a pure maths course than the other 3 courses you mentioned.

Can any 4th year/just graduated TP students give their opinion?

PurpleFistMixer

CJC86 wrote: »

Well, he's a physicist so that makes sense. If you like pure maths, it should still be far closer to a pure maths course than the other 3 courses you mentioned.

Can any 4th year/just graduated TP students give their opinion?

Yes to the above. It was a bit of a "pre-general-relativity" course I believe (I've only taken one course on differential geometry so it's hard to judge it), but it's still definitely the closest thing to pure maths out of the options you've given.

Also if you're going into fourth year and need to make up credits, I hope you're already doing a project. *stern face*

KarlD93

Hi, I'm just about to go into SF Maths and wondering about the Mechanics course that Frolov lectures. I didn't really like Kovacs' course at all on Mechanics, I found him difficult to understand and I mostly scraped my way through the homework. I'm just wondering is Frolov's course in any way related to Kovacs' or is it completely different? Any info would be great, just want to get a general feeling of what the course is like.

PurpleFistMixer

KarlD93 wrote: »

Hi, I'm just about to go into SF Maths and wondering about the Mechanics course that Frolov lectures. I didn't really like Kovacs' course at all on Mechanics, I found him difficult to understand and I mostly scraped my way through the homework. I'm just wondering is Frolov's course in any way related to Kovacs' or is it completely different? Any info would be great, just want to get a general feeling of what the course is like.

The courses are pretty much completely unrelated. The second year course is on Lagrangian mechanics which is an entirely different approach to the Newtonian stuff you do in first year.

Maybe_Memories

KarlD93 wrote: »

Hi, I'm just about to go into SF Maths and wondering about the Mechanics course that Frolov lectures. I didn't really like Kovacs' course at all on Mechanics, I found him difficult to understand and I mostly scraped my way through the homework. I'm just wondering is Frolov's course in any way related to Kovacs' or is it completely different? Any info would be great, just want to get a general feeling of what the course is like.

Second year mechanics is entirely analytical, so no drawing diagrams with a million vectors. It's terrifying at first but you get used to it and it becomes second nature after a while.

KarlD93

Maybe_Memories wrote: »

Second year mechanics is entirely analytical, so no drawing diagrams with a million vectors. It's terrifying at first but you get used to it and it becomes second nature after a while.

That's good to know, I always hated drawing all the force diagrams. If it is more mathematical and analytical I think I'd like it a lot more than last year's course.

Maybe_Memories

JS Maths timetable seems to clash a lot.

PDEs clash with Algebraic topology and Statistical Physics,
Functional Analysis clashes with Group reps and Stat Physics.

This is a massive inconvenience...

Aoibheann

You'll always have clashes, it's the unfortunate part of being able to choose all your modules. I know we got a couple of clashes sorted out by asking the lecturer (there was a large group of us that had PDEs and Stat. Phys clashing, and one of the lecturers was happy to change the timeslot), but this won't always be possible.

I'm lucky so far in that I haven't come across a single clash for what I want to take. Pretty sure this is the first time!

Maybe_Memories

Out of curiousity what modules are you taking?


I was intending on taking Quantum Mechanics, Electrodynamics, Stat Phys, Functional analysis, PDEs and algebraic topology. No way am I taking a computational module so I might just have to alternate which I go to every week for the ones that clash. Shouldn't be too bad since they only clash once a week. :pac:

Aoibheann

Honestly? I'm not sure at all what I'm taking yet! Having real problems deciding what to take this year - might take a completely different direction from previous years. I'll definitely take Functional Analysis, PDEs and Maths Econ I. We'll see beyond that - I'm narrowing down choices but not sure yet!

If you want any info on the first three modules you've mentioned, give me a shout.

Tears in Rain

Haha, this whole idea of actually having choices in 3rd year is so alien to me...I'm a little jealous, though knowing me I wouldn't be able to decide at all :<

Oh well, at least I get to pick between astrophysics and computational physics in TP

ride-the-spiral

Any advice for these physics posters? We got our project titles today (didn't get the space elevator one :pac:) and I'd like to not have to spend a lot of time on them or worry too much about them.

jennn

Aoibheann wrote: »

You'll always have clashes, it's the unfortunate part of being able to choose all your modules. I know we got a couple of clashes sorted out by asking the lecturer (there was a large group of us that had PDEs and Stat. Phys clashing, and one of the lecturers was happy to change the timeslot), but this won't always be possible.

I'm lucky so far in that I haven't come across a single clash for what I want to take. Pretty sure this is the first time!

What's pdes like?? I'm put off by stalker but if it's doable course material I might take it

Aoibheann

jennn wrote: »

What's pdes like?? I'm put off by stalker but if it's doable course material I might take it

I haven't taken Stalker's PDEs course (took a half-year course by Pete, it was very different in terms of content), but I will definitely be taking it this year. I've always liked him as a lecturer, and the course material looks interesting if it's anything like the last time he taught it in 2010/11 (see here). At least try out the first couple of lectures if you're interested! I'm going to a couple of extra courses for the first week or so, makes it handy if I find out I unexpectedly don't like something!

Yarghhh

ride-the-spiral wrote: »

Any advice for these physics posters? We got our project titles today (didn't get the space elevator one :pac:) and I'd like to not have to spend a lot of time on them or worry too much about them.

From what I remember the aesthetics of the poster seemed to be a main point. Keep the info on the poster minimal and with a white/plain background. Easy to read basically. Keep all other info for questions they ask.

blagards

Aoibheann wrote: »

I haven't taken Stalker's PDEs course (took a half-year course by Pete, it was very different in terms of content), but I will definitely be taking it this year. I've always liked him as a lecturer, and the course material looks interesting if it's anything like the last time he taught it in 2010/11 (see here). At least try out the first couple of lectures if you're interested! I'm going to a couple of extra courses for the first week or so, makes it handy if I find out I unexpectedly don't like something!

You going to twelve subjects worth of lectures? ........the days were so long

Tears in Rain

Yarghhh wrote: »

From what I remember the aesthetics of the poster seemed to be a main point. Keep the info on the poster minimal and with a white/plain background. Easy to read basically. Keep all other info for questions they ask.

This definitely is the best advice. I remember Coey grumbling rather loudly about some posters having fonts that were too small and having too much writing.

Take a look at actual postgraduate posters downstairs in the SNIAM for an idea of how much information to put on the page.

Basically, if you know your topic inside out, and you want to demonstrate that knowledge, don't just **** it out onto an A2 page, put the key details down, and demonstrate that knowledge when assessors come round and ask you about the project.

Mr. Maths

On the subject of the posters, if anyone can find/knows where to find any material on "Magnetic dispersive (non-resonant) imaging" that'd be sound...

Its officially ungoogleable, not a sniff of it on wikipedia either.

Aoibheann

blagards wrote: »

You going to twelve subjects worth of lectures? ........the days were so long

I'm not as insane as some people... *cough*... I may go to an extra two, maximum! :P

Tears in Rain

I considered going to extra lectures this year, but it really doesn't seem worth the effort...much as I love the course for its own sake, this year counts for my degree, so gonna try to keep as much on topic as possible...

blagards

Tears in Rain wrote: »

I considered going to extra lectures this year, but it really doesn't seem worth the effort...much as I love the course for its own sake, this year counts for my degree, so gonna try to keep as much on topic as possible...

I went to extra so I could pick the subjects that I enjoyed/found easy. Only did it for a few weeks (except for a couple I couldn't decide on for ages). Found that it definitely helped my overall result, as if I had taken the 6 I had started with I would have had Abstract Algebra instead of Complex Analysis, and Abstract apparently had a massive workload, and Zaitsev's a legend and gave loads of people 100%

Maybe_Memories

Loving Classical Electrodynamics. So far Tristan McLoughlin seems like a great lecturer. Also really liking Jackson's book. Considering buying it.

blagards

Maybe_Memories wrote: »

Loving Classical Electrodynamics. So far Tristan McLoughlin seems like a great lecturer. Also really liking Jackson's book. Considering buying it.

Hang on, did Buttimore retire?

Maybe_Memories

blagards wrote: »

Hang on, did Buttimore retire?

The School Of Maths site still has him listed as faculty, so I'm guessing there just giving McLoughlin a go at teaching a module. Buttimore is still listed as the lecturer on the timetable. Interestingly enough up until last week Sinead Ryan was listed as the lecturer for Stat Physics 1 but they changed it to Christopher Thomas. They don't seem very organised this year...

ride-the-spiral

Do we get free printing on the maths computers? Also, are there any sort of opening hours for the computer rooms?

Reek_The_Meek

Printing is free in the maths computer rooms. Although whether they're working when you want them is another matter.

Computer rooms are always open. They never sleep.