I read Brian Cox's PhD Thesis so that you don't have to...

[Paul M]

Actually, I didn't I watched this video with the same title:

 

[saac]

Nice find  

Jim

[Paul M]

1 minute ago, saac said:

Nice find  

Jim

I came across Tibee's channel a couple of nights ago. She does that title theme with a few of the big names and makes them accessible and interesting to the "hobbyist"

Just watched a video about Nikola Tesla's school grades. Not much science in there but an insight to his early life:

 

[mikeDnight]

Tibees provides fascinating insight into some great minds like Einstein, Tesla, Newton and many more. I love her relaxing style and watch  her short posts on U-tube  regularly. Her voice is relaxing too, and is easy listening despite some of her topics touching on the mathematical.

[Paul M]

3 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

Her voice is relaxing too, and is easy listening despite some of her topics touching on the mathematical.

Yesterday I watched her explanation of Logs using a picture of a hillside with trees growing on it. It was very relaxing and, somehow, enjoyable. But I came away feeling I understood logarithms less than before and trees even less so! 🤣

[Macavity]

A very good summary of Prof. Cox's thesis! I did then wonder re. her background...
Not many people talk of Pomerons like they are a "familiar"? Interesting personal
stuff: Dunno... Ph.D. or "follow your dreams" as a Youtuber? Many (women) talk of
abuse received online? She was spotted with "Physics Girl" (Dianna Cowern). 😎

Maybe a bit of "seague"... but I was SAD (Human aspect of Physics?) to see D.C.
is in hospital with knock-on of "Long Covid":  https://youtu.be/vydgkCCXbTA 😐

On a lighter note, maybe they should teach some "Maths for Physics Students"?
At least where I was concerned, there was a fair gap, between the 1st Deg level
and the sort of *Matrix Algebra* expected of the more "Theoretical" Physicists.
Maybe this slightly more user-friendly (less combative?) style could be useful...
Something as "simple" as e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_notation 😬

 

Edited March 13, 2023 by Macavity

[Froufrou]

On 12/03/2023 at 23:49, mikeDnight said:

Tibees provides fascinating insight into some great minds like Einstein, Tesla, Newton and many more. I love her relaxing style and watch  her short posts on U-tube  regularly. Her voice is relaxing too, and is easy listening despite some of her topics touching on the mathematical. Also love this source https://assignmentbro.com/ca/nursing-assignment-help for getting help with some of my assignments.

Agree with you! I love such a type of education. Her voice is much better than my teacher's one...

Edited July 2, 2023 by Froufrou

[iantaylor2uk]

On 13/03/2023 at 20:14, Macavity said:

A very good summary of Prof. Cox's thesis! I did then wonder re. her background...
Not many people talk of Pomerons like they are a "familiar"? Interesting personal
stuff: Dunno... Ph.D. or "follow your dreams" as a Youtuber? Many (women) talk of
abuse received online? She was spotted with "Physics Girl" (Dianna Cowern). 😎

Maybe a bit of "seague"... but I was SAD (Human aspect of Physics?) to see D.C.
is in hospital with knock-on of "Long Covid":  https://youtu.be/vydgkCCXbTA 😐

On a lighter note, maybe they should teach some "Maths for Physics Students"?
At least where I was concerned, there was a fair gap, between the 1st Deg level
and the sort of *Matrix Algebra* expected of the more "Theoretical" Physicists.
Maybe this slightly more user-friendly (less combative?) style could be useful...
Something as "simple" as e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_notation 😬

 

I have a great book "Mathematical Methods of Physics" by Jon Matthews & R.L. Walker which is well worth getting if you can find a copy.

[George Jones]

On 13/03/2023 at 13:14, Macavity said:

On a lighter note, maybe they should teach some "Maths for Physics Students"?
At least where I was concerned, there was a fair gap, between the 1st Deg level
and the sort of *Matrix Algebra* expected of the more "Theoretical" Physicists.
Maybe this slightly more user-friendly (less combative?) style could be useful...
Something as "simple" as e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_notation 😬

The 4-year physics B.Sc. that I took in Canada 4 decades ago had many, many math courses as required courses. No math courses were required for the Ph.D., although I did take several.

12 hours ago, iantaylor2uk said:

I have a great book "Mathematical Methods of Physics" by Jon Matthews & R.L. Walker which is well worth getting if you can find a copy.

This was on the reading list for one of my undergrad courses. Interesting passage from its Preface "The course from which this text evolved was originally based on lectures By Professor R.P. Feynman at Cornell University."

[andrew s]

Half in jest we used to say Physics is just maths with boundary conditions.

If you just give the "variables" fancy names e.g. mass, position, field strength, then it is Physics! 

Regards Andrew 

[saac]

12 hours ago, andrew s said:

Half in jest we used to say Physics is just maths with boundary conditions.

If you just give the "variables" fancy names e.g. mass, position, field strength, then it is Physics! 

Regards Andrew 

There is actually more than a grain of truth in what you say there Andrew, same with Engineering, you could describe both as applied maths really. Yet I don't think applied maths fully describes either (Physics or Engineering) , after all each discipline has something essentially different that appeals to different students/practitioners.   And this is curious because at the end of the day maths has to be the core of each.  I always find it strange when I get a student who is really excelling in maths but just does not see anything in Physics. 

Jim  

Edited June 26, 2023 by saac

[andrew s]

2 hours ago, saac said:

There is actually more than a grain of truth in what you say there Andrew, same with Engineering, you could describe both as applied maths really. Yet I don't think applied maths fully describes either (Physics or Engineering) , after all each discipline has something essentially different that appeals to different students/practitioners.   And this is curious because at the end of the day maths has to be the core of each.  I always find it strange when I get a student who is really excelling in maths but just does not see anything in Physics. 

Jim  

Indeed, I think it is the motivation that differs. In fact physicist have led mathematician in some areas.  The Dirac delta function was invented by physicists and mathematicians played catch up finally formalising it after years of turning their noses up at it.

Regards Andrew 

[saac]

I wonder if we are like stem cells, starting off with equal potential for either of the related disciplines. Given that maths is so central I wonder what factors  are determinant in our choices.  I guess it's how we see the world that largely influences our motivations. I do find it hard to understand though why pure maths would be followed rather than applied maths or the physical sciences/engineering. Thinking about it now, that is probably due to the bias in my own motivation,  but when and where does it start.?

Jim 

Edited June 26, 2023 by saac

[andrew s]

5 minutes ago, saac said:

I wonder if we are like stem cells, starting off with equal potential for either of the related disciplines. Given that maths is so central I wonder what factors  are determinant in our choices.  I guess it is ultimately how we see the world that influences our motivations. I do find it hard to understand though why pure maths would be followed rather than applied maths or the physical sciences/engineering. Thinking about it now, that is probably due to the bias in my own motivation,  but when and where does it start.?

Jim 

We are all different.  One of my delights, as I grow old,  is to see the development of my 4 grandchildren.  You could not make up such 4 different characters - brilliant. 

My motivation is/was to understand how things work.  Once I am satisfied I know I lose interest.  

Regards Andrew 

 

Edited June 26, 2023 by andrew s

[Macavity]

Mathematicians - A "different breed"? lol. Recalling (a Primary School best friend!) Phillip:
On weekly Arithmetic Tests, he invariably scored "Fifty out of Fifty"! (49/50? - A Disaster)! 😅

Intriguing that, ability in "basic arithmetic", should be a preditor of *Mathematical Genius*?
Phil excelled at (70's A-level) Maths... Further Maths... Won a Scolarship to Cambridge etc. 😲

I bumped into him later, entirely by chance, in the shopping precinct: He ENVIED Physicists!
He struggled to find an *application* for his "Pure Maths" abilities? He also found it "quite
hard" to fit into the Oxbridge System!? Fortunately, he was independent enough to survive! 😛

Edited June 28, 2023 by Macavity

[Peter Drew]

I was a "low achiever" at school, 5 scraped "O" levels, including maths!.  Anything that I have been eventually successful at has been self taught.    🙂

[Macavity]

1 hour ago, Peter Drew said:

I was a "low achiever" at school, 5 scraped "O" levels, including maths!.  Anything that I have been eventually successful at has been self taught.    🙂

Ah... "Mentor Pete"! (sic) From a personal perspective: "To me anyway"? lol.
Formal Qualifications, *don't matter* - But actual ability is STILL important.
I admire anyone who has "Defied the odds" - "Come good, despite" etc. 😎

I am ever grateful for (I now miss!) the company of Amateur Astronomers...
These days, I seem to spend so MUCH time "Arguing with Idiots"... Trying to
convince "experts", who are firmly of the Dunning Kruger persuasion etc. 😁

I do occasionally MISS (fellow) Particle Physisicts... No one is perfect? lol. 😅

Edited June 28, 2023 by Macavity

[saac]

On 28/06/2023 at 10:56, Peter Drew said:

I was a "low achiever" at school, 5 scraped "O" levels, including maths!.  Anything that I have been eventually successful at has been self taught.    🙂

Nothing like self motivation to fuel learning

Jim

[George Jones]

On 26/06/2023 at 15:32, saac said:

I wonder if we are like stem cells, starting off with equal potential for either of the related disciplines. Given that maths is so central I wonder what factors  are determinant in our choices.  I guess it's how we see the world that largely influences our motivations. I do find it hard to understand though why pure maths would be followed rather than applied maths or the physical sciences/engineering. Thinking about it now, that is probably due to the bias in my own motivation,  but when and where does it start.?

I guess it's different strokes for different strokes for different folks. If when at university I had been forced to major in something other than physics, I would have chosen pure maths, not one of the more obvious choices, e.g., engineering or chemistry. Engineering and chemistry are both great programs, and I expect that many people, if put in my hypothetical situation, would have chosen one of them.

My love affair with pure maths started when I was exposed to Euclidean geometry in high school, and has yet to end. I took longer than normal to do my physics B.Sc. so that I could take courses in pure math for which there was no room in a standard physics program. I currently am on the thesis-examination committee of an M.Sc. student in pure maths.