Maths and Theoretical Physics Course Thread TR031 TR035

joyle

Hey, ive just done first year of TP and i felt i struggled a bit but i got a decent mark in the exams, does the course get any worse as you go on or is it managable, im thinking of switching to science and i want to get as much info as possible!

Any reply would be very helpful!

Tears in Rain

joyle wrote: »

Hey, ive just done first year of TP and i felt i struggled a bit but i got a decent mark in the exams, does the course get any worse as you go on or is it managable, im thinking of switching to science and i want to get as much info as possible!

Any reply would be very helpful!

TP gets significantly harder in 2nd year, if you're not prepared to put significantly more work than you did in first year, either change course, or be prepared to fail a few subjects.

I don't mean that in a dickish way, but just to prepare you for what's ahead. I put in an amount of work commensurate to what I did in first year, and I have several repeats now (going into 3rd year TP).

joyle

Tears in Rain wrote: »

joyle wrote: »

I put in an amount of work commensurate to what I did in first year, and I have several repeats now (going into 3rd year TP).

How much work did you put in in first year roughly?

Maybe_Memories

So as we know Frolov asks the same summer exam every year bar a few formula changes or something. Does anyone know if his supplemential exams are the same as the summer in this respect?

And does anyone know what Derek Kitson's metric spaces supps are like?

Maybe_Memories

Any info on the above?

Kinda freaking out about mechanics. If he keeps it to the usual paper I'll pass. If he doesn't well I'd rather not think about that.

EuropeanSon

Maybe_Memories wrote: »

Any info on the above?

Kinda freaking out about mechanics. If he keeps it to the usual paper I'll pass. If he doesn't well I'd rather not think about that.

I can't imagine Frolov bothering with the effort of thinking up new questions. He basically told us pre summer exams that his exam would be similar to always, and (condescendingly as always) that he couldn't imagine how anyone could fail it, and then mentioned how people still do, and he hates having to write a supplemental exam.

Kitson will be like he usually is, which is to say, tough enough compared to some other lecturers, but not unfair.

PurpleFistMixer

joyle wrote: »

Hey, ive just done first year of TP and i felt i struggled a bit but i got a decent mark in the exams, does the course get any worse as you go on or is it managable, im thinking of switching to science and i want to get as much info as possible!

Any reply would be very helpful!

I remember being taken aback by how hard TP was when I was in first year. It might just be a general "going from school to college" sort of thing, though. College was the first time I'd ever had to study really, so that was a bit of a struggle. I continued having to study for the rest of the degree, but I can't really hold that against it (in fact it is probably a good thing) and it never became unmanageable or anything. Not sure if that was the source of your difficulties though, so maybe this is no good to you.

Anyway, re: the difficulty: it does get harder each year, but any course should theoretically do that. In retrospect (just finished 4th year TP here) I think the jump from 2nd to 3rd year was the worst, but that's mostly because the physics suddenly got harder (also more interesting!). There are some pretty tricky courses in 2nd year maths (Advanced Mechanics in particular) but they are ultimately doable if you put the work in. I guess it's up to yourself though. If you're interested in and passionate about the subject, difficulty shouldn't be such a big deterrent (especially considering you said you did well in first year) imo, but TP to Physics isn't that big a jump content-wise anyway (just much less maths, but prospects afterwards are probably similar enough).

blagards

Maybe_Memories wrote: »

Any info on the above?

Kinda freaking out about mechanics. If he keeps it to the usual paper I'll pass. If he doesn't well I'd rather not think about that.

I had to repeat this when I was in second year (2 years ago) and it was pretty much the same as all the summer exams, so hopefully he just leaves it the same.

joyle

PurpleFistMixer wrote: »

joyle wrote: »

Hey, ive just done first year of TP and i felt i struggled a bit but i got a decent mark in the exams, does the course get any worse as you go on or is it managable, im thinking of switching to science and i want to get as much info as possible!

Any reply would be very helpful!

I remember being taken aback by how hard TP was when I was in first year. It might just be a general "going from school to college" sort of thing, though. College was the first time I'd ever had to study really, so that was a bit of a struggle. I continued having to study for the rest of the degree, but I can't really hold that against it (in fact it is probably a good thing) and it never became unmanageable or anything. Not sure if that was the source of your difficulties though, so maybe this is no good to you.

Anyway, re: the difficulty: it does get harder each year, but any course should theoretically do that. In retrospect (just finished 4th year TP here) I think the jump from 2nd to 3rd year was the worst, but that's mostly because the physics suddenly got harder (also more interesting!). There are some pretty tricky courses in 2nd year maths (Advanced Mechanics in particular) but they are ultimately doable if you put the work in. I guess it's up to yourself though. If you're interested in and passionate about the subject, difficulty shouldn't be such a big deterrent (especially considering you said you did well in first year) imo, but TP to Physics isn't that big a jump content-wise anyway (just much less maths, but prospects afterwards are probably similar enough).

Exactly an answer i was looking for! i think ill try stick at it, being able to do the maths from TP might be more useful after college rather trying to learn it all then!

Seeing as your finishing what sort of thing are you looking to do, keep studying or go look for a job, i keep getting asked what will i do after and i kinda want to see what sort of options i have!

Tears in Rain

Maybe_Memories wrote: »

Any info on the above?

Kinda freaking out about mechanics. If he keeps it to the usual paper I'll pass. If he doesn't well I'd rather not think about that.

Yeah, I can't imagine he'd change it much, I'm banking on it being more of the same too.

I'm more worried about complex, since there's less of a base of past exam questions to draw an inference from, I have no idea what questions he's most likely to ask...

Maybe_Memories

Tears in Rain wrote: »

Yeah, I can't imagine he'd change it much, I'm banking on it being more of the same too.

I'm more worried about complex, since there's less of a base of past exam questions to draw an inference from, I have no idea what questions he's most likely to ask...

I'd say as long as you know the definitions and can do all the problem sets you'd be grand... That's all I knew for the summer exam and passed (by the skin of my teeth). That should get you through question 1 since he said there wouldn't be any proofs in that section. The only proof stuff you need for section 2 is the proof of the product rule/chain rule and that kinda stuff and the proof of the cauchy-riemann equations. The other sections have a lot more proofs but hey i suppose if you know all that its 50%... then just know at least the definitions and problems from the other chapters and you're set.

Also for metrics he said more than likely the result would be 100% exam so its very possible he'll do the same for complex... might be worth knowing.

PurpleFistMixer

joyle wrote: »

Seeing as your finishing what sort of thing are you looking to do, keep studying or go look for a job, i keep getting asked what will i do after and i kinda want to see what sort of options i have!

Currently I'm headed for more academia - I'm going to do a masters in maths in Cambridge for a year. This is a somewhat popular choice for TPs (there will be 3 from my class doing it) so perhaps unsurprising. There are a fair few continuing in academia, doing PhDs in TCD or masters elsewhere etc., largely in physics. Off the top of my head, I know someone is doing a masters in biomedical engineering and a few are doing a high performance computing masters, so it's not all pure physics or anything. Re: non-academia, someone else from my class is working in SIG now and I'm sure there are others doing similar-ish things, but that's all I know. Asking "what are you doing next year?" in fourth year is often not a good idea so I didn't poll my class on this.

To be honest, regarding post-college prospects I feel that TP has it better than experimental physics. Unless you want to go into very experimental physics or want the added experience in some specific field of the larger final year project that EPs do, I think TP gives most of the same physics-based opportunities that EP does, but also maths-based ones as well. That said, a lot of PhD programs etc. I've been looking at just ask for a degree in "physics, engineering, maths, or related disciplines" or whatnot, so the difference between TP and EP is really incredibly marginal unless you want to go into something very mathsy. In fact I'd say the difference is so small that your biggest concern should be "which one of these courses will I enjoy more?", if it wasn't already. : P

blagards

joyle wrote: »

Seeing as your finishing what sort of thing are you looking to do, keep studying or go look for a job, i keep getting asked what will i do after and i kinda want to see what sort of options i have!

Well I started in TP, and switched to Maths after second year, and I'm working as a trainee actuary in Irish Life now. As Purplefistmixer said above there's people in finance and similar, not just from the Maths side but from TP too, it certainly keeps your options open. Another lad I know who did TP in Maynooth is also doing actuary now, and there's plenty of trading, trading analyst, risk analyst etc etc going for TP grads and the likes, on top of the more academic/sciency route.

So it definitely keeps your options open, there's very little you can't do with TP/maths

Mr. Maths

Any tips for someone who's looking to get TP schols this year?

myfatherrsson

I've a few bits on this on my web page. There's a wealth of resources for 2nd year material so theres no shortage of notes and stuff. Talk to a few 3rd/4th years who sat for it to get their advice but I think the best I can offer is to start as early as you can and put in the work from the word go.


Edit: few problems with my links, I'll fix them soon enough

Tears in Rain

myfatherrsson wrote: »

I've a few bits on this on my web page. There's a wealth of resources for 2nd year material so theres no shortage of notes and stuff. Talk to a few 3rd/4th years who sat for it to get their advice but I think the best I can offer is to start as early as you can and put in the work from the word go.


Edit: few problems with my links, I'll fix them soon enough

You got schols in 3rd year right? I'm hoping to do the same this year (going into 3rd year)...any advice on that in particular? How did you find balancing studying for schols and studying 3rd year material simultaneously?

myfatherrsson

Tears in Rain wrote: »

You got schols in 3rd year right? I'm hoping to do the same this year (going into 3rd year)...any advice on that in particular? How did you find balancing studying for schols and studying 3rd year material simultaneously?

Fixed those links.


It was tough. I was mulling over the decision for a while, I think it was around reading week that I decided to give it another shot.

I think I spent weekdays doing 3rd year stuff and weekends doing schols stuff and just jumped right into the inverse function theorem. But yeah despite the material being more familiar it was much tougher to find the time to sit down and do it. At that stage as well I was **** sick of the material and I had to spend all Christmas revising again, (I think I did one day of the Christmas holidays on my own modules).

So yeah you really have to decide if it's worth the time it's going to take. It will distract you from your own coursework which unfortunately actually counts for something this year and you can't afford to be wasting time on past material. If you were close the first attempt I'd say go for it otherwise think about it a while because it will only take that much more work.

Hope that helps

Tears in Rain

myfatherrsson wrote: »

Fixed those links.


It was tough. I was mulling over the decision for a while, I think it was around reading week that I decided to give it another shot.

I think I spent weekdays doing 3rd year stuff and weekends doing schols stuff and just jumped right into the inverse function theorem. But yeah despite the material being more familiar it was much tougher to find the time to sit down and do it. At that stage as well I was **** sick of the material and I had to spend all Christmas revising again, (I think I did one day of the Christmas holidays on my own modules).

So yeah you really have to decide if it's worth the time it's going to take. It will distract you from your own coursework which unfortunately actually counts for something this year and you can't afford to be wasting time on past material. If you were close the first attempt I'd say go for it otherwise think about it a while because it will only take that much more work.

Hope that helps

Sound advice, I guess if I go for it I'll probably try and get as much of the tedious administrative stuff like compiling what I need to learn out of the way before college starts so I can just dive straight into it...

Haha, the Inverse Function Theorem, what a nightmare...I guess learning it's the Rubicon of going for maths/tp schols..

antiselfdual

Tears in Rain wrote: »

Haha, the Inverse Function Theorem, what a nightmare...I guess learning it's the Rubicon of going for maths/tp schols..

Now there's a change - when I did Schols (the slightly distant past) I was the only person in TP or Maths who bothered learning that...

Tears in Rain

antiselfdual wrote: »

Now there's a change - when I did Schols (the slightly distant past) I was the only person in TP or Maths who bothered learning that...

Was gonna say would it not be madness going into schols without knowing the Inverse Function Theorem, but then I realised two things (depending on how distant the 'slightly distant past' is)...I guess firstly one had a lot more material to choose from (up till end of old Hillary Term), and secondly, with a paper for each subject, one had a lot more leeway to decide what they could leave out learning...

These days, with 2 subjects crammed into a 3 hour paper, seems you really need to make sure you know everything or else risk getting caught out badly...less exams sounds welcome but I'm really not sure I prefer the current system...

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.