| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"ubuu7" |
| Date: |
19 Oct 2005 09:06:25 PM |
| Object: |
Is physics a dead science? |
I'm still an undergraduate physics major, but I worry about this field.
Most of the interesting research (and money) seems to be focused on
the biological and materials sciences.
I realize there must be some overlap, especially with materials
science, but there doesn't seem to be any great, exciting, earth
shaking physics discoveries as of late.
Looking for WIMPs and elusive particles do not count as exciting on my
radar.
Searching for the theory of everything is all well and good, but I
doubt it will lead to any useful applications in the near future.
(sorry to the "pure" research lovers)
There are a couple of areas that seem incredibly exciting, like
discovering what the nature of dark matter and energy is. But it seems
as if no one has a clue as to how to tackle those and discover new
laws of nature that can be exploited.
Another area that would be extremely exciting is energy research. But
this area seems to be floundering. We still havn't been able to work
out how to create a workable fusion reactor for energy, the field seems
defeated.... it's sad!
Cold Fusion sounded incredibly exciting, but that was a flop, even if
some are still continuing behind closed doors.
There won't EVER be enough antimatter around to make that kind of
reactor.
The one area physics, it seems to me, should be agressively researching
is energy research. Alas it seems abandoned.
Am I wrong? Are there prospects on the horizon that physicists are
excited about and doing aggressive research in.
I can't see it. Discovering the rules of E&M, Q&M, and nuclear physics
must have been an exciting time for physics.
What is there now? The only candidate seems to be energy, but the field
seems stalemated with no novel ideas.
I really want to learn about new ways of using nature to extract energy
from it, hear of some hope for physics.
Is there any....
.
|
|
| User: "Al Zenner" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
19 Oct 2005 11:22:41 PM |
|
|
"ubuu7" <madsci@ucla.edu> wrote in
news:1129773985.550448.249110@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
I'm still an undergraduate physics major, but I worry about this field.
Most of the interesting research (and money) seems to be focused on
the biological and materials sciences.
snip
It is for you and your classmates to be shakers and movers.
Are you?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles Androcles@ MyPlace.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
20 Oct 2005 06:05:35 AM |
|
|
"ubuu7" <madsci@ucla.edu> wrote in message
news:1129773985.550448.249110@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
| I'm still an undergraduate physics major, but I worry about this
field.
| Most of the interesting research (and money) seems to be focused on
| the biological and materials sciences.
Until you know the answer to life, the universe and everything
science remains alive.
| I realize there must be some overlap, especially with materials
| science, but there doesn't seem to be any great, exciting, earth
| shaking physics discoveries as of late.
Then get busy! Start shaking the Earth, we are all waiting for YOU!
|
| Looking for WIMPs and elusive particles do not count as exciting on my
| radar.
|
| Searching for the theory of everything is all well and good, but I
| doubt it will lead to any useful applications in the near future.
| (sorry to the "pure" research lovers)
Oh... you want MONEY, royalties...
I thought you wanted earth-shaking discoveries.
Yep. Physics is dead. Go be a banker.
[snip dead wood]
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Orion" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
20 Oct 2005 07:19:39 AM |
|
|
It could be that superstring/M theory is the end of physics. Beyond
this no more human progress can be made. Physics hasn't progressed much
since 1864.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
19 Oct 2005 09:11:43 PM |
|
|
Am I wrong? Are there prospects on the horizon that physicists are
excited about and doing aggressive research in.
**************
Go into cybernetics, young man/woman. Shake things up.
http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "axolotl" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
20 Oct 2005 03:26:17 AM |
|
|
Dead fields are where it's at. Anything trendy and popular is *****.
On 19 Oct 2005 19:06:25 -0700, "ubuu7" <madsci@ucla.edu> wrote:
I'm still an undergraduate physics major, but I worry about this field.
Most of the interesting research (and money) seems to be focused on
the biological and materials sciences.
I realize there must be some overlap, especially with materials
science, but there doesn't seem to be any great, exciting, earth
shaking physics discoveries as of late.
Looking for WIMPs and elusive particles do not count as exciting on my
radar.
Searching for the theory of everything is all well and good, but I
doubt it will lead to any useful applications in the near future.
(sorry to the "pure" research lovers)
There are a couple of areas that seem incredibly exciting, like
discovering what the nature of dark matter and energy is. But it seems
as if no one has a clue as to how to tackle those and discover new
laws of nature that can be exploited.
Another area that would be extremely exciting is energy research. But
this area seems to be floundering. We still havn't been able to work
out how to create a workable fusion reactor for energy, the field seems
defeated.... it's sad!
Cold Fusion sounded incredibly exciting, but that was a flop, even if
some are still continuing behind closed doors.
There won't EVER be enough antimatter around to make that kind of
reactor.
The one area physics, it seems to me, should be agressively researching
is energy research. Alas it seems abandoned.
Am I wrong? Are there prospects on the horizon that physicists are
excited about and doing aggressive research in.
I can't see it. Discovering the rules of E&M, Q&M, and nuclear physics
must have been an exciting time for physics.
What is there now? The only candidate seems to be energy, but the field
seems stalemated with no novel ideas.
I really want to learn about new ways of using nature to extract energy
from it, hear of some hope for physics.
Is there any....
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
31 Oct 2005 12:38:22 AM |
|
|
For most people it is. For me it is just beginning.
I am enjoying my own personal renaissance.
Take a look at light inflation or light expansion
The question is simple: How long does it take for
very large light-waves to form? Lets say there
was a light wave a light year long emitted, how
long would it take to form?
If light is local the answer would be: one year.
But what is unformed light?
What does it look like?
And what is the physics behind light's expansion?
All light at its creation undergoes expansion in
order to form.
This is the future of the physics of light.
It must be explained.
Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls --
.
|
|
|
| User: "Orion" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
31 Oct 2005 08:06:09 AM |
|
|
I hope physics is not dead because without physics there is no science.
I think there's still a lot more to be discovered about the properties
of matter and space.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles Androcles@ MyPlace.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
31 Oct 2005 03:11:29 PM |
|
|
"Orion" <danny99@bezeqint.net> wrote in message =
news:1130767569.016650.270250@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
|I hope physics is not dead because without physics there is no science.
| I think there's still a lot more to be discovered about the properties
| of matter and space.
That makes physics half dead. Space has no properties.
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Orion" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
31 Oct 2005 03:38:53 PM |
|
|
Androcles wrote:
That makes physics half dead. Space has no properties.
Androcles.
The vacuum must have some properties. It's not "nothing".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles Androcles@ MyPlace.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
31 Oct 2005 06:50:33 PM |
|
|
"Orion" <danny99@bezeqint.net> wrote in message =
news:1130794733.177528.143040@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
| Androcles wrote:
|=20
| > That makes physics half dead. Space has no properties.
| >
| > Androcles.
|=20
| The vacuum must have some properties. It's not "nothing".
Why? Because you say so?
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Orion" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
01 Nov 2005 01:59:29 PM |
|
|
Androcles wrote:
Why? Because you say so?
Androcles.
No because that's the only thing which makes sense imo.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles Androcles@ MyPlace.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
01 Nov 2005 06:29:54 PM |
|
|
"Orion" <danny99@bezeqint.net> wrote in message =
news:1130875169.547968.102190@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
|=20
| Androcles wrote:
| > Why? Because you say so?
| > Androcles.
|=20
| No because that's the only thing which makes sense imo.
Since I have no idea what you are babbling about, having responded to
about 20 other posts today and you've snipped all reference to what it =
might be, go away.
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Orion" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
02 Nov 2005 02:33:55 PM |
|
|
Physics is not a dead science, it just doesn't progress so much. Other
sciences such as nanotechnology, biotechnology and medicine progress
very fast.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles Androcles@ MyPlace.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
02 Nov 2005 07:25:20 PM |
|
|
"Orion" <danny99@bezeqint.net> wrote in message =
news:1130963635.753367.182110@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
| Physics is not a dead science, it just doesn't progress so much. Other
| sciences such as nanotechnology, biotechnology and medicine progress
| very fast.
That's because too many phuckwits don't understand math and waste
billions teaching phuckwittery and building equipment that can't work.
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory L. Hansen" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
02 Nov 2005 06:33:45 PM |
|
|
In article <1130963635.753367.182110@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
Orion <danny99@bezeqint.net> wrote:
Physics is not a dead science, it just doesn't progress so much. Other
sciences such as nanotechnology, biotechnology and medicine progress
very fast.
Those all involve applications of physics. Progress in nanotechnology is,
basically, progress in physics. Or in that fuzzy boundary between science
and engineering.
--
"The ability to quote is a serviceable substitute for wit". --William
Somerset Maugham
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
01 Nov 2005 02:55:45 PM |
|
|
Orion wrote:
Androcles wrote:
Why? Because you say so?
Androcles.
No because that's the only thing which makes sense imo.
That's the same thing: Because you say that's the only thing that makes
sense. Fact is, the contrary makes sense to some other people.
PD
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Nick" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
01 Nov 2005 06:03:07 PM |
|
|
No because you can't measure "nothing"
It doesn't exist.
Your the guy who believes in multiple Gods?
There's only One.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
23 Oct 2005 01:31:11 PM |
|
|
If the field of energetics seems to lack new ideas, put on your
thinking cap and think some new ideas. The progress of physics has
always been made at the point when physics seems dead for futile. For
example, Planck's energy quantum solved the Black Body problem. Bohr's
atom was the first step in accounting for the spectral lines. Etc. etc.
The futhue of physics belongs to young researchers with the brains and
ambition to do something new, useful and sound.
The only cure of a scarcity is a plentitude.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory L. Hansen" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
20 Oct 2005 08:44:25 AM |
|
|
In article <1129773985.550448.249110@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
ubuu7 <madsci@ucla.edu> wrote:
I'm still an undergraduate physics major, but I worry about this field.
Most of the interesting research (and money) seems to be focused on
the biological and materials sciences.
I realize there must be some overlap, especially with materials
science, but there doesn't seem to be any great, exciting, earth
shaking physics discoveries as of late.
Looking for WIMPs and elusive particles do not count as exciting on my
radar.
What would you find exciting? Magnetic media, quantum optics,
nanotechnology, and the next step beyond silicon-based computers are some
hot topics of research.
Another area that would be extremely exciting is energy research. But
this area seems to be floundering. We still havn't been able to work
out how to create a workable fusion reactor for energy, the field seems
defeated.... it's sad!
The field isn't defeated until new ideas stop and progress on relevant
parameters stops. It's still moving forward. But it's also such a small
peice of the physics picture that I wouldn't bet your future career on
getting in on it.
The one area physics, it seems to me, should be agressively researching
is energy research. Alas it seems abandoned.
Am I wrong? Are there prospects on the horizon that physicists are
excited about and doing aggressive research in.
Sounds to me like you should switch majors to an engineering program.
That seems more like the kind of work you want to do, and seriously, you'd
be more employable.
--
"What's another word for thesaurus?" -- Steven Wright
"Let me look in my synonymicon." -- Thaddeus Stout
.
|
|
|
| User: "Orion" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
20 Oct 2005 10:40:31 AM |
|
|
If one is money motivated, then mathematical physics is not the best
choice. Mathematicians work really hard and don't make so much money.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Neil W" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
29 Oct 2005 04:25:54 PM |
|
|
Part of our short-sighted society, I'm afraid. The vast majority of
discoveries that have advanced humankind have come from basic research,
i.e., where they weren't trying to how to cure or fix something. Or if they
were, it was something else than what they actually discovered.
Those types of serendipitous accidents will become fewer and fewer as the
focus becomes solely on the bottom line.
-------------------------
"ubuu7" <madsci@ucla.edu> wrote in message
I'm still an undergraduate physics major, but I worry about this field.
Most of the interesting research (and money) seems to be focused on
the biological and materials sciences.
I realize there must be some overlap, especially with materials
science, but there doesn't seem to be any great, exciting, earth
shaking physics discoveries as of late.
Looking for WIMPs and elusive particles do not count as exciting on my
radar.
Searching for the theory of everything is all well and good, but I
doubt it will lead to any useful applications in the near future.
(sorry to the "pure" research lovers)
There are a couple of areas that seem incredibly exciting, like
discovering what the nature of dark matter and energy is. But it seems
as if no one has a clue as to how to tackle those and discover new
laws of nature that can be exploited.
Another area that would be extremely exciting is energy research. But
this area seems to be floundering. We still havn't been able to work
out how to create a workable fusion reactor for energy, the field seems
defeated.... it's sad!
Cold Fusion sounded incredibly exciting, but that was a flop, even if
some are still continuing behind closed doors.
There won't EVER be enough antimatter around to make that kind of
reactor.
The one area physics, it seems to me, should be agressively researching
is energy research. Alas it seems abandoned.
Am I wrong? Are there prospects on the horizon that physicists are
excited about and doing aggressive research in.
I can't see it. Discovering the rules of E&M, Q&M, and nuclear physics
must have been an exciting time for physics.
What is there now? The only candidate seems to be energy, but the field
seems stalemated with no novel ideas.
I really want to learn about new ways of using nature to extract energy
from it, hear of some hope for physics.
Is there any....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Orion" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
29 Oct 2005 06:01:30 PM |
|
|
UHE comsic rays and gravitation radiation are hot topics of research.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andy Resnick" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
20 Oct 2005 08:18:46 AM |
|
|
ubuu7 wrote:
I'm still an undergraduate physics major, but I worry about this field.
Most of the interesting research (and money) seems to be focused on
the biological and materials sciences.
<snip>
Am I wrong? Are there prospects on the horizon that physicists are
excited about and doing aggressive research in.
<snip>
I feel your pain. I graduated with a Ph.D. in physics (fluid dynamics
and optics concentrations), and have slowly and steadily headed away
from orthodox physics (i.e. physics with a capital 'P') over to
biophysics, mostly for the reasons you state. Several of the graduate
students we have here are also refugees from various Physics departments.
In the end, you are responsible for your own career choices. But, I can
offer my perspective.
1) Follow the money. In all fields of research, what is funded changes
over time. The key to being productive is to stay current.
2) Science is science. You should make an effort not to distinguish
between, for example, 'pure' and 'applied' science. Rather, you should
make an effort to distinguish between world-class and third-class science.
3) The current trend is toward multidisciplinary research: groups of
physicists, chemists, biologists, and computer science types working on
a common problem.
4) Do what you like to do. What you like to do should change over time,
and that's a good thing. If you want to work on energy research, then do
so- don't worry about being in a popular subfield.
--
Andrew Resnick, Ph.D.
Department of Physiology and Biophysics
Case Western Reserve University
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
19 Oct 2005 11:51:42 PM |
|
|
ubuu7 wrote:
I'm still an undergraduate physics major, but I worry about this field.
Most of the interesting research (and money) seems to be focused on
the biological and materials sciences.
I realize there must be some overlap, especially with materials
science, but there doesn't seem to be any great, exciting, earth
shaking physics discoveries as of late.
Looking for WIMPs and elusive particles do not count as exciting on my
radar.
Searching for the theory of everything is all well and good, but I
doubt it will lead to any useful applications in the near future.
(sorry to the "pure" research lovers)
There are a couple of areas that seem incredibly exciting, like
discovering what the nature of dark matter and energy is. But it seems
as if no one has a clue as to how to tackle those and discover new
laws of nature that can be exploited.
Another area that would be extremely exciting is energy research. But
this area seems to be floundering. We still havn't been able to work
out how to create a workable fusion reactor for energy, the field seems
defeated.... it's sad!
Cold Fusion sounded incredibly exciting, but that was a flop, even if
some are still continuing behind closed doors.
There won't EVER be enough antimatter around to make that kind of
reactor.
The one area physics, it seems to me, should be agressively researching
is energy research. Alas it seems abandoned.
Am I wrong? Are there prospects on the horizon that physicists are
excited about and doing aggressive research in.
I can't see it. Discovering the rules of E&M, Q&M, and nuclear physics
must have been an exciting time for physics.
What is there now? The only candidate seems to be energy, but the field
seems stalemated with no novel ideas.
I really want to learn about new ways of using nature to extract energy
from it, hear of some hope for physics.
Is there any....
Awhile back, the science train came to an intersection signed
c=c+v <<<< c'=c+v >>>>
The driver Einstein took the left, and by analysing data ALWAYS in this
mode, things appeared to progress along "the right track". But now
truth is dawning; there is a dead-end on this line! How to get the
entrenched accademics to back-up? How to re-educate 3 or 4 generations
of the mislead? How to knock the scales from their eyes, so that
progress can be resumed?????????
Jim G
c'=c+v
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
19 Oct 2005 10:06:47 PM |
|
|
ubuu7 wrote:
I'm still an undergraduate physics major, but I worry about this field.
Most of the interesting research (and money) seems to be focused on
the biological and materials sciences.
I realize there must be some overlap, especially with materials
science, but there doesn't seem to be any great, exciting, earth
shaking physics discoveries as of late.
Looking for WIMPs and elusive particles do not count as exciting on my
radar.
Searching for the theory of everything is all well and good, but I
doubt it will lead to any useful applications in the near future.
(sorry to the "pure" research lovers)
There are a couple of areas that seem incredibly exciting, like
discovering what the nature of dark matter and energy is. But it seems
as if no one has a clue as to how to tackle those and discover new
laws of nature that can be exploited.
Another area that would be extremely exciting is energy research. But
this area seems to be floundering. We still havn't been able to work
out how to create a workable fusion reactor for energy, the field seems
defeated.... it's sad!
Cold Fusion sounded incredibly exciting, but that was a flop, even if
some are still continuing behind closed doors.
There won't EVER be enough antimatter around to make that kind of
reactor.
The one area physics, it seems to me, should be agressively researching
is energy research. Alas it seems abandoned.
Am I wrong? Are there prospects on the horizon that physicists are
excited about and doing aggressive research in.
I can't see it. Discovering the rules of E&M, Q&M, and nuclear physics
must have been an exciting time for physics.
What is there now? The only candidate seems to be energy, but the field
seems stalemated with no novel ideas.
I really want to learn about new ways of using nature to extract energy
from it, hear of some hope for physics.
Is there any....
If you are interested in *applications* of physics and the betterment
of society as a result, then fundamental physics research is not what
you should be pursuing. At the time that fundamental research was being
done around 1900, no one had *any* idea what the practical applications
of those advancements would be, and this is not why they did the work.
It sounds to me like you should be looking at more of an applied
direction. There is plenty of exciting physics to be done in optics,
for example, that would have near-term consequences. You may even want
to consider engineering, which still has lots of new physics to
explore.
PD
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "cnctut" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
19 Oct 2005 10:07:52 PM |
|
|
ubuu7 wrote:
I'm still an undergraduate physics major, but I worry about this field.
Most of the interesting research (and money) seems to be focused on
the biological and materials sciences.
I realize there must be some overlap, especially with materials
science, but there doesn't seem to be any great, exciting, earth
shaking physics discoveries as of late.
Looking for WIMPs and elusive particles do not count as exciting on my
radar.
Searching for the theory of everything is all well and good, but I
doubt it will lead to any useful applications in the near future.
(sorry to the "pure" research lovers)
There are a couple of areas that seem incredibly exciting, like
discovering what the nature of dark matter and energy is. But it seems
as if no one has a clue as to how to tackle those and discover new
laws of nature that can be exploited.
Another area that would be extremely exciting is energy research. But
this area seems to be floundering. We still havn't been able to work
out how to create a workable fusion reactor for energy, the field seems
defeated.... it's sad!
Cold Fusion sounded incredibly exciting, but that was a flop, even if
some are still continuing behind closed doors.
There won't EVER be enough antimatter around to make that kind of
reactor.
The one area physics, it seems to me, should be agressively researching
is energy research. Alas it seems abandoned.
Am I wrong? Are there prospects on the horizon that physicists are
excited about and doing aggressive research in.
I can't see it. Discovering the rules of E&M, Q&M, and nuclear physics
must have been an exciting time for physics.
What is there now? The only candidate seems to be energy, but the field
seems stalemated with no novel ideas.
I really want to learn about new ways of using nature to extract energy
from it, hear of some hope for physics.
Is there any....
ubuu7
Here's some energy ideas for you to think about--
Pyrolysis, hydrogasification, hydrogenation--figure out how to do them
at room temp/pressures
A new manufacturing process that reduces solar cells cost to $1 per
watt
A wind generator rotor that is more than 59% efficient
Integrate a solar concentrator and steam engine/generator that produces
useful power for the backyard (good undergrad project)
Hang in there and good things will come--try smaller steps first--i.e.
wait a few years before tackling cold fusion and other exotics.
Good luck
Tut
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
29 Oct 2005 05:17:39 PM |
|
|
ubuu7 wrote:
I'm still an undergraduate physics major, but I worry about this field.
Most of the interesting research (and money) seems to be focused on
the biological and materials sciences.
I realize there must be some overlap, especially with materials
science, but there doesn't seem to be any great, exciting, earth
shaking physics discoveries as of late.
Physics actually no longer even exists.
A gaggle of Oprah Winfrey wannabee Psychologists
took over ALL science research in the 1950s.
So biology research is also even limited to
McDonald's Eve Gene Theme Songs, rather than anything
to do with biology.
Looking for WIMPs and elusive particles do not count as exciting on my
radar.
The idiots in "pure" Physics, read idiot math, will
be looking for Tachyons forever.
Searching for the theory of everything is all well and good, but I
doubt it will lead to any useful applications in the near future.
(sorry to the "pure" research lovers)
There are a couple of areas that seem incredibly exciting, like
discovering what the nature of dark matter and energy is. But it seems
as if no one has a clue as to how to tackle those and discover new
laws of nature that can be exploited.
Another area that would be extremely exciting is energy research. But
this area seems to be floundering. We still havn't been able to work
out how to create a workable fusion reactor for energy, the field seems
defeated.... it's sad!
Cold Fusion sounded incredibly exciting, but that was a flop, even if
some are still continuing behind closed doors.
There won't EVER be enough antimatter around to make that kind of
reactor.
The one area physics, it seems to me, should be agressively researching
is energy research. Alas it seems abandoned.
Am I wrong? Are there prospects on the horizon that physicists are
excited about and doing aggressive research in.
I can't see it. Discovering the rules of E&M, Q&M, and nuclear physics
must have been an exciting time for physics.
What is there now? The only candidate seems to be energy, but the field
seems stalemated with no novel ideas.
I really want to learn about new ways of using nature to extract energy
from it, hear of some hope for physics.
Is there any....
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Henry Lemington-Wholeflavors" |
|
| Title: Re: Is physics a dead science? |
30 Oct 2005 09:04:42 PM |
|
|
ubuu7 wrote:
I'm still an undergraduate physics major, but I worry about this field.
Most of the interesting research (and money) seems to be focused on
the biological and materials sciences.
I realize there must be some overlap, especially with materials
science, but there doesn't seem to be any great, exciting, earth
shaking physics discoveries as of late.
There are only so many physical processes at work in the universe.
There are only four forces. Fundamental physics research has entered a
period of diminishing returns.
Looking for WIMPs and elusive particles do not count as exciting on my
radar.
Searching for the theory of everything is all well and good, but I
doubt it will lead to any useful applications in the near future.
(sorry to the "pure" research lovers)
I personally doubt any "theory of everything" will lead to any
experimental predictions within my lifetime, never mind useful
applications.
There are a couple of areas that seem incredibly exciting, like
discovering what the nature of dark matter and energy is. But it seems
as if no one has a clue as to how to tackle those and discover new
laws of nature that can be exploited.
Another area that would be extremely exciting is energy research. But
this area seems to be floundering. We still havn't been able to work
out how to create a workable fusion reactor for energy, the field seems
defeated.... it's sad!
Yeah, I agree.
I can't see it. Discovering the rules of E&M, Q&M, and nuclear physics
must have been an exciting time for physics.
What is there now? The only candidate seems to be energy, but the field
seems stalemated with no novel ideas.
I really want to learn about new ways of using nature to extract energy
from it, hear of some hope for physics.
Is there any....
As someone else pointed out, you should probably switch to engineering.
Physics is discovery, and there's only so much out there to be
discovered.
Engineering is creation, and there's no limit to what can be created.
--
http://cherenkov-radiation.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|