Astrophysics

[Dunecat]

What's it like? The study of it, I mean.

I'm seriously considered switching my major to it next school year. I'm capable in the sciences (A-/B+ I'll get in this quarter's chem lecture/lab for chem majors... So annoyingly boring... Except for the structure of the atom and quantum physics part, which is why I'm here ), and I was considering pursuing a career as a professor/scientist/researcher.

Even though I averaged a 30 on my ACT, I got a 22, yes, 22 on my science part. I was a COMPLETE slacker growing up (well, not complete... I had alot of personal issues to deal with), but I was able to get a 35 in the english part, and I don't even know grammar. I don't know what a predicate nominative is. Which is why I was surprised I did that well, but I digress... I don't think the science score accurately reflected my ability and ceiling for achievement, as I attended private fundamentalist christian schooling in jr high and high school, and- well...- They didn't even teach us evolution...

So I think I have the ability to learn and work with this hard science, but...

...What's it about? Is physics like math, where you have many equations and a lot of abstract problems? Is it experimental like chemistry? Do you many labs as part of the course?

I was thinking astrophysics because that's basically the major you take at my school unless you want to do something with industry or just get a general degree. I wanted to work with particles/waves and such, and the only way I could see that applied besides theoretical stuff was on the large, astronomical scale.

Much thanks,
Ronnec

[Gary88]

its like standard physics but you focus astro topics. for instance you will spend more time looking at stars and galaxies than you will lasers. (to put it very simply).

In the UK an astrophysics degree is more accurately called Physics with astorphyics because it contains all the core aspects of a straight physics degree but all you optional modules are astrophysics based.

by the way, its great fun and very interesting.

[Syron]

Well i can only give you an impression from a UK perspective, US courses may be focused slightly different. You should really look over the specifics of your intended course.

...What's it about? Is physics like math, where you have many equations and a lot of abstract problems? Is it experimental like chemistry? Do you many labs as part of the course?

I'm doing a physics degree, although i've chosen all the astrophysics options so far, and yes maths is big part of it. Do not worry though, the maths is far less abstract. We only deal with the stuff that actually is of real-world use. You tend to focus on particular techniques that are useful for solving physics problems.

Astrophysics concentrates on the physical processes that produce the effects we observe in astronomy.

I assume you are talking about astrophysics when you talk about labs? Here astrophysics labs are astronomy based, collecting data on Cepheids etc etc either by direct observation of using data on computers. I don't know about your course, i assume you do standard physics as well (or much of astrophysics wouldn't make sense!)?

.I was thinking astrophysics because that's basically the major you take at my school unless you want to do something with industry or just get a general degree. I wanted to work with particles/waves and such, and the only way I could see that applied besides theoretical stuff was on the large, astronomical scale.

Are there not Photonics or Nuclear options?

[DisgruntledGoat]

Astrophysics will not get you a job outside of universities. Big mistakes people make these days when they want engineering/science degrees they pick the ones that just aren't a big focus any more. Basically Aerospace engineering, rocket science, astrophysics aren't big anywhere other than the campuses. If you want to be a life long student and professor then yes they are the right field for you. Otherwise stay away. From the sound of it you really don't know what physics is about and physics isn't just one field. Its just as varied as science itself. Mechanical engineering can bring you into vibrations that will work with waves, get very heavy in terms of its math and physics and has a HUGE industry appeal. No particles I am afraid, but it can get you into nuclear engineering, another industry that relates to what you are interested in.

I would definitely moved towards those kinds of engineering instead of physics. a BS in physics isn't going to do much for you outside of school (unless that is what you are really looking for). Engineering, while applied science, will give you courses in hardcore physics and math while introducing you to a huge array of different topics. I hold a BEng in mechanical engineering, I went to school with aerospace engineers, rocket sci and even physics guys. They are struggling to find positions outside of a university campus. So keep that in mind when you make this kind of decision.

[Dunecat]

:hmmm:

Thanks all! (I'd rep you if I could, but I'm practically banned...)

In the UK an astrophysics degree is more accurately called Physics with astorphyics because it contains all the core aspects of a straight physics degree but all you optional modules are astrophysics based.

Well, my degree has all the core physics courses (those needed for a general physics degree), with several Astronomy (alot, actually) tacked on. There's some variance on what's required or not, but effectively I'd still be taking the same classes. I think then we're basically in the same boat.

its like standard physics but you focus astro topics. for instance you will spend more time looking at stars and galaxies than you will lasers. (to put it very simply).

See to me, that seems like a world of difference as far as a career goes. I'd much rather study the cosmos than laser light shows (which his why I'm a philosophy minor, too... I like abstract and basic stuff ("basic" not meant as "simple"), and learning about the unseen.)

Are there not Photonics or Nuclear options?

There are a few classes and labs dealing with photons, the nucleus and such, but there's not major or certificate program for it.

I would definitely moved towards those kinds of engineering instead of physics. a BS in physics isn't going to do much for you outside of school (unless that is what you are really looking for). Engineering, while applied science, will give you courses in hardcore physics and math while introducing you to a huge array of different topics. I hold a BEng in mechanical engineering, I went to school with aerospace engineers, rocket sci and even physics guys. They are struggling to find positions outside of a university campus. So keep that in mind when you make this kind of decision.

Well to be honest I wasn't thinking of getting a job in an industry. I was hoping this could lead to a post at an observatory/university thing. An old friend of mine is in a coop school doing mechanical engineering, and the stuff he talks about is just... Boring. He gets payed well (for the work he does at least, I mean 15-20$ an hour ain't bad while you're still in college...), and he'll have no problem getting a job afterwards because even salespeople nowadays have good technical knowledge of their product (an engineer could post as someone in sales, for example). The whole business thing just never has, and does not, interest me.

But the challenges and excitement about discovery do (not to mention the fact you work on a college campus at least part of the time, which is WAY better than working behind a desk all day IMO), AND you get to travel alot if you actually do astronomy and astrophysics, or so I've heard).

The amount of schoolwork required before and after I would work with the Uni impresses and even scares me. But in a butterflies sort of way, not a "I-can't-do it" one.

Eh, I'm just rambling now...

But just one more thing-

The work function of an element is the energy required to remove an electron from the surface of the solid element. The work function for rubidium is 208.4 kJ/mol.

a. How much energy does it take to remove a single electron from a single Rb atom at the surface of solid rubidium metal?

b. What is the maximum wavelength of light capable of providing enough energy to remove an electron from a Rb atom at the surface of solid rubidium metal?

208.4 kJ/mol * 1000 J/kJ * mol/6.022e23 atom = 3.461e-19 J/atom

v = E/h = 3.461e-19 J/6.626 e-34 J*s = 5.223e14 s^-1

lambda = c/v = 2.998e8m*s^-1/5.223e14s^-1 = 5.740e-7m

lambda = 574.0 nm

I'm only in the first quarter of 3 in this chem class (I used to be a bio major, I needed to retake it to get a b+/A- because I dropped out the major last Nov.), but this is kindof like physics, right? What is a problem I would work out first quarter in general physics?


*EDIT*- 2 more guys posted while I typed this, hold on lemme read (thanks btw )

[Simetrical]

Well, your degree doesn't determine what you can do entirely. There are some skilled, high-paying jobs that don't care so much what your college degree is, like programming (my non-academic field of interest). Needless to say you should consider career options when choosing a major.

If you do want to be a professor, though, you'd definitely better have a backup plan in mind, whatever it may be. That's if you don't want to risk working forever as a research assistant at some crummy university for terrible pay and hours, anyway, which I'm sure you could arrange easily enough if it suited you.

[Squier]

Astrophysics will not get you a job outside of universities.

i'm sorry but thats nonsense. Physics graduates are highly in demand by employers and physics degrees are viewed highly by any profession involving mathematical and logic/problem solving skills. reserach has shown that UK physics grads have more career options than any other degree. a common mistake people assume with Astrophsics is that graduates are only good with telescopes and **** at everything else, what they forget is that all the straight physics majors are having to take other options that may be just as obscure and all of them are learning the same core physics. heck at my University you could take all the astrophysics options but one and still get a degree in Physics whilst if you do all the astro topics you get a degree in physics with astrophysics.

[Squier]

See to me, that seems like a world of difference as far as a career goes. I'd much rather study the cosmos than laser light shows (which his why I'm a philosophy minor, too... I like abstract and basic stuff ("basic" not meant as "simple"), and learning about the unseen.)

well not really because you could take all your options in photonics but then have a career based entirely on your skills from your core course. photonics by the ways is all stuff lasers.

[Dunecat]

Well, I am partially limited by the fact I need to attend this specific university for at least the next two years for financial reasons, so there's only a certain amount and type of classes I have to choose from.

**** im late for pols

*EDIT*- Okay, I'm back. Sprint there, 5 mins later the class was over. The prof didn't even show up.

Bah.

Anyway, there's 4 physics majors in my school; Physics, Astrophysics, Applied (industry) Physics, and Meteorology.

This challenging program offers a solid foundation in physics, along with specialized study for students interested in pursuing advanced degrees in astronomy or astrophysics.

I'd like to have the option of doing a graduate study in astrophysics, even if in the end I change my graduate choice. If the only difference in major are the addition of astronomy classes (which I'd like), why not take 'em and be set up for the graduate degree, unless I'm set against it. Which I'm not.

Reading the wiki on different fields of physics, what jumps out at me are particle physics and astrophysics, particularly theoretical. I'm not saying I don't want to learn more about the rest of them, but those are what jump out at me, for sheer familiarity or not.

[Simetrical]

i'm sorry but thats nonsense. Physics graduates are highly in demand by employers and physics degrees are viewed highly by any profession involving mathematical and logic/problem solving skills. reserach has shown that UK physics grads have more career options than any other degree.

Do you have a link to that? I'd be interested. Most of what I "know" about this stuff is hearsay. I was poking around at www.bls.gov but couldn't find very much interesting. I found some other random stuff, though. This says that research jobs are very hard to get, but PhD's do considerably better than those with just bachelor's or master's degrees (but worse than those with professional degrees; and correlation is not causation!).

Some more info from that PDF (this is all about PhD's, though): physics/astronomy PhD holders, in 1999 (old data!), who had earned their PhD within the last one to three years, had 0.0% unemployment, but 11.1% were involuntarily employed out-of-field, and 8.4% indicated they were doing postdoc work for lack of alternatives. Put another way, I guess, more than 80% got a real job in their field, although that's the worst of any of the degrees listed. Physics PhDs earned about $61,000 median per year. If that's good enough for you, then you'll probably be fine. Engineers did do better.

The page on physicists and astronomers says that "Despite their small numbers, astronomers can expect good job prospects in government and academia over the projection period. Since astronomers are particularly dependent upon government funding, Federal budgetary decisions will have a sizable influence on job prospects for astronomers." So hey, if you want to be an astronomer, go for it. You probably won't be able to realistically decide if it's what you really want until at least a couple of years into your physics courses, at the very least. Probably not until into graduate school sometime.

Well to be honest I wasn't thinking of getting a job in an industry. I was hoping this could lead to a post at an observatory/university thing.

Just keep in mind you might not get what you want. The academic job market is dicey.

But the challenges and excitement about discovery do (not to mention the fact you work on a college campus at least part of the time, which is WAY better than working behind a desk all day IMO), AND you get to travel alot if you actually do astronomy and astrophysics, or so I've heard).

If you're a theoretician, you'll work wherever you want, maybe at home or in the park or wherever else you feel comfortable fidgeting with equations. Except if you're more of a number-crunching theoretician, I guess you'll be using supercomputers a lot, however you use those. Probably batch jobs, but I imagine you'd have to write the number-crunching routines up on a computer.

If you're an experimentalist, you'll work in a lab, which may or may not be on a college campus. At least some astronomy labs are deliberately situated on high mountains and so forth, and I imagine they avoid cities and other populated areas if possible.

All professors get to travel to conferences and so on. I wouldn't imagine astronomers would more than most. I'm pretty sure most astronomy is done by computer now, no taking trips to obscure parts of the world to set up your telescope so you can look for gravitational lensing at the best spot to see the eclipse.

But just one more thing-

I'm only in the first quarter of 3 in this chem class (I used to be a bio major, I needed to retake it to get a b+/A- because I dropped out the major last Nov.), but this is kindof like physics, right? What is a problem I would work out first quarter in general physics?

Something involving free-body diagrams and Newton's laws, probably. Stealing from here:

"A 5.5 kg mass and a 12.1 kg mass are tied to a light string and hung over a frictionless pulley. What is the tension in the string?"

"What is the speed of a 101.7 kg woman running with a kinetic energy of 3030 J?"

"A ball is thrown from a height of 1.88 m, at a speed of 6.8 m/s and at an angle of elevation of 58.8o. What is the maximum height it reaches?"

"What is the radius of a 0.101 kg hollow sphere with a moment of inertia of 0.00317 kg*m2 about a diameter axis?"

"If it takes a centripetal acceration of 8.945 m/s2 for a car to go around a 58 m corner, how fast is the car traveling? "

Those are all relatively easy first-semester physics problems. A reasonably difficult and complicated problem, more like what you'd see on a test, would be something like (from my old textbook):

"A 60.0-kg skier starts from rest at the top of a ski slope 65.0 m high. a) If frictional forces do −10.5 kJ of work on her as she descends, how fast is she going at the bottom of the slope? b) Now moving horizontally, the skier crosses a patch of soft snow, where μ_k = 0.20. If the patch is 82.0 m wide and the average force of air resistance on the skier is 160 N, how fast is she going after crossing the patch? c) The skier hits a snowdrift and penetrates 2.5 m into it before coming to a stop. What is the average force exerted on her by the snowdrift as it stops her?"

[Dunecat]

Well I took a "physics" course in high school which was painfully basic, but I think if I busted out my notes I could do those first problems for the most part.

That one from your textbook is interesting. My mechanical engineering friend said that physics was way harder than his major (which I assume means its uber-hard, he has a 4.1 gpa as a science major. I hate him... ), but when does it become that difficult (as difficult as he described)? First year physics seems a great deal easier than first year chemistry has been.

A lot more interesting too. I cannot tell you how boring find molar enthalpy of formation is for a compound. Who cares.

I've naturally always been the type that likes playing with numbers and seeing how a given amount things work together. I was the one who'd toy with point lists in DnD and Warhammer for fun. I never had an intention of ever representing the list in the game, I just liked the numbers and how things fit together. So the problems you showed me seem like a step in the right direction to finding my field of study, at least moreso than chemistry and biology.

Honestly, if I had the time and money, I'd get a degree in everything (except business, of course )

[Simetrical]

Physics doesn't get hard until beyond the first year. In the first year it's basically all majors from random science fields, so it can't be very hard or else everyone in the college would flunk their required courses. After the first year, it's almost all physics majors (I'm weird for being a non-physics major taking courses like mechanics or thermo) and it's a. Lot. Harder. I actually once got a 75 on a physics test, the lowest score on any test I've gotten in college. And it was probably an A, too. The class average was more like 30. That was just a third-semester course, classical mechanics. It wasn't even something like QM that has a year of advanced prerequisites. Let alone graduate school, which I can't tell you anything about since I'm an undergrad and am not going to grad school in physics.

But better to try and fail than never to have tried at all. Go for it. If you can't get good enough grades, decide then and only then whether you want to put in more work or give up. You probably need the intro physics anyway for whatever science major you'll take, so it's only a few extra courses you're spending even if it ends up too hard, or you otherwise dislike it.

[Dunecat]

Thanks! Duly noted.

Well, at least in my case, my school makes the intro courses purposely to sort the chaffe out. Average last quarter for my chem class was a 57 after the curve...

Same with bio. They're both for their respective majors, and they're both designed to flunk you out if you don't belong there.

Or maybe that's standard and it just gets THAT MUCH HARDER! lol

Hmmm... My parents both took physics in uni (dad was a math major, yikes, and mum went into law enforcement and then left to recreate traffic accidents and assess damage... whatever that's called...), and I think at least one of the textbooks is on our bookshelf(s) back home.

I get on break in a week, I'll check it out.

*EDIT*-
http://youtube.com/watch?v=3Nca-jgg5mA

This is cool. Starts out with basic stuff like spdf and msubs then WHAM starts talking about anti-e- and I got a little lost, but still fun to watch the pictures...

*EDIT2*-

This is just algebra, no? Manipulating physics equations with algebra?

Pretty cool. *stares*

[Simetrical]

Thanks! Duly noted.

Well, at least in my case, my school makes the intro courses purposely to sort the chaffe out. Average last quarter for my chem class was a 57 after the curve...

Same with bio. They're both for their respective majors, and they're both designed to flunk you out if you don't belong there.

Yeah, the intro courses for majors try to flunk you out. The real intro ones (that non-majors also take) generally don't.

This is just algebra, no? Manipulating physics equations with algebra?

Well, it uses calculus. I don't know what the equations are talking about, so I can't say more than that.

[Syron]

Well, in the last line there's L(L+1) so it's probably a quantum mechanics equation with some sort. H probably stands for the the Hamiltonian.

Haven't a clue what it's on about though.

[DisgruntledGoat]

Generally the material isn't harder per say, more that they grading scheme is tougher. As you move forward the less strict they are with regards to marks and the more the professors try and help you along. The first year is really sink or swim basically. But I wouldn't say that the material is harder than it needs to be.

[Dunecat]

*gets really excited about physics*

[Trax]

Astrophysics will not get you a job outside of universities.

Hehe,
the speaker of our parliament is an astrophysicist.

[DisgruntledGoat]

Hehe,
the speaker of our parliament is an astrophysicist.

And thats a highly unusual position. I doubt being an astrophysicist is what got him the position. In the end you are unlikely to find a position out in the world that is looking for an astrophysicist just as I said. Are there jobs out there that can use the skills you learned? Sure, but that applies anywhere. As a mechanical engineer that means my skills are useful even to a business that has nothing to do with mechanical engineering, engineering or physics in any sense. But that doesn't mean I will be employing the skills I learned and enjoyed during my education. Hence I have not found a job in the industry. Aerospace engineers that I know have yet to find a position that employs their aerospace education. Hardcore physics, including astrophysics just like aerospace engineering is a very very niche education. One should know that before getting involved in them. Something I know my aerospace friends wish they were told before the university gladly took their tuition.

[Simetrical]

Well, in the last line there's L(L+1) so it's probably a quantum mechanics equation with some sort. H probably stands for the the Hamiltonian.

Haven't a clue what it's on about though.

Yeah, I figured it was QM-related from the URL.

And thats a highly unusual position. I doubt being an astrophysicist is what got him the position. In the end you are unlikely to find a position out in the world that is looking for an astrophysicist just as I said. Are there jobs out there that can use the skills you learned? Sure, but that applies anywhere. As a mechanical engineer that means my skills are useful even to a business that has nothing to do with mechanical engineering, engineering or physics in any sense. But that doesn't mean I will be employing the skills I learned and enjoyed during my education. Hence I have not found a job in the industry.

One of the links I gave above said that close to 90% of physics PhD's got jobs in physics, if I read it correctly. Although doubtless, in many case, sucky jobs.