Hey, guys. I'm a guy from Latin America and I'm getting my Masters in Philosophy, but I'm fucking tired of this Greek Metaphysics bullshit. I'm thinking about finishing my Masters and prepare myself to get a Masters in Physics (no way I'm entering the undergraduated level again). I can't see myself in 20 years teaching the outdated Aristotle's and Descartes' physics for pothead students in my country. I want to make a contribution to science, even if it's very modest. So is it possible to enter the graduated level in Physics directly with just 2 or 3 years of intense preparation? I'm just starting my Masters and I have 2 years, so I'm thinking about changing my subject to Newton's work, so I can study physics while I prepare my dissertation on his thinking on physics and metaphysics. Is it possible? How can I prepare myself to get a Masters on Physics?
Hey, guys. I'm a guy from Latin America and I'm getting my Masters in Philosophy...
Other urls found in this thread:
staff.science.uu.nl
twitter.com
do you know math?
philosophy of math doesn't count as math btw
Just high school level math.
I stumble upon this article by Gerard 't Hooft: staff.science.uu.nl
Is it a good roadmap?
>I want to get to graduate level physics without doing undergrad level physics
Wew lad. This shouldn't even be done but as you say you will study for 2-3 years then I guess I will give you my assesment.
Let me start with this: A person could learn all of undergrad physics 2 or 3 years. Definitely. But that person would have to be really smart, because there is a lot to cover... on your own.
What is the problem? You chose to study philosophy, which makes you not-very smart. Lets put a lower bound on your IQ, lets say your IQ is 70, which must be at most 5 points below the average philosopher.
With this IQ, you could take maybe 2 years learning freshman physics.
Then 3 years sophomore physics.
Then 4 years junior physics
And finally 5 years for senior physics.
This adds up to 14 years of study. So clearly your 2-3 year goal is completely retarded. But 14 years is something.
If you are deadset on being a physicist I have a shortcut though. What you have to do is lower your goal. Instead of being a physicist you could be a "computational physicist" and this will still land you many jobs, either in academia as a CS teacher or in industry as someone who makes physical models for engineering companies.
Computational Science is pretty much CS with some applied mathematics. And to do CS and applied mathematics you just need (at least) freshman level math/physics.
Which, lets remember, makes your time only 2 years. Yes! Even a brainlet like you could learn the basics of physics and CS in 2 years!
But just so that you can include some additional important topics, make that 3 years and be sure to study a little of sophomore level CS and physics so that you are over-qualified.
And that is it. You are done. You go get your masters in computational science or computational physics/engineering, become a physicist and then go live your life!
But that Mensa test said I have a 138 IQ. Are (((they))) lying to me? Also, can a brainlet read and understand the dialogue "Parmenides"? I think not.
IQ dont mean shit if you rub your dick all day over it, instead of actually doing the work.
And the tone in which you speak acts like life is already handed to you and it is a path easily to be walked by you.
You'll quit halfway unless you put your fuckinhead down
>But that Mensa test said I have a 138 IQ
Yeah but that is "jerkoff showoff" type IQ.
Here we don't measure IQ like that. Giving you a bunch of random puzzles literally means shit the moment you start doing serious mathematics.
Naturally, scientists and mathematicians have high jerkoff-IQs but it is not also true that all people high jerkoff-IQs can be good scientists/mathematicians.
You need to measure your IQ by how good you are at intuitive mathematics.
How can you rate it? Easily. Go pick an elementary number theory book, one that starts from 0 and will give you all the definitions, and try to read it and solve problems from it.
If you can breeze through every problem set then a lower bound for your IQ would be 100.
If you struggle a bit then a lower bound for your IQ is 90
If you literally can't even understand the definitions then your IQ is bounded above and below by 0.
Lol I have a masters in math (financial math no less) and wish it was in philosophy.
I can't do finance or basic soul crushing office work, gave that a try but, fuck, I can't just stare at a computer all day I need some engagement.
I also don't really care about research, I'm not smart enough for pure math research, could do something with computers but, it's a lot of work and I have basically no interest in it.
So that leaves me with teaching. I don't really mind teaching, it'd be nice to not have to do it. But I need to pay for rent, weed and festival tickets and it's good to have something that gets me out of the house and interacting with people on a daily basis, I also like staying in touch with younger people. Also community college girls are pretty hot.
Anyway, I'm OK with teaching math, I know it well and I'm good at it so using textbooks/lesson plans it's easy enough to teach things like algebra and calculus. But it's so boring, man, they're just dry subjects, there's no room for commentary on the real world.
I'm sure philosophy would involve a lot of bullshit, too, getting quotes right for a bunch of old dead white people and all that. But at least you get to talk about the world with a bunch of students who, mostly, are interested and willing to learn.
The only person lying to you is the dude trolling you softly coming up with probability bounds for your (((IQ))), dude.
...
I'm good at what I study (greek philosophy). I'm not saying I'm good or will be good at graduated level physics. That's the reason I'm asking, so I can maximize my chances of becoming good.
>((())) on Veeky Forums
>never change Veeky Forums
If you're not smart and if you are a peasant who has to be a slave the rest of his life, how long would it take to learn undergrad physics? Is it possible to take one course at a time? I don't even want the degree, just the knowledge.
>You chose to study philosophy, which makes you not-very smart
I thought the highest IQ people are philosophers and physicists
That is jerkoff IQ.
You need Veeky Forums IQ to be a physicist.
>Veeky ForumsQ
interesting
>((()))
sub-80 IQ confirmed
Sub 80 IQ don't go to college.
Follow the rules and go through undergraduate physics.
A decent amount of undergrad physics is dicking around and repeating the same thing in different classes. To enter graduate level physics though you'd need to have a solid grasp of some fundamental courses like EM, (quantum) mechanics, thermodynamics and statistical mechanics, and of course some math courses, mostly Calc and linear algebra.
I'd say you can do it in 2 years especially since you'd be skipping the labs and electives. Self studying would require a ton of determination so I'd say just look at your uni's physics curriculum and make a 2 year roadmap for yourself and follow those courses.
You will find out soon that science is in no way applied philosophy while also understanding why everyone thinks a philosophy degree is worthless in STEM and many places of academia. Maybe this is b8, but the amount of philosophy majors who think they can enter a graduate program for physics or math is outstandingly high.
Philosophy majors have the highest IQ
they do if it's philosophy
So what? Even though that bs statistic based on SATs is in no way reliable, or IQ is a good way to predict succes in a field, that doesn't mean a philosopher will be better at learning physics. Many of the people who were into philosophy in my classes always failed in basic shit.
it's because a different part of the brain is used for each
wrong
the difference between math and humanities is that concepts are ill-defined in the latter, but it's all logical reasoning the same way
How did you find your bachelors studies? Just starting out this fall.