Over the next year, I want to develop practical programming and computational skills that I can use to explore physics, CAD, simulations, animation, and higher-level mathematics such as topology. Rather than trying to learn every software package individually, I want to understand the underlying principles that transfer across programming languages and platforms—such as abstraction, data structures, algorithms, numerical methods, visualization, modeling, and modular software design.
I also want to learn how to use AI intelligently as part of my workflow without allowing it to replace my own understanding. My goal is to use AI for explanation, brainstorming, debugging, research assistance, and exploring alternative approaches while still doing the important mathematical reasoning, computational experiments, and scientific interpretation myself.
As part of this process, I want to become familiar with tools for symbolic mathematics, mathematical typesetting, technical writing, simulations, visualization, and CAD. I am particularly interested in tools that allow me to work with symbolic equations and produce mathematical documents in the spirit of LaTeX.

I’m not a physicist, it’s never been my strong suit. I’ve taken basic physics courses in high school and college but it always messed with my head. I’d plug in numbers to equations and I always ended up with As in all my physics courses in college but i never truly grasped it because it’s so abstract. It’s been almost a decade since I took any physics class but I just watched a full lecture on YouTube about superposition and even after 1,5hr of watching it, I have a such a hard time understanding… how do you imagine things in your head that are (to me) impossible to understand? I get the definitions of terms like superposition or uncertainty principle but it just doesn’t make sense to me lol. I don’t know if I’m making sense.

I am currently reading it and chapter one was pretty comprehensible but after finishing chapter 2 I am lost. I do not understand the links he is making with electromagnetism and neuclear electromagnetic what ever with pions. He was saying it as an analogy to explain the forces between protons and neutrons in the nucleus and how they stay attracted. But I simply jsut don’t get it.

He later went on to begin using leptons, baryons, multiplets, couplings and more in conversation and I am just lost man ( this in the section nuclei and particles of chapter 2), but I’m also confused with the first two parts of chapter 2 to so idek anymore.

What do I do? I tried getting chat gpt to explain it to me but it’s not working.

However, I am currently struggling with math, and I don't really know which path to follow. Could you recommend a roadmap for me? I want to make this journey as perfect as possible.

A recent Open Access book from Springer, Quantum Mechanics Done Right: The Shortest Path from Novice to Researcher, takes a different approach to introducing quantum mechanics.

The book develops the theory in a representation-independent way, building the formalism from quantum experiments and operator identities rather than beginning with wavefunctions or differential equations. This research-first pedagogy was developed and refined across more than two dozen peer-reviewed articles. Remarkably, the book uses no calculus, while still developing topics including spin, angular momentum, the hydrogen atom, many-body physics, quantum information, and modern quantum experiments.

The goal is not to eliminate the usual representations—they remain important—but to develop the underlying quantum formalism before choosing a particular representation.

I am the author, and I'm happy to answer questions or discuss the approach in the comments. I'm particularly interested in hearing from people who have taught quantum mechanics or learned it through the traditional approach and what they think about this new way.

The electronic version is freely available through Springer: Quantum Mechanics Done Right: The Shortest Path from Novice to Researcher | Springer Nature Link

I saw this video recently by Rational Thinker on How quarks were discovered and it seemed very well produced and I couldn't find any sign of AI slop in the visuals, voice over, or the script. But the rate at which this channel is making videos seems suspicious, especially because the creator seems to refer to themselves as "I" and not "we", making me think it is just a single person.

Am I being paranoid or is there some misinformation / sloppiness / plagiarism going on here?

So i am 18m just going to start college, where you get to major in a science in year 3 which most likely I’ll do physics, and do an integrated BS-MS for five years. After this it’s PhD most likely and then I’d want to go into research as a scientist or enter fields like quantum computing that require advanced knowledge

But the other thing is I have Crohn’s disease. So I get flare ups often. I can’t be physically active for long hours and might need breaks here and there. I’m wondering if my career path is right considering my situation. My dad says CS would’ve been easier since it is a one desk job. But I was more interested in physics. I would also need a decent pay for medicines and stuff. Not extreme rich but above average.

Anyone with IBD, or any other chronic illness who are currently in the physics field, having done PhD or working, please do comment your views and even those who don’t, please tell me if the career would suit my situation. Would love to hear from people in similar situations pursuing this field and their experiences dealing with it.

Also for background I am Indian and want to move abroad for PhD or higher studies.

Source: retractionwatch, with the link to paper in the article.

Based in Las Vegas, Yates earns a living as a composer for the animated series called “Death Battle.” He also has had an “intuitive understanding of, and love for, General Relativity for as long as I can remember,” he told Retraction Watch. But he has no formal training in physics and is self-taught, he said. 

After watching a video lecture series online by Canadian physicist Eric Poisson, in January, Yates built a computer algebra program to look into rules in general relativity used to fuse two spacetimes across a thin shell, Yates said. By March, he had come across a conditional result he believed to be novel.

I find this extremely impressive. I think Brandon must be the only amateur physicist who is not a crankpot (and the many people on r/HypotheticalPhysics would do well to learn from his story). Although it's not clear from the article if he already has a degree in an adjacent field (I suspect he perhaps had formal training in e.g. computer science?) AI also has likely played a role in lowering barrier to entry. Still, self studying advanced GR - even with the help of AI - is no joke!

Hi everyone,

I'm a French "classe préparatoire" (CPGE) student working on my TIPE — a personal research project we present at oral exams for engineering school entrance exams. This year's official theme is "Sobriety, efficiency, optimization."

I'm trying to avoid the classic, overused topics (heat loss in buildings, pendulum motion, projectile trajectories, etc.) and find something more original — ideally something involving a real experiment I can build or measure myself, not just theory.

I'm particularly interested in mechanics/aeronautics and energy/thermal topics, but I'm open to anything physics-related that fits the theme.

If you have any ideas — a cool physical phenomenon, an everyday object that hides interesting physics, a real engineering trick used in industry — I'd love to hear it! Bonus points if it's something that can be tested with simple equipment.

Thanks in advance for any suggestions 🙏

In this video I simulate a laser beam bouncing through a labyrinth of mirror obstacles. The beam changes its trajectory immensely upon tiny changes in the initial angle of only 5×10⁻¹² degrees — roughly 5 trillionths of a degree.

As an extra for Reddit, here is a figure showing how often the beam bounces before it escapes: https://imgur.com/l0xDY0U As you can see, as the angle varies the bounces often jump harshly. But there are also some regions of the launch angle spectrum where there is some degree of continuity.

Fun fact: Claude did not believe me that a range from 70.0 to 70.00000001 would produce any meaningful result and tried to talk me out of this. It wanted to use a range of 4° instead.

Made with manim.

I want to study physics, I am an engineering student. I do not want to go purely mathematical, but yes I can understand basic calculus, algebra etc. I want to develop an interest in physics and think about the reality as a physicist. Suggest me some books pls.

I was trying to learn abit about quantum entanglement but I was quickly humbled by my lack of comprehension and understanding. Having that said, I was hoping to get an intro to quantum physics (quantum mechanics) so I can then learn the core concepts to eventually be able to understand things like quantum entanglement and such.

How do you recommend I begin? I have no clue where to start and what core concepts to look at. What would be the limit, derivative and integral (in calculus) but for quantum physics? Idek why I said that I’m just saving overall, what are the main subjects that are intro to the branch of physics as a whole so I can use that combined knowledge to continue forward.

Please help.

I submitted a manuscript to JMP on August 14. The initial submission checks were completed the same day, and an Associate Editor was also assigned that day. The has been no indication of reviewer invitations, under review or any other change. This is my first submitting to JMP, so I'm trying to understand how their workflow normally works. I know 15 days is not especially long in academic publishing, but i am wondering whether a manuscript remaining with the Associate Editor for this long can still end in a desk rejection, or whether this duration might mean the editor is considering sending it out for review?.

my scores are too low and now i'm feeling like i'm at the rock bottom in start of my career.

Hello everyone,

i’m an international Master’s student in a germany university studying physics with decent enough grades. I will be starting my master thesis soon and was wondering about phd prospects. i know that it might be too soon to think about a phd but i want to be better informed. my interest lies in experimental particle physics particularly in Higgs physics (My thesis is also in the same topic). I know that fact that given my field my best chances would be in Europe especially at CERN which is also my goal.

However, i am curious about doing a phd in the US. I am not aware of the phd system there but i think im open for the experience. Any info on how phd in US works especially in my field is appreciated.

Thanks

a first work of mine in spintronics..

I'm not very knowledgeable on math or physics, but I do like to learn about quantum particles and behaviors casually, how ever I can. I have trouble understanding how a tensor boson would behave, while I already have a somewhat decent idea of how scalar and vector bosons behave (in a simplified way at least). I understand that vector bosons can be transferred from one particle to another, which I assume has to do with them being vectors, and that scalar bosons kind of "stick around" a single area or particle, assumedly related to scalar quantities being singilar points with a value. In these senses, what would a tensor boson (or more specifically, spin-2 tensor boson) act like?

I have tried a lot to look for resources that explain to me simply what tensor bosons are like, but I haven't found anything that gives me any solid idea. I know gravitons are theorized to be spin-2 tensor bosons. I know spin-2 that means it would take only a rotation of 180° to return to its original state (don't know what relevance that has to anything though). I know that spin-2 particles can have 5 spin states: 2, 1, 0, -1, and -2. But I don't know how to visualize the effects that a spin-2 tensor boson (virtual or real) would have on other particles. That's something I'm very interested in knowing.

My understanding of boson behavior comes from learning about the elementary bosons (gluon, photon, higgs, etc), but I'm not really sure how accurate those behaviors are for composite bosons (mesons), so forgive me if what I said doesn't fully make sense.

Say someone fell into a pool of a thing (liquid) from the 20th floor of a building

What are the properties of the said thing should have so the person doesn't turn into a human apple pie

I know there is no such a thing in real life, so theoretical physics time

When I was 15, in my first physics class, the teacher asked everyone to call out a number between 1 and 100.
He wrote down the long string of digits across the blackboard, and with 30 or so students, the number stretched from one side to the other.
Then he talked for a while, never looking back at the blackboard.
A few minutes later, without looking back at the board, he started reciting the entire list from memory with 100% accuracy.
I remember thinking, “I’m going to need to lock-in for this subject.”
Well played, Sir. Well played.

My bf is currently on his last year for his undergraduate, majoring in physics and mathematics. He goes to a not so well known school with a small physics program and has a 3.7 gpa. He’s done really well but has no research experience nor much of a relationship with any of his professors. He’s currently trying to get some research experience but is afraid there’s not enough time to get enough for graduate school to consider him, as applications are due in December. He’s currently preparing to take the PGRE in September but is unsure how he’ll do as he has 6 classes this semester so not much study time before the exam. Would it be possible for him to go straight into his PHD after graduation at some more well known schools (US Berkeley, U of Chicago, UC Santa Cruz, UIUC, etc). If not would it be worth extending his bachelors for another year and acquiring some more research during that time? Any suggestions or possible school choices are welcome.

Hi, Im currently a senior working on a moon landing sim for one of my extracurriculars and I need help with knowing and understanding which math and physics topics do i need to be familiar with to implement the math. I have a very strong background in C and graphics programming with raylib, I have a strong background in algebra and geometry (780 on the sat). Im already aware of most of the basics (periapsis, apoapsis, eccentricity, true anomaly) and with a prototype prepared. The prototype just consists of the moon lander orbiting in an equatorial orbit as the main issue im facing is inclination changes and implementation of engine burns. The sim only aims to just orbit the moon and land on it and get back in orbit with an orbital height limit off 150km to avoid problems.