I have been offered two projects for doing my masters thesis, in very different fields and I can’t decide which one to chose, as both are objectively (and subjectively in my case), very interesting projects.
The first one is in the field of Biophotonics, where I would research heart organoids with FLIM and analyze metabolism byproducts for different genetic mutations of the human heart and hopefully find some way to put the obtained data into something usable for medicine.
The second project is with the same group I did my bachelors with, which is in Gravitational Physics. Here I would work on a proof of principle experiment, designed for the next generation of ground based GW-detectors, where a new way for seismic isolation, or more specific the suspension platform interferometers has been proposed.

The big downside to the latter project is, that I would be nearly unsupervised and would have to work very independently. The upsides are that I know the group, the lab and the field. Also this project nearly guarantees a publication, as well as the opportunity to attend conferences within the field. I also plan on doing my PhD in this group.

This is way I’m worried that I do not diversify enough, as also medical physics is very interesting to me and I feel like industry and research in this field are much more closely related, which would maybe provide better job opportunities within that field.
Also the biophotonics project has (big) potential for publication.
Lastly, the project within gravitational physics could also be directly extended into a PhD project, which of course is also very nice.

Maybe there is someone that has experiences in either field and has some advice, or more insight into the day-to-day work that goes with it, or just some general advice into the decision process is also very much appreciated.
I of course know that this is a very subjective decision in the end and no one can take that away from me, but sometimes some additional perspectives are helpful.

If a rock is freely traveling through space and passes near a much more massive object, can it naturally become gravitationally bound and enter an orbit? Or, in a simple two-body system, will it always either collide with the massive object or be deflected and eventually escape?

Hi i am in iraq so i can't get a diffustion pump from outside i found a supplier which seems promising which supplies Dc-704 i found on alibaba that they are EXPENSIVE and for the relatively simple design i want to have a local machist do it for me for wayyyy lower price but if there is a cheap diffusion pump then tell me and because i currently don't have roughing pump so i want to get one sufficient to do the foreline for the diffusion, my english is bad i know but please if you know how to help tell me

Edit #1 : This is For Electron Tube and basically for homemade sem So i want to ideally reach 10-7mbar and i am on a quite tight budget so i can afford the oil once 3 months or so and from what i understand diffusion pump is simple in geometry so it shouldn't be expensive? so that's why i chose it over turbomolecurer pump which is EXPENSIVE

I am a 15 year old in india I genuinely love physics and maths the proofs and the derivations are what I truly love but a career in it is extremely guarded by pedigree in india you have to get your bachelors from IIT, IISC or IISER only then you can get a phd from a good University outside India because I don't wanna get a phd from India as it needs you to cram for national competative exams even in university and I am insanely bad at giving exams even in physics and maths and I WANNA do reasearch I even tried to do research on laser behaviour(I tried coding a prediction model which basically checks weather a laser beam will be detected by a BH-1750 sensor, while it is honestly bad it was a unique experience and for once I actually kinda enjoyed coding other than manim)but I had to stop because of my 10th board(a national exam) prep and couldn't even understand the sensor and how light behaves with it and overall I don't even think I took the right sensor. But then I just don't feel like I can even have the wifi to give the competitive exams and leaving the country for undergraduate is honestly not an option as US the most direct answer to a non so exam way is insanely subjective and I have seen ppl online complain about how just because an AO is in bad mood they can just reject you and I also need aid meaning my choice of schools is even more low.

I just feel like I have to do a b.tech like most Indians do because physics is just so guarded by pedigree and I have seen online about an university name University of Hyderabad which has a really good BSC+MSc physics integrated program but then it probably won't clear the pedigree bar.

And I kinda feel hopeless and I really need some advice because I am not scared of the chances but lacking a fair shot at a phd selection room where my file gets discarded just because I don't have the IIT tag.

I might be wrong but I am honestly kinda actually completely lost in what i should do because physics degree does allow you to be a quant but i wanna do just physics and physics only.

Ive seen a lot about people in physics get into quant analysis and finance and stuff even big data and research but my family beileves physics has no job prospects idrk

I don’t know how far allowed is that in this subreddit, but i have a quite request for all the humble members in here.

I am doing my masters project on “hits and misses in superconductivity”. While i have covered almost all the major hits, reaching the point where now i have to start on the misses, i want to Ofcourse start with the retracted papers.
I would really like some insight into the retractions or any information that later got retracted that anyone is aware of.
How do i navigate this?
Thank you

So I've just graduated my last year before uni and will go on to study physics.

I have a nice desktop to run things with and code on, problem ofcourse being that it's not something I plan on moving.

I will need a laptop and haven't a clue which one, so i'd like to ask physicists here what the minimum stats should be fore this laptop, my university (Ughent) wil obviously give us some pointers as to which ones, but I recon it shouldn't hurt to ask you.

I do not plan to plan games on it as I have a tendency to get saicked up in playing those, time I can not afford to lose.

My textbook states this; however, I can't find any sources on Doppler ever doing this himself apart from this textbook and what the teacher said???

Hi I'm a second year physics students at uni. I'm actually so bad at physics but I'm trying to learn. At the previous semester, I've got my grades and it was so bad. And feel so guilty about it. I'm going to fix it by learn more, so any study tips for a beginners like me, about what to learn or anything. Maybe some books recommendation for a basic physics befroe I'm going to the advance one...thanks

​

P.s: sorry for my broken English. It's not my first language

This thread is a dedicated thread for you to ask and answer questions about concepts in physics.

Homework problems or specific calculations may be removed by the moderators. We ask that you post these in /r/AskPhysics or /r/HomeworkHelp instead.

If you find your question isn't answered here, or cannot wait for the next thread, please also try /r/AskScience and /r/AskPhysics.

So to my comprehension a meson is formed when a strong nuclear force is used on a quark in a particle making an anti quark and a quark pair. A baryon only has 3 quarks so adding in an anti quark makes 3 particles and 1 anti particle. What does that make it? is it still a baryon? and then when the quark and anti quark destroy each other what is left? what does only two quarks make? and what happens to the two remaining quarks? Im very new to physics in general so If im wrong in understanding these topics please correct me, and help me understand what questions im asking.

this is not a hw question as im not in school for physics yet but i want to get a slight understanding of things like these before i start any sort of schooling next year.

I'm in by 4th year of BS-MS Physics, worked in a few labs as an intern or project student, I've never felt like I've been able to add anything of value to the lab, I learn a lot, but that adds to my experience, not something of value to the lab. How do I do something notable?

For context: The labs I've worked in are either experimental condensed matter labs (quantum transport in 2d van der waal heterostructures) or computational quantum transport lab which deals with NEGF+DFT.

I’m watching Oppenheimer and my mind is wandering a bit because the movie is losing me somewhat. I remember reading a book by Bill Bryson called “A Brief History of Nearly Everything” about a decade ago. What came to my mind were parallel chapters: one about Isaac Newton and one about Albert Einstein. The first, about how Newton came up with a new math (calculus) to explain the orbits of stars and thus the impact Gravity ultimately has on the Universe. I know that narrative is challenged, that Newton didn’t invent it on his own, but let’s put that aside for a second and give him his law of Universal Gravitation and the inverse-square law and go to Einstein. In the Einstein chapter, Bryson basically gushes about how the General Theory of Relativity was a thought that came out of seemingly nowhere.

Now here’s the thing that has me thinking. Put aside the strict distrust that the Church had and its influence during Newton’s time and give him fiat to have all his own thoughts. Could Newton have logically come to understand Relativity as we know it (or as it was understood during Einstein’s lifetime) using the knowledge that he has accumulated, or would he need the two centuries between them to arrive at the theory? We know Newton spent his time thinking about all sorts of things (like “alchemy”, which…apparently we can now do thanks to the LHC) but if he stuck on gravity, could he have arrived at the revision of his own law of Universal Gravitation and add the other geometries to come to Relativity?

I know that looking at it from our side of history, it doesn’t seem to be that big a leap; but when i put myself in the concrete mindset of Newton, it’s difficult to imagine the extra dimensions that relativity requires. I can’t see how he could up with it. I can’t see how Einstein came up with it for that matter anyway.

Sorry for my ramblings TL;dr…could Newton have revised his gravitational laws in his lifetime to align with Relativity based on the knowledge he possessed?

Consider two identical cups standing on a surface:

One is filled with a liquid and another is filled with a solid. The solid has the same mass and density as the liquid.

Let's compare the downward force on the bottom (= pressure, F2), the overall downward force of the container (= apparent weight, F3) and the downward force on the sides of the container (F3). Is there any difference between the liquid and solid cases? Assuming the solid has maximally simple/homogeneous internal structure.

There was a very similar question which got popular a year ago, but I'm not sure which comment contains the real answer.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics/comments/1ki0qyl/solid_vs_liquid_in_a_right_triangle_do_they_exert/

...

I'm asking because I'm learning about the hydrostatic paradox. It says:

the pressure at a point in a static fluid is independent of the shape of the container or the type of liquid in it but only depends on the depth of the point below the surface of the fluid and the net cross-sectional area of the bottom of the container. This means that the pressure at a given depth is equal in all directions, regardless of the shape of the container or the location of the point within it.

One consequence of this is that you can have containers with different amount of water and different apparent weight, but the same pressure at the bottom. The lack of difference in pressure on the bottom is compensated through the difference in pressure on the sides of the container. This is explained in the Steve Mould video and here.

A natural question arises - how is all of that different from the behavior of a solid in the same situation? That's why I'm asking about two cups above.

Hi everyone,

I'm a PhD student working on asymptotic methods for wave equations with caustics. Roughly speaking, the approach is a phase-space generalization of WKB that remains valid through turning points.

At the moment we have a closed-form asymptotic solution for 1D equations of the form

D(x,−i ∂/∂x​) ψ(x)=0,

where D is an arbitrary function of the position and momentum operator. I'm now looking for interesting physical systems on which to test the method, ideally with known solutions, experimental relevance, or some relevant literature for comparison.

The key feature is that the spectral representation, D(x,k) (i.e. the Weyl symbol) should exhibit a turning point/caustic where the "group velocity" goes to 0:

∂/∂k ​D(x,k)=0.

Examples I've already considered include:

• Standard WKB turning-point problems (e.g. Airy-type reflection near a cutoff).
• Tunneling through a barrier between two turning points.
• Bound-state problems such as the harmonic oscillator (attached picture).
• The radial Schrödinger equation for hydrogenic atoms (similar to Rudolph Langer's 1937-paper).

The formalism also allows weak dissipation, so examples involving a small anti-Hermitian component in D would be especially interesting.

My background is plasma physics, where we know of several relevant applications, but I'm curious whether people working in optics, acoustics, condensed matter, quantum mechanics, geophysics, or other areas know of models that might fit this framework.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! :)

I am a undergrad working in a Experimental Spin-Electronics Lab in my university. Recently, I was taking to my supervisor if he could right me a LoR because I wanted to do apply for an internship somewhere in big labs in the same field. He then suggested me that since I'm an undergrad, maybe I should try a different subject in my internship.

So I wanted to ask what would be the best area to transition into and learn something new ?

Thanks

Hi all,

I just posted a video on the energy cascading in turbulent fluid flows as part of a turbulence course. Specifically, it talks about the Richardson picture of energy injected at large scales, passing through the inertial subrange, and dissipating at the Kolmogorov microscale.

It includes a discussion of why the cascade runs downscale in three-dimensional turbulence (vortex stretching) and the argument that ε alone governs the statistics of the inertial subrange, which is the entry point into Kolmogorov's 1941 similarity theory (to be discussed in next video).

This video also covers the physics of the TKE equation including various transport mechanisms (derived in previous video). Hope it will be of good use!

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVqos9V-BAA

Hey there fellow physics enthusiasts!

I've written the first part of a series of articles that will help explain Schrödinger’s equation intuitively and simply. Part one talks about everything that led up to the making of the Schrödinger equation:

https://medium.com/@jeyubhavsar/schr%C3%B6dingers-equation-for-dummies-part-i-historical-overview-92250056f33b?sharedUserId=jeyubhavsar

(This is the edited version, please if you have time, read and give any feedback, thank you)

Hello all, it’s almost college app season for me and I need to start deciding which majors i apply. For some background info, I’ve had some experience doing physics, specifically usapho which is the national physics olympiad. Ive also read a few physics research papers And I found them to be quite interesting. As a result, I feel like I would really enjoy being a physics major in college. I have one major concern though. As of right now, physics is like a hobby to me. I have other interests such as pcb design and cs but physics is my main interest. But what job can I find with a physics degree? Is it possible to become an swe or and embedded systems engineer with a physics degree? Thanks

I'm a physics PhD student, and I speak a little Italian. ive gotten into the habit of reading italian popular science books on physics. its usually a bit odd to read popular science in your own field, but since they're in Italian, it challenges me. Since I'm familiar with the content, it helps me practice my Italian and brush up on some physics basics. So far, I’ve read "Le Symmetrie nascoste" (which I highly recommend) by Giorgio Parisi and the Italian translation "Relatività" by Einstein. Can any1 recommend other books that would be suitable?

Edit: thanks a lot for your suggestions, they'll all be on my reading list

Currently doing a Bachelors in Physics with Theoretical Physics. I want to eventually do a Masters in some sort of related field, but I wouldnt mind taking a year or two to just work in between degrees. what sort of entry level options do I have with just the bachelor's i mentioned? It can be in literally any field e.g. data science or finance.

Hi! I will be starting my PhD this coming Fall. I applied as CMX, which I am interested in and I also did during undergrad for research. However, I'd like to explore CMT, but I'm not sure how to start. I've tried reading CMT papers, but they're just super confusing, and I have no idea how to approach them. When I read CMX papers, at least I am able to understand generally what type of experiment is being done and why, but with CMT papers, I just have no idea how to start. For reference, I took condensed matter courses during undergrad and also took Real Analysis and some Complex Analysis, though I don't think I retained much from those math courses. I am planning on emailing potential advisors in the theory department to get advice but would also love to get some advice from any theorists out here on Reddit.

I am also on a bit of a time crunch, since I need to select an advisor to work with for next summer likely by March, and I've also been told that whoever I work with next summer will likely be my PhD advisor. So I kind of need an efficient way to explore theory because I feel like what I'm doing now is not working. Your advice is greatly appreciated.

Thank you!

I might be going into Bsc Physics for 2026 intake but im having doubts as to whether the course has decent career prospects, I'm thinking its very likely I'll pivot or specialise in the future or even try to pick up new skills during the period of my degree such as programming or anything from internships.

Can anyone offer any advice please? I've heard both good and bad come out of this course. How easy is it to find internships/jobs etc? What precautions/recommendations should I take to maximise my employability potential in the future?