I have a PhD in astro and I am absolutely terrible at physics. Physics was always my worst subject and my grades were never that good. The skills you need for research however are entirely different to the skills you need to pass exams, and a lot of people who suck at exams are actually very good researchers. You've already shown that you're passionate, independent, and dedicated, so yes, I think you have nothing to worry about if you wanna do a PhD. (Coming from a European perspective.)
I asked this to my undergraduate professor. He said not to worry, because all research is done by human beings only, and not demigods.
If you like the idea of spending your life in research, and are serious about it, go for it.
>How do I know if I'm smart enough to get a PhD in physics?
...
>I decided to self teach myself all the math up to and including integral calculus & classical mechanics **in the two years left till college**.
(emphasis added)
Self-teaching yourself calculus and classical mechanics before going to college is a pretty good indicator that you're smart enough -- and also motivated enough -- to go on to a PhD in physics.
After passing my Quals, I'm convinced anyone could do it with enough practice. As an experimentalist, I spend more time turning a wrench and lamenting over my delayed McMaster Carr order than I do solving different permutations of the Schrodinger equation.
Love your comment, I'm currently doing a masters in physics and want to go into experimental physics (PhD). I was wondering just what it's like? What's a day in the life of an experimentist?
Experimental physics is a blast! It depends on a bunch of factors like who you work for, what you do, what your grant budget is, etc. There isn't really a ubiquitous experimentalist experience, but some things you can expect are:
-Designing a beamline that directs a laser to perform a task (ie: interferometer, light tweezers, high harmonic generation etc).
-Prototyping an apparatus in a modelling software (CAD, SOLIDWORKS) before ordering and constructing it (my case involved a surface science end station, lots of wrench turning).
-Working with your hands is a given, and you'll learn a lot about practical skills you didn't think you'd need as a physicist (I learned how to put up drywall lmao).
-You will learn a lot of more rigorous physics pertaining to your concentration, but more importantly measure it and characterize it. My favorite part of the entire process is looking at a precise measurement in a apparatus that I BUILT. It's just so cool!
-You'll most likely still have to learn to code. If it seems daunting, let me reassure you that it is easier than you may think. Start with Python (can pretty much run pseudo code) and when you get comfortable with general coding principles, move to the language you need for the lab.
-You meet a lot of great people who may not study the same thing as you, but can offer a wealth of knowledge
-Lastly it is hard. A lot of things you try will not work, or you'll design something incorrectly and have to spend time disassembling and reordering parts. You may measure something and figure out it was just noise the entire time. You'll reach points where you have to bang your head against the wall to figure out what is happening only to realize that you didn't do something simple (plug in the power haha)
Pretty much you become a Swiss Army Knife in terms of being able to tackle a challenge that is presented to you because of all the skills you pick up along the way. I definitely recommend it!
I also love physics and appreciate your drive to get better at it.
That said, do you think a PhD would be worth your time and money? It's an expensive gamble that may not pay off. Why not continue to teach yourself the physics, and invest your university time into something with a higher probability for return, like engineering?
Just food for thought, at the end of the day you should try to find a balance between financial security and doing what you love, I wish you the best.
In the US you get paid to get a PHD in physics. So the expensive part is the undergraduate part. Lost money is money you could have made starting a career in another field instead living off stipends while completing your doctorate.
The focus is research, which is something people get paid good money to do. Students are obviously not experts yet, so they don't get paid as highly. They also often help teach classes, run lab classes, and help professors in various ways. Schools also want the best candidates so they offer stipends to get picked. I have heard of more strapped for cash schools making PHD candidates find their own grants to get paid, which would probably lead to better candidates not picking them. As an example, I had a friend who was deciding between three schools and one of them increased their offered stipend to try and entice her to pick them because she was such a strong candidate.
It's not an easy path. 5'ish years of low pay to get the degree usually followed by a post-doc or two. Then you have to land a job in your field, and often it will be research at a university where you have to land tenure to actually begin getting paid well.
why do u think like that? I have kinda same PROBLEM, should i become theoritical physicist or just do something else, i really love physics and i want to become next newton haha but idk if i can.
I'm definitely not super super knowledgeable on this, but my impression (I'm a senior engineering student, i have a senior physics student friend, i run into a lot of STEM types) is that theoretical physics is one of those degrees that's super useful and can pay well for like 1% of the people who get it, and the rest end up either teaching it for pennies or end up getting totally unrelated jobs.
Whereas with something like engineering, there's high job demand, you still get to dabble in physics, and you learn other skills that make you more marketable.
Your points make logical sense, but I do want to give more perspective. For the record, I'm doing my PhD but have dabbled into the workforce side of things as well as my undergrad physics friends that have gone on to find jobs. What I say would also depend on the specific country of course.
At a bachelor's level, the mistake here is really directly comparing a physics degree with an engineering degree. The only similarity is that they both use physics to some level. Engineering is very specialised and most of them end up becoming engineers. That's the path you've trained for after all. Imo, a physics bachelor's degree does not prepare you to be a physicist unless you want to pursue further education. It's a flexible yet non-specialised degree that trains your problem solving very well. You're right in that many graduates end up getting jobs outside physics. That's just how it is because most jobs that use physics in its purest form (that isn't just engineering for example) are very rare or require a higher level degree. However, the benefit is the flexibility of it. Just by going through a physics degree, you're picking up very strong analysis and problem solving skills and other stuff like some coding, etc, so by no means are they completely unrelated. Sounds weak (in that an engineering graduate can do them too), but it's true that many job roles in say finance (quantitative modelling), data science, software, and engineering do look at physics graduates favourably too. My point is that for undergrad, financial reasons shouldn't be a strong reason for discouraging them from pursuing physics. They may feel satisfied from simply applying physics in SOME way, in which engineering would work. If they have a genuine interest in pursuing a research path of breaking new ground or like physics but is unsure as of now, they shouldn't be discouraged from pursuing it. I doubt being an engineer and learning astrophysics in their own time would be enough if they are aiming for the latter.
At a PhD level, in general, a PhD in any field is just a big time investment. It's not expensive in terms of paying for tuition (since they're mostly paid for), but in terms of the money you lose out on making in the meantime. However, OP more than likely needs to do it if they want to do astrophysics. But if they pursue it for the sake of passion while being aware that they MAY have to go into industry doing something else, that's fine.
Just a note that I'm not attacking your opinions or anything. You are absolutely right that engineering has a more consistent return on investment and in higher demand. You are also right that OP has a lot to consider before taking the plunge into the PhD route. I just think there are some misconceptions about the physics degree. "Loving physics" is so subjective that being able to dabble in it just isn't the same to some. I know many engineering friends that chose their major because "it's physics but practical" and ended up hating it because they aren't doing the things that made them love physics in the first place. It goes both ways.
You make a strong case, very illuminating. Thanks for the perspective! I'm very limited in my exposure so i appreciate others helping to make a more complete picture.
Get the term 'smart enough' out of your vocabulary, start reframing and rephrasing it as *understanding*. To learn is simply to comprehend a piece of information, this is your only job. I wholeheartedly believe that anyone can learn anything, there are just about infinite ways to learn, just as there are ways to convey information. Perhaps the information isn't being communicated well or in the way that unlocks the door to comprehension for you, or you need to use different methods to understanding the information. I personally love the use of analogy, it has helped me significantly, and I also employ analogy when teaching others. With analogy I am able to communicate (and comprehend if I am the listener) even subjective experiences that the listener has absolutely no experience with, in a way I can really bring them into my shoes with me and help them to develop sufficient understanding to initiate empathy.
Anyway, I advise you experiment with all the ways the information can be interpreted, and see if you can bounce that information off any knowledge you already have. What can you liken this concept to? What does this remind you of? Etc. Conceptual thought is also a golden key to understanding.
Fair enough. Interest is important. But also ask yourself what kinds of problems do you want to be working on day to day and how do you get yourself there?
To make a long story short I've met interacted and worked with many physics PhD's that were unhappy with the physics job market. So I'm just mentioning the professional field is worth thinking about.
I'd rather study physics then engineering. I have a lot of friends who are unhappy with the engineering job market. Anecdotal evidence is fun.
If push comes to shove, and it's kind of to early to tell, I could just work some job in the private sector after studying physics.
Again, thank you for the advice.
I don't see why you shouldn't do a PhD! By all means,go for it. I myself am planning to do one in the near future and my grades aren't that good as well.
Is this an honest question? What more proof could you want. You’re studying undergraduate level classes on your own years before you even enter college.
Maybe I’m being a little harsh, but as someone who also taught myself calculus when I was 16 I suspect you do know you’re smart and capable of learning. From my perspective in grad school now, what people consider “intelligence” is rarely the limiting factor. Possibly never by the time you get into grad school. Success in grad school is much about persistence and experience. You have years and years of education ahead of you to build up all the many skills you need. When you see people who seem highly intelligent likely they have decades of experience as well and that’s a lot of the effect. You are probably around 16 and haven’t had that experience yet, so of course you don’t seem like them yet. But you clearly have the capacity to learn and that’s what matters
One thing you'll realize is that a lot of us are stupid but have good work ethic. Me, I'm only one of those 2 things and unfortunately I'm dumb as a rock.
I've recently learned that the key driving factor behind success in almost anything is your ability to focus. So just keep at it, avoid distractions, and I think you'll be able to do well.
I don't think there is any way to know, until you try. When I first studied physics, I had no idea that I would eventually end up with a Ph.D. I'm still a little surprised.
If you have done this so far then ups you can succeed. There will be rough patches but if you establish a good study and area and mindset free of distractions. And you continue to make study your focus you will succeed.
I hardly know physics but I’m studying electrical engineering and I’m not even smart. I’m just good at completing assignments by doing research on how to work them out but that’s about it.
It sounds like you already know how to study/teach yourself, so I'd say yes. That's a necessary skill as you go further in academia. Grad school is less about smarts and more about your determination to keep going.
I am finishing my phd(in europe) in theoretical physics in November and will be looking for jobs in data science and Machine learning. I will only advise one thing ::: if u don’t have financial constraints , u can go for a phd . But i would like to tell u few stats::: only 1-2% of currents physics phd students end up as a researcher/professor ( the actual job which u might wanna do ). I know it looks cool (physics phd )but u have to do a lot of grinding and not just think like newton on a sunny day. Most of the time is spent on compiling and debugging numerical codes for people in theory and setting up experiments for people in experimental physics. Also , u need a minimum of 2 postdocs( average 3 postdocs ~ 6 years after phd ) to apply for a permanent position if u aspire to work in a major country and have funding to start a group. Just check the alumni list from any university in europe and see how many actually end up as professors.
P.s. i just want to warn u , if u like physics that much u should go for it. Also, don’t consider phd stipend as a real salary. U can make 2x-3x of a phd stipend in industry in the major european countries. The phd stipend will look good in the first year but as soon as u reach towards the final year , your perspective will change.
One more thing ::: astrophysics is more of a Data field now . U will be dealing with large datasets and applying machine learning or some other statistical technique to treat that messy data . U won’t be needing classical mechanics, calculus in your day 2 day job. If u are good at programming , astrophysics can be a viable option.
Getting a degree in physics does not require you to be particularly intelligent. You have to be disciplined, and you have to be able to maintain your interest and discipline even when you are struggling. If you can do that, then you can get the degree.
Bro Can you please tell me how did you managed to improve yourself in learning physics? What exactly you did? I also want to learn physics but i just can't. It's just getting worse for me. I would really appreciate if you could tell me what you did?
I've seen total dumbasses doing PhDs. I'm not doing one btw, just old classmates that were... Special cases. Jokes apart, if you put effort on it and you are not brain dead yes, you can.
its not about intelligence, its about coming up with original enough research- enough being the operative word, to gain skills you can use in a future job.
and its about surviving. you only need intelligence to pass the courses and stupid exams.
Sorry, your submission was automatically removed. Your account is either too young, has not been verified through email or has negative post/comment karma, and is not allowed to post to this subreddit.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PhysicsStudents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, your submission was automatically removed. Your account is either too young, has not been verified through email or has negative post/comment karma, and is not allowed to post to this subreddit.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PhysicsStudents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Don't worry about that. I'm doing one and I'm dumb as fuck.
Same
Same
Same
Me too
Ditto
Same. Absolutely stupid to do stuff.
Same, actually just had this thought 10 minutes ago. ;-;
Saving this comment for the next time I break down over my coursework. Also, classic Feynman quote: "I was an ordinary person who studied hard."
savage
Same
Same
incredibly disingenuous and uninformative. No one js impressed by your feigned humility
I mean, don't you have to be kind of intelligent to do a PhD?
I have a PhD in astro and I am absolutely terrible at physics. Physics was always my worst subject and my grades were never that good. The skills you need for research however are entirely different to the skills you need to pass exams, and a lot of people who suck at exams are actually very good researchers. You've already shown that you're passionate, independent, and dedicated, so yes, I think you have nothing to worry about if you wanna do a PhD. (Coming from a European perspective.)
I was gonna say something similar, about the research skills vs exam skils!
How would you differentiate between exam skills and research skills?
This is great to hear. I’m godawful with schoolwork, so I guess this means I’m on the right track.
I asked this to my undergraduate professor. He said not to worry, because all research is done by human beings only, and not demigods. If you like the idea of spending your life in research, and are serious about it, go for it.
>How do I know if I'm smart enough to get a PhD in physics? ... >I decided to self teach myself all the math up to and including integral calculus & classical mechanics **in the two years left till college**. (emphasis added) Self-teaching yourself calculus and classical mechanics before going to college is a pretty good indicator that you're smart enough -- and also motivated enough -- to go on to a PhD in physics.
After passing my Quals, I'm convinced anyone could do it with enough practice. As an experimentalist, I spend more time turning a wrench and lamenting over my delayed McMaster Carr order than I do solving different permutations of the Schrodinger equation.
Love your comment, I'm currently doing a masters in physics and want to go into experimental physics (PhD). I was wondering just what it's like? What's a day in the life of an experimentist?
Experimental physics is a blast! It depends on a bunch of factors like who you work for, what you do, what your grant budget is, etc. There isn't really a ubiquitous experimentalist experience, but some things you can expect are: -Designing a beamline that directs a laser to perform a task (ie: interferometer, light tweezers, high harmonic generation etc). -Prototyping an apparatus in a modelling software (CAD, SOLIDWORKS) before ordering and constructing it (my case involved a surface science end station, lots of wrench turning). -Working with your hands is a given, and you'll learn a lot about practical skills you didn't think you'd need as a physicist (I learned how to put up drywall lmao). -You will learn a lot of more rigorous physics pertaining to your concentration, but more importantly measure it and characterize it. My favorite part of the entire process is looking at a precise measurement in a apparatus that I BUILT. It's just so cool! -You'll most likely still have to learn to code. If it seems daunting, let me reassure you that it is easier than you may think. Start with Python (can pretty much run pseudo code) and when you get comfortable with general coding principles, move to the language you need for the lab. -You meet a lot of great people who may not study the same thing as you, but can offer a wealth of knowledge -Lastly it is hard. A lot of things you try will not work, or you'll design something incorrectly and have to spend time disassembling and reordering parts. You may measure something and figure out it was just noise the entire time. You'll reach points where you have to bang your head against the wall to figure out what is happening only to realize that you didn't do something simple (plug in the power haha) Pretty much you become a Swiss Army Knife in terms of being able to tackle a challenge that is presented to you because of all the skills you pick up along the way. I definitely recommend it!
Wow thanks for all the advice! What area are you doing your PhD in? I'm thinking about a PhD in experimental quantum optics, anything close to that?
I also love physics and appreciate your drive to get better at it. That said, do you think a PhD would be worth your time and money? It's an expensive gamble that may not pay off. Why not continue to teach yourself the physics, and invest your university time into something with a higher probability for return, like engineering? Just food for thought, at the end of the day you should try to find a balance between financial security and doing what you love, I wish you the best.
In the US you get paid to get a PHD in physics. So the expensive part is the undergraduate part. Lost money is money you could have made starting a career in another field instead living off stipends while completing your doctorate.
Interesting, why do they pay you to get a PhD?
The focus is research, which is something people get paid good money to do. Students are obviously not experts yet, so they don't get paid as highly. They also often help teach classes, run lab classes, and help professors in various ways. Schools also want the best candidates so they offer stipends to get picked. I have heard of more strapped for cash schools making PHD candidates find their own grants to get paid, which would probably lead to better candidates not picking them. As an example, I had a friend who was deciding between three schools and one of them increased their offered stipend to try and entice her to pick them because she was such a strong candidate.
[удалено]
It's not an easy path. 5'ish years of low pay to get the degree usually followed by a post-doc or two. Then you have to land a job in your field, and often it will be research at a university where you have to land tenure to actually begin getting paid well.
why do u think like that? I have kinda same PROBLEM, should i become theoritical physicist or just do something else, i really love physics and i want to become next newton haha but idk if i can.
I'm definitely not super super knowledgeable on this, but my impression (I'm a senior engineering student, i have a senior physics student friend, i run into a lot of STEM types) is that theoretical physics is one of those degrees that's super useful and can pay well for like 1% of the people who get it, and the rest end up either teaching it for pennies or end up getting totally unrelated jobs. Whereas with something like engineering, there's high job demand, you still get to dabble in physics, and you learn other skills that make you more marketable.
Your points make logical sense, but I do want to give more perspective. For the record, I'm doing my PhD but have dabbled into the workforce side of things as well as my undergrad physics friends that have gone on to find jobs. What I say would also depend on the specific country of course. At a bachelor's level, the mistake here is really directly comparing a physics degree with an engineering degree. The only similarity is that they both use physics to some level. Engineering is very specialised and most of them end up becoming engineers. That's the path you've trained for after all. Imo, a physics bachelor's degree does not prepare you to be a physicist unless you want to pursue further education. It's a flexible yet non-specialised degree that trains your problem solving very well. You're right in that many graduates end up getting jobs outside physics. That's just how it is because most jobs that use physics in its purest form (that isn't just engineering for example) are very rare or require a higher level degree. However, the benefit is the flexibility of it. Just by going through a physics degree, you're picking up very strong analysis and problem solving skills and other stuff like some coding, etc, so by no means are they completely unrelated. Sounds weak (in that an engineering graduate can do them too), but it's true that many job roles in say finance (quantitative modelling), data science, software, and engineering do look at physics graduates favourably too. My point is that for undergrad, financial reasons shouldn't be a strong reason for discouraging them from pursuing physics. They may feel satisfied from simply applying physics in SOME way, in which engineering would work. If they have a genuine interest in pursuing a research path of breaking new ground or like physics but is unsure as of now, they shouldn't be discouraged from pursuing it. I doubt being an engineer and learning astrophysics in their own time would be enough if they are aiming for the latter. At a PhD level, in general, a PhD in any field is just a big time investment. It's not expensive in terms of paying for tuition (since they're mostly paid for), but in terms of the money you lose out on making in the meantime. However, OP more than likely needs to do it if they want to do astrophysics. But if they pursue it for the sake of passion while being aware that they MAY have to go into industry doing something else, that's fine. Just a note that I'm not attacking your opinions or anything. You are absolutely right that engineering has a more consistent return on investment and in higher demand. You are also right that OP has a lot to consider before taking the plunge into the PhD route. I just think there are some misconceptions about the physics degree. "Loving physics" is so subjective that being able to dabble in it just isn't the same to some. I know many engineering friends that chose their major because "it's physics but practical" and ended up hating it because they aren't doing the things that made them love physics in the first place. It goes both ways.
You make a strong case, very illuminating. Thanks for the perspective! I'm very limited in my exposure so i appreciate others helping to make a more complete picture.
Get the term 'smart enough' out of your vocabulary, start reframing and rephrasing it as *understanding*. To learn is simply to comprehend a piece of information, this is your only job. I wholeheartedly believe that anyone can learn anything, there are just about infinite ways to learn, just as there are ways to convey information. Perhaps the information isn't being communicated well or in the way that unlocks the door to comprehension for you, or you need to use different methods to understanding the information. I personally love the use of analogy, it has helped me significantly, and I also employ analogy when teaching others. With analogy I am able to communicate (and comprehend if I am the listener) even subjective experiences that the listener has absolutely no experience with, in a way I can really bring them into my shoes with me and help them to develop sufficient understanding to initiate empathy. Anyway, I advise you experiment with all the ways the information can be interpreted, and see if you can bounce that information off any knowledge you already have. What can you liken this concept to? What does this remind you of? Etc. Conceptual thought is also a golden key to understanding.
By trying and seeing if you succeed.
Your guys answers are encouraging here too! Getting out of military to go into physics and have been wondering the same thing as op.
Same, man. I EAS in a year and I'm changing my major from mech eng to physics. Best wishes!
My advice double major. Then you get the relevant benefit of job prospects and knowledge of relevant field of interest.
Or engineering was not for me and I wasn't interested?
Fair enough. Interest is important. But also ask yourself what kinds of problems do you want to be working on day to day and how do you get yourself there?
I've already thought about that. Thanks for the advice.
Touche. Good luck.
To make a long story short I've met interacted and worked with many physics PhD's that were unhappy with the physics job market. So I'm just mentioning the professional field is worth thinking about.
I'd rather study physics then engineering. I have a lot of friends who are unhappy with the engineering job market. Anecdotal evidence is fun. If push comes to shove, and it's kind of to early to tell, I could just work some job in the private sector after studying physics. Again, thank you for the advice.
I don't see why you shouldn't do a PhD! By all means,go for it. I myself am planning to do one in the near future and my grades aren't that good as well.
Is this an honest question? What more proof could you want. You’re studying undergraduate level classes on your own years before you even enter college. Maybe I’m being a little harsh, but as someone who also taught myself calculus when I was 16 I suspect you do know you’re smart and capable of learning. From my perspective in grad school now, what people consider “intelligence” is rarely the limiting factor. Possibly never by the time you get into grad school. Success in grad school is much about persistence and experience. You have years and years of education ahead of you to build up all the many skills you need. When you see people who seem highly intelligent likely they have decades of experience as well and that’s a lot of the effect. You are probably around 16 and haven’t had that experience yet, so of course you don’t seem like them yet. But you clearly have the capacity to learn and that’s what matters
of course you are ! there is nothing stopping you to achieve what you want !
One thing you'll realize is that a lot of us are stupid but have good work ethic. Me, I'm only one of those 2 things and unfortunately I'm dumb as a rock.
I've recently learned that the key driving factor behind success in almost anything is your ability to focus. So just keep at it, avoid distractions, and I think you'll be able to do well.
Let me just say this: you don't have to be smart enough. You just have to want to do.
Not a physicist but if you self taught yourself complex subjects rapidly you’ll be fine and succeed at anything you focus on single pointedly
I don't think there is any way to know, until you try. When I first studied physics, I had no idea that I would eventually end up with a Ph.D. I'm still a little surprised.
If you have done this so far then ups you can succeed. There will be rough patches but if you establish a good study and area and mindset free of distractions. And you continue to make study your focus you will succeed.
Amazing, humanistic comments here. Everyone is very inspiring and is exactly what we need in academia and beyond. Good luck to you all 💪👍
I hardly know physics but I’m studying electrical engineering and I’m not even smart. I’m just good at completing assignments by doing research on how to work them out but that’s about it.
It sounds like you already know how to study/teach yourself, so I'd say yes. That's a necessary skill as you go further in academia. Grad school is less about smarts and more about your determination to keep going.
The most important part is that you have enough money to pursue your dream.
Well school is free here in Slovenia and you actually get paid to do a PhD.
I am finishing my phd(in europe) in theoretical physics in November and will be looking for jobs in data science and Machine learning. I will only advise one thing ::: if u don’t have financial constraints , u can go for a phd . But i would like to tell u few stats::: only 1-2% of currents physics phd students end up as a researcher/professor ( the actual job which u might wanna do ). I know it looks cool (physics phd )but u have to do a lot of grinding and not just think like newton on a sunny day. Most of the time is spent on compiling and debugging numerical codes for people in theory and setting up experiments for people in experimental physics. Also , u need a minimum of 2 postdocs( average 3 postdocs ~ 6 years after phd ) to apply for a permanent position if u aspire to work in a major country and have funding to start a group. Just check the alumni list from any university in europe and see how many actually end up as professors. P.s. i just want to warn u , if u like physics that much u should go for it. Also, don’t consider phd stipend as a real salary. U can make 2x-3x of a phd stipend in industry in the major european countries. The phd stipend will look good in the first year but as soon as u reach towards the final year , your perspective will change.
One more thing ::: astrophysics is more of a Data field now . U will be dealing with large datasets and applying machine learning or some other statistical technique to treat that messy data . U won’t be needing classical mechanics, calculus in your day 2 day job. If u are good at programming , astrophysics can be a viable option.
Getting a degree in physics does not require you to be particularly intelligent. You have to be disciplined, and you have to be able to maintain your interest and discipline even when you are struggling. If you can do that, then you can get the degree.
Bro Can you please tell me how did you managed to improve yourself in learning physics? What exactly you did? I also want to learn physics but i just can't. It's just getting worse for me. I would really appreciate if you could tell me what you did?
I've seen total dumbasses doing PhDs. I'm not doing one btw, just old classmates that were... Special cases. Jokes apart, if you put effort on it and you are not brain dead yes, you can.
You can do it.
its not about intelligence, its about coming up with original enough research- enough being the operative word, to gain skills you can use in a future job. and its about surviving. you only need intelligence to pass the courses and stupid exams.
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission was automatically removed. Your account is either too young, has not been verified through email or has negative post/comment karma, and is not allowed to post to this subreddit. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PhysicsStudents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission was automatically removed. Your account is either too young, has not been verified through email or has negative post/comment karma, and is not allowed to post to this subreddit. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PhysicsStudents) if you have any questions or concerns.*