decision

Hi, sorry for my bad writing (English is not my first language). I am between a situation between choosing two degrees: physics or computer science. I like them both, but I don't know which one is better. Which of the two do you recommend?

This is a question I was deeply troubled by as well. I would say people could be of more help to you if you shared more of your background, but I'll try my best to help you make your decision. A question that often pops up are career prospects. Now, I'm not all too qualified to comment on this matter, you can read the plethora of discussions on the web on career prospects, it's all too mixed. I also don't like this question, university shouldn't be a prerequisite for a non-academical career. This is just opinion, but to me university is simply an opportunity to learn the specifics of a field of your choosing. But before I move on, you might have heard that computer scientists are hot soykaf on the job market, they pretty much are here in my country. This is of course very dependent on your location. Physicists have more opportunities within academia. Basically get a PhD, be a professor and do research. Of course this also exists for computer science students, but in my experience computer science students transition into work instead. Now, assuming you're purely interested from a curiosity point of view, this decision just gets harder. Physics describes the very processes underlying our reality (at least according to realists) and while there is boatloads of concepts to learn for physics, they can all individually be a source of inspiration to further study physics. There is a LOT of associated mathematics knowledge you will have to develop for physics. Computer science as I see it is sort of unique, people are still unsure whether to categorize it as a natural science (weird right?), because computer science is all about the nature of information. Now realistically, you will learn a lot of theoretical concepts that help you understand the landscape of computers today. This will require you to learn a fair deal of mathematics also, but this is slightly different from the mathematics you will focus on for physics. While in physics you will need a lot of calculus, CS (at least at my uni) gets away doing only a basic calculus course. There is a calculus II course offered for students but it is voluntary. In physics you will also have to learn a lot of linear algebra, arguably more than in CS. Other areas of mathematics that are uninteresting to physicists however are considered fundamental for computer science, namely elementary number theory, graph theory and abstract algebra. In my experience at least, no physics courses really teach these. The plot twist is that I took neither of these. There exists a very interesting alternative, one that is highly likely offered at your university also. I recommend you look up computer engineering. It is usually summarized as "the intersection of electrical engineering and computer science", which basically means you deal with hardware and software. Usually, a degree in computer engineering is considered more difficult compared to computer science, because of the interdisciplinarity, but again, dependent on your university. My rationale for recommending computer engineering is as follows: - you're bound to learn some physics, namely the parts electrical engineers learn, but without optics - you don't have as many courses for computer science, but the courses offered only for computer science students at my uni offer supplementary knowledge that you can likely learn on your own anyway, should you develop an interest in them (functional programming, project management, ...) - You're much more low level than typical computer scientists. A field of application for example would be in chip design (depends on your master), computer engineers are often times coupled with physicists to solve problems in computer hardware (like heat dissipation schemes) A nice bonus, computer engineers are supposedly real hot soykaf in industry. Soul crushing jobs but ungodly pay, classically engineering. Think chip design, chip verification, embedded computers and more (FPGAs!). You can get a feel what computer engineering as a degree really is by looking at some curriculums. MIT additionally has heaps of open and easily accessible course-ware. These links may help you: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer-science/ http://www.ee.uh.edu/sites/www.ece/files/files/2016_BSCPE%20Flowchart.pdf (American cookie cutter computer engineering curriculum) Learn computer engineering today lain!

You don't just choose a field. You choose a specialization inside a field. There are both good and bad choices in both. The most important point was already mentioned - figure out if you are ready to leave your country and if not whats available locally. I have a friend who found out too late his perfect degree was worthless locally, don't risk ending like that.

Computer science won't make you cool. Physics won't make you understand the world (not even better than randoms on the street). Keep these two in mind.

>>15772 I realize this is a very tall order, but have you considered a double-major or a major/minor? You'll open some doors if you follow this sort of route (like scientific computing in physics, game physics, and other fun cross-skill areas). Alternatively, depending on how your school structures your degree program, you can likely take physics as a per-requisite for a CS degree. Career-wise, both have great opportunities. Some, however, will possibly require you relocate. Computer Science is great for the possibility of telecommuting, reducing this burden. Also, computer science is somewhat overvalued (which I say as a CS person) and the pay can be much better. Physics pay isn't bad, but its value isn't nearly as inflated. Hope this helps.

I would say physics, falling back to CS from physics is easier.

>>15779 Basically this. I was in a similar situation about a year ago, when I finally decided I had enough of my failed physics degree and switched to computer science. I was allowed to keep all my completed maths courses, as the maths required in computer science is either less or the same, depending on what topics you specialize in. Physical knowledge, especially electrodynamics, also transfers really well for courses on hardware and there are a lot of other little things you touch on in physics that can come in useful in computer science. Signal processing, geometrical modeling and such. It might help to outline why I gave up on physics, mainly the misconceptions I held, to aid you in your decision. 1.) If you only know physics from school it will most likely (depending on your school) be a shock, as you will spend way more time proving equations than using them (this applies to maths as well). It is obviously possible to overcome this, I did so with maths myself, but never could get over physics. 2.) Most of the actual skills you learn in physics are either mathematical in nature or how to conduct an experiment. And with experiment I don't meant the kind that you set up and do once to qualitatively demonstrate a cool quirk of nature, I mean the kind that you repeat possibly hundreds or thousands of times to get data, on which you then spend hours doing statistical work. The results may be worth it, a theory in an empirical science like physics is never complete without experimental proof, but learning that this would probably be my job later on was the breaking point for me personally. 3.) Kind of in the same vein, if you want to actually apply the knowledge you gain in physics, I would suggest taking a look at engineering instead. Until you get to the crazy details of the very big or small in physics, most of the topics should be the same but obviously more focused on making use of them. I'd guess transferring later on should be similarly easy as with computer science. That, by the way, does make use of the mathematical skills more, in a non-proof driven way, due to programming. 4.) Working in (academic) physics almost certainly means working in a team or collaboration. The reason for this is simply that all work that can be done by a single person has already been done (probably). This is somewhat true for computer science too, where it's unlikely you'll do something groundbreaking on your own, but in physics you'll never even get access to the kind of machines or materials you'd need. 5.) This has less to do with physics itself and is more of a general point when it comes to studying. During physics, I never looked for more information outside of my lectures. I was fine(read: overwhelmed) with what my professors taught me and didn't cultivate my curiosity into an actual interest. I'm pretty sure most of these points wouldn't have been so bad, if I was really immersed in the topic and had more drive to actually learn about it. That's what happened to me with computer science, which mainly began as a hobby when I needed something to do to distract me from thinking about how I was failing physics. I guess the most important advice I can give to you is to not be afraid of ever giving up on a field and switching. There is really no way for you to know right now which of the two (or if any of the two) is right for you. The decision you have to take should not be considered final until you can confidently say you can finish what you started. When you notice your first choice was wrong, don't draw it out too much. But obviously don't immediately give up on the first hardship either and jump from field to field, that's the other extreme and also not to recommend. So in short: start with physics, see if you like it, if not switch from there. Good Luck.

Computer science is more applied than physics, so if you're into applied sciences, choose the former. Idk what applied physics is. Mechanical engineering?

>>15790 Don't forget electrical engineering, lots of overlap

>>15790 Entire engineering is just applied physics. Besides this, physics has usage in chemistry, biology, economy, computer science etc.

The 'best one' is the one you enjoy doing the most, and enjoy the people you'll be working with. Using other criteria like pay scale, prestige, etc would be a mistake. Personally, I couldn't take working around programmers, but you may be just the opposite. Choose well and you'll be happier in the long run.

>>18079 Why can't you stand working as a programmer? What specifically do you dislike about it? Asking because I'm also in a situation similar to the one OP is in and I don't know if I should study CS in university

Physics is completely useless unless you are in the top of the class and do a PhD. The internet is full of students that havent graduated yet that are in denial of this. It doesn't matter that physics is involved in many things - studying quantum mechanics isnt going to help you be an engineer or whatever. It is the worst combination of difficult and useless. As much as I hate that university has become all about employment... no matter how much you enjoy studying something, you need to think about career - it's what you'll actually be doing for decades of your life, so it eclipses a few years of study. I studied all 3 of maths, physics and computer science. Graduated years ago. Now I wish I never studied at all and just taught myself tech skills that are actually useful

>>15816 Electrical engineering is pretty fun. Especially RF. Makes you feel like a sorcerer. I'm not gonna lie, I get a perverse satisfaction from being the only guy in my group of friends who can fix the electronic (or even electrical, really) components in people's cars and motorbikes. Lots of people who understand various mechanical concepts to different degrees, including some rather impressive people who do fab work and make things from scratch or do incredible engine modifications. But electrical? Apparently that's my realm :)

>>18099 There was this one graph from my college textbook talking about how engineering as a whole is moving more and more to software rather than general hardware (either electronics or mechanics). pic related, something like this So essentially it turns out that mechanical engineers and electrical engineers that stay in the field have to have really condensed knowledge about vast different fields while programmers can get proficient in language or even framework and get a job in that. Not trying to whine, this puts me in advantage on job market since I am EE but almost all my friends from college that ended having mechanical engineering degree or electrical engineering degree they end up having soykafty tester position for C++ programming in Ericsson. I am simply essentially saying that even though you can say that you can diagnose and fix some circuit, and understand basic circuits that you either know a part of everything and are good at one thing but you're not master at amplifiers, high frequency amplifiers, digital electronics, RF electronics, ... nobody is...

>>18098 A physics degree will help you get a computer interview

Do you care about getting money? Do computer science. Do you care about understanding the universe? Do physics. Do you want to do both? Lmao good luck with that

>>18255 Not when 400 computer science graduates are applying for the sample job

>>18257 hiring managers aren't stupid. They know that 300 of those 400 CS graduates are completely unqualified and cheated their way through their degrees, and they know that if you stuck it out for a physics degree you have the tenacity and smarts to make up for any missing knowledge.

>>15772 Physics for a career path like Joe Armstrong's, or perhaps pure math if you value solving theoretical problems more than practical ones. CS can mean different things depending on country, but usually CS modules are insanely easy compared to math modules.