<p>What are the main differences between an engineering major like MechE and a Physics major?</p>
<p>As it was explained to us...a physics major in an arts and science school is more focused on the theory and research around the issue/problem/principle; whereas, physics in the engineering school would be an application of the same principle. Hope that helps. I'll be curious to read other answers.</p>
<p>Engineering is a trade. Physics is an art.</p>
<p>That said, with engineering you are concerned with real life issues/problems, focusing largely on the practical aspects of math, physics, chem, bio, or whatever else. Physics on the other hand, is much more "noble," because it is truly and wholly an intellectual pursuit... in my opinion, it is something you want to do (as a career) only if you are completely fascinated by it and willing to sacrifice most of your life for it. However, it can also be a good basic degree that involves a lot of math and thinking.</p>
<p>If you find math and physics "beautiful" such that you are inspired and your blood warms at the thought of learning the basic principles of this world through the application of math and logic, and if you find that you are interested in the underlying principles of this world and the fascinating correlation between the governing theories pertaining to nature, then physics may be for you.</p>
<p>However, if you are just "good" at math/physics and don't mind the bland utilization of these vast topics as tools then you are looking at engineering. In my experience engineers tend to be much better at number crunching while physicists/mathematicians are much better at thinking... many don't even care about numbers, they work with symbols. </p>
<p>As far as college curricula are concerned... with engineering you will learn many hard skills, like using CAD tools, or oscilloscopes, or techniques of fabricating/designing a certain piece of hardware/software/structure/robot, and you will learn many specific parts of mathematics, picking and choosing things that are most applicable to real life. You will not, for instance, be concerned with string theory or a lot of things in cosmology. You will also ignore many or all parts of quantum mechanics. Your classes will be much more concerned with design and application.</p>
<p>Physics curricula is concerned about all aspects of physics, broken up into classical and modern, usually. Your courses will be very similar, and they will involve learning increasingly abstract concepts and realizing them through mathematics. Your studies will be geared towards preparing you for grad school, and so you may also get introduced to ongoing research.</p>
<p>Myself, I am a beginning engineering student and most of the above info comes from a lot of research, and the general impression I have been getting... so don't hold me to anything, of course. Personally, I love physics but feel that I just don't have the level of devotion it requires.</p>
<p>Well, engineering's an art, too. (This is particularly true for me at the moment, as I'm taking a break from detailing rebar in concrete beams, for which there is no real cut-and-dried method, and for which it's mostly just left to my judgment. There are some general recommended guidelines, but when I'd pressed for a more specific detailing procedure, my PM basically told me that I'd get a feel for it after a week or so.)</p>
<p>At any rate, I think there are two main differences between engineering and physics. The first difference is that at the end of the day, engineers usually have to make a decision about the best way to do things, <em>the</em> solution, and they have to rely on their judgment to come to that single conclusion and to act upon it. Physicists (and, to a certain extent, academic engineers) can come up with several solutions and present all of them and say "these are the solutions we came up with." Practicing engineers have to choose a particular course of action. Physicists have to evaluate a situation and come up with one or more conclusions. There's a lot less "the-answer-is-4" in physics.</p>
<p>The second main difference is the goal in mind, and this is kind of the part that separates out practicing and academic engineers from physicists. Engineers work with the intention of coming up with a practical application at the end of the day. That's not always the goal in mind for physicists. Physicists can be like, "I'm going to study Bose-Einstein condensates and at the end of the day, I may come up with something cool and applicable." Engineers are more like, "I'm going to figure out how to use dampers to prevent wild oscillations of cables on this cable-stayed bridge."</p>
<p>There are exceptions to these, too... There may be some engineers who pursue tangential studies, and there can be physicists who are working towards a particular ends. Still, I think it more or less holds for the majority of engineering and physics.</p>
<p>PS... I think engineering is absolutely gorgeous. There's no other field in this world where I can take my paper and pencil and bring an architectural wonder into actual, physical existence, and I find that to be immensely beautiful. If that takes persistence and a bit of plodding, then that's okay... because I don't think there's anything else out there that matches being able to look up at a newly-built tower and to know that I made that possible through my writing things down and doing math and making judgment calls. There's something truly spectacular and humbling about that. I walk out of our downtown office at night and look up at all of the towers around and think, "Look what we can <em>do</em>."</p>
<p>Thanks for the replies</p>
<p>I know this thread is old but just incase someone takes a look here is something to think about on the matter of physics vs engineering:</p>
<p>Physicists did NOT get us to the moon,</p>
<p>Engineers did.</p>
<p>Without engineers, physicists would be out of luck with a lot of their theories. Not to disrespect any discipline of the sciences however. Both are good thinkers and appliers, but one is the better thinker and one is the better applier, but we BOTH need each other to succeed with our ideas.</p>
<p>From a double major in physics and mechanical engineering.</p>
<p>Physics is a science. Engineering is, well, engineering.</p>
<p>Science studies the properties of the world and universe. Engineering uses science to make and do useful things.</p>
<p>Curriculum-wise, the first two years of math and physics courses are similar between physics and engineering. But the courses diverge somewhat in the junior and senior years.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Numbers are important in physics too. When you are working with a complicated system with a lot of physics going on, doing estimations and plugging in the numbers can tell you which factors can be ignored and which are more important. Plus usually only the simplest physics problems can be solved analytically (with symbols). Any problem that is more complicated than that you will have to solve numerically.</p>
<p>“Physicists did NOT get us to the moon”</p>
<p>Perhaps - but it it was physicists who first came up with the principles to make it possible to get to the moon.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. Heck, if anything, engineering, at least as it is performed in the real world, is more of an art than physics is.</p>