<p>What I would recommend is to major in one and minor in the other. You shouldn’t have to decide on one or the other until your sophomore year since the courses for each major freshman year are almost the same.</p>
<p>Physics breaks things down farther. If you take a strong look at chemistry (especially pchem), you’ll see models that are based on physics. Biology (simplified) is chemistry, broken down into physics. How you want to approach these subjects and which one’s you prefer is difficult. I enjoy all three, but stuck with physics because I found it to be the most challenging. </p>
<p>It’s difficult to double major, let alone triple major, because of the brutal blocks of lab time. It’s hard to turn in quality work for one lab course, let alone 2 or 3. Additionally, I’d be wary of scheduling conflicts.</p>
<p>Freshman sequence will be some variety of intro courses. Physics is likely to have the highest burn out rate. I’d take the intro physics sequence, and if you’re not sold-- continue with the chem/bio route. A lot of people are weeded out through the intro physics sequence not because it’s brutally hard, but because it requires a different level of dedication. You have to sit and do the problems. </p>
<p>I think a lot of us aren’t used to that. And if you don’t get a problem, you figure it out, and find 3 more like it to work on. There is a lot of personal accountability that occurs in the first year of physics. Not saying it doesn’t also occur in bio and chem, but I wager that it’s worse for physics. My reasoning is that in engineering heavy schools, they make it tough on purpose, as I said, to weed out the weak.</p>
<p>If that doesn’t kill your passion, you’re probably set. Again, the level of “torture” will vary from institution to institution. There’s a lot of factors.
Not all schools weed people out through ridiculous standards. And a lot of the time what’s plastered on the internet as reviews for courses/unis/profs saying “ridiculous amount of work” was just lots of really hard problem sets. If you’re not comfortable with being stumped and working past it, everything in physics will be a ridiculous amount of work.
Cheers</p>
<p>As an important nitpick: chemistry is not a subfield of physics, nor is biology a subfield of chemistry. They are 3 distinct fields with distinct goals, methodologies, and origins.</p>
<p>Sure, there is significant overlap in fields such as physical chemistry. There’s also chemical physics, which does the same thing in reverse. Physics is concerned with the motion of matter, and chemistry with the composition of matter. The two subjects are related, but one is not part of another. Chemistry is as much a subfield of physics as physics is a subfield of mathematics - physicists use math, but math doesn’t contain physics. In general, physics is more mathematically rigorous, chemistry/biology more concerned with practical applications that are “precise enough” to serve a specific purpose.</p>
<p>Triple majoring is hard because you’re learning 3 different fields. Math and physics are possible if there is a ton of overlap (which is likely if your school lets you do that), but they are not similar enough for that. Pick whatever works and has the best career prospects.</p>
<p>“As an important nitpick: chemistry is not a subfield of physics, nor is biology a subfield of chemistry. They are 3 distinct fields with distinct goals, methodologies, and origins.”</p>
<p>Absolutely not what I intended to imply. What I meant is what I thought I stated: As you dig father, you’ll see models that borrow across disciplines. At the most basic, physics is the under working of nature. Break that down further, and there’s math. Of course, there just 3 distinct ways of observing and cataloging natural phenomena. Chemistry and Biology are completely different in their methodology. Just as Physics stands alone. </p>
<p>“chemistry/biology more concerned with practical applications”</p>
<p>I’ll trade you a nit-pick for a nit-pick ;)</p>
<p>I’d say this is only true in undergraduate background work. Experimental physics is VERY concerned with the practical applications. Only really does theory-based work become abstracted from it. </p>
<p>Cheers</p>
<p>What do you mean by “different methodology”?</p>
<p><a href=“https://xkcd.com/435/[/url]”>https://xkcd.com/435/</a></p>
<p>This comic makes me sad. I love chemistry so much, but no matter how I look at it, chemistry always boils down to physics. I can see how physics does NOT boil down to math, though. Physics makes a connection to the real world. You need to observe the universe to study physics. You can’t get physics from just math because math is not concerned with reality, but you CAN get chemistry from just physics (I understand that physics students don’t know what chemistry students know and vice versa, but chemistry is still just a subdivision of physics.). Judging from that, it would make sense to double major in math and physics. I don’t understand why I’m so crazy about chemistry, but I just am.</p>
<p>By the way, thank you all for posting. I really appreciate it.</p>
<p>Don’t fret, you will get more clarity as your Senior year goes on. By the way, it is possible to get a double major (or double degree) in chemistry and physics. I did it many years ago and I have had students at my university do it too. Furthermore, we have a number of physics chemists on our physics faculty. We are all basically materials scientists as far as research goes. An alternative could be a materials science/engineering which combines the two disciplines.</p>
<p>As far as physics and mathematics, they go together pretty well and we have had a number of students get this combination.</p>
<p>However, when I advise undergraduates, i don’t usually recommend getting two degrees unless it can be done in a four year period. It may not be worth the extra expense if a minor is possible instead. A physics degree with a chemistry minor is pretty straightforward, your physics curriculum takes care of quantum mechanics and thermodynamics and statistical mechanics and so if you add two semesters of organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry and analytical chemistry, you pretty much have a broad coverage. A similar thing can be done with a mathematics minor since a lot of upper level physics requires applied mathematics such as matrices and complex analysis.</p>
<p>Triple major offers no advantage, just a boatload of uneeded stress and possibly more debt since it will take longer or require summer classes. Be an ace of one and not a jack of all trades.</p>
<p>Like someone else mentioned, why not just study engineering in the first place. If you focus on a field like chemical engineering, you physics, chemistry, and math all rolled into one, but the big plus is that job markets and salaries for engineers are wayyyyyyyyyyy better than they are for the physical, natural, and mathematical sciences.</p>
<p>BTW, much of chemistry does NOT boil down to physics. You people probably have no experience in the lab at all doing real chemistry. You can solve all of the schrodinger and QM that you want for 100 years, but that isn’t going to help you solve flash chromatography problems to separate diastereomers or help you figure out the right solvent systems to perform recrystallization. So much of chemistry simply requires experience and finesse that it boils down almost to an art. You simply can’t learn chemistry by solving equations and doing problems, it’s a laboratory science.</p>
<p>While labs are fun, I enjoy learning about theories more. My favorite part of any science class is learning new topics. I REALLY love chemistry so far, but does it get more experimental as you take higher-level classes? If so, I guess I should go with physics and/or math. </p>
<p>I don’t want to do engineering because I’m more interested in pure science than applied science.</p>
<p>By the way, I’m sorry for my ignorance and, once again, thank you all for posting.</p>
<p>Yes, chemistry is largely an experimental science. There is certainly a lot of theory to it, but not in the same way as physics. It’s also worth noting that many of the fundamental theories of modern chemistry have, in fact been discovered by physicists. </p>
<p>Wolfgang Pauli(Pauli Exclusion Principle) was a physicist, Niels Bohr(Bohr structure of the atom) was a physicist, as were many other founders of modern chemistry theories. Physical chemistry, or chemical physics are two fields that might be worth considering. Despite the similar names, they’re actually quite different. Physical chemistry is basically the study of larger scale amounts of chemical compounds on the macroscopic level, from the standpoint of physics. Chemical physics is the microscopic study of the physical properties of chemical reactions. There is obviously much more to it than that though.</p>
<p>“Yes, chemistry is largely an experimental science.”</p>
<p>It is? <em>Sigh</em> I loved AP Chemistry because I liked learning about the topics; they’re my favorite part of chemistry. When chemistry classes get more experimental, I think I’ll start to lose interest. I hate to say this, but I guess I can forget about considering chemistry as a major. :(</p>
<p>Upper level chemistry classes almost always have laboratories. As I said, there is certainly a big theoretical aspect to chemistry as well, but a lot of that theory is, in essence, physics. Even most of the great chemists will concede to that fact. It’s a broad statement, but a lot of chemistry is essentially applied physics. </p>
<p>What parts of chemical theory did you like so much? If you’re referring to things like that nature of atoms, electron orbitals, and atomic interaction and such, you will still learn a lot about those kinds of things in physics. In physics though, you don’t just learn how they interact, but why they interact in the ways that they do. There’s a good reason that chemistry majors typically have to take some kind of quantum mechanics courses. The behavior of atoms really does come down to quantum physics, when you get into the real nature of things like orbital jumping and covalent bonding and such.</p>
<p>I think you’ll really like physics.</p>
<p>I loved EVERY topic we learned, but I guess my favorite topics were molecular geometry, electron configuration, and orbital hybridization.</p>
<p>Judging from what you just said about learning not just HOW molecules, atoms, etc. interact, but also WHY, I think I’ll like physics too. :)</p>
<p>I think you should not worry about major now. You still need to take at least 2 math classes, 2 physics classes, 1 or 2 chemistry classes during your freshman or sophomore year if you want to double major in one of the 3 fields you mention. Right now focus on math, the king of all sciences. It will help you a lot in other majors. If you have not taken physics and biology in HS then take at least one class in each area if you want to apply to competitive colleges.</p>
<p>I’m taking Multivariable Calculus and Linear Algebra over the summer right now through the Harvard Secondary School Program. So far, it’s a bit difficult, but fascinating. I guess I’m fine right now, but I’m a little afraid that I won’t be able to handle math as it gets more advanced. I don’t know whether math in college really is difficult or if it just seems that way because my courses are fast-paced since I have only 7 weeks (including finals week) to learn them.</p>
<p>Every subject is difficult in college, especially in selective colleges. But you will get through if you have passion and work hard.</p>
<p>College math is certainly difficult. But, math in summer is particularly difficult. It runs at double speed, so professors don’t get to spend very much time going over a given topic. In many classes, it basically comes down to having a test every single week.</p>
<p>What comes after Multivariable Calculus and Linear Algebra?</p>
<p>I think I’m fine now, but how scary does math get?</p>
<p>I’m not a math major, but from what I’ve heard, upper division math courses are very different than the lower division ones (Calculus, Linear Algebra, and Differential Equations). I can’t speak from personal experience, but the general opinion I hear is that they get more abstract, theoretical, and proof-based. Since you seem to be ahead in math, you might be able to take some higher level math courses in college and decide if that type of thinking still suits your fancy.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>At the sophomore level, differential equations is also a typical course.</p>
<p>Typically, junior level math courses include proof-oriented courses like real analysis (prove calculus), abstract algebra, proof-oriented linear algebra, complex analysis, geometry and topology, and mathematical logic. At some schools, there is a sophomore level course intended to give practice in mathematical proofs to prepare for these courses.</p>