The eople who major in Physics are smarter than everybody

Larry Silverstein wrote:

there is a difference between 'intelligent' and 'smart'. I have known a large number of 'intelligent' people that were dumb to the basic functions of the world.

Intelligence and inefficiency are strongly correlated.

+1000

Honestly, organic chemistry is one of the easiest science classes as part of an undergrad curriculum. I would agree that physics is one of the hardest majors, but physicists are basically applied mathematicians. But they are definitely different subjects.

Yet O Chem is considered difficult by many and is one of the most failed classes at my university along with third semester Calculus and Physics. Perhaps you think spatially as well. In any case I wrote supposed for a reason, so don't know what you're disagreeing with...

Well I have taken physics, chemistry, organic chem, and lots of bio classes genetics, molecular biology etc. None of the classes are hard. And of course "smart" is relative. Humans are complex.

I'll say. I don't even know what an 'eople' is.

Speaking as a EE/CS who started out as a physics major, I'll put it this way:

A bumblebee is an airplane designed by a physicist.

The math dude is the guy who said the creation of the physicists can't fly because his equations said so.

Point being that engineers have to deal with the world as it really is--with chaos, harmonic and non-harmonic noise, perturbations of electromagnetic and fluid dynamic types--to actually create something useful, rather than dealing with the simplistic "perfect" reality that they dream up. And I submit that the former requires more, not less, intelligence than the latter.

Do you really believe that Albert Einstein was more intelligent than Alan Turing?

Which reality would you rather give up--the one without knowing of relativity, or the one without computers and everything that follows from Turing?

Just about all the highest paying college majors are in engineering, computer computer science, with occasional mention of biochemistry, accounting or economics. So physicists choose a field with fewer career opportunities, that pays less than almost any form of engineering, because companies know that they don't produce anything useful. But physicists are more intelligent.

Uhh Huh.

I'm not sure whether this thread qualifies as a troll. The OP might certainly belief his statement, but the whole purpose of the thread is to rile people up so they respond. So in that sense it is like a troll.

Responses to this certainly are interesting. Some respond with some statements attempting let readers know they highly intelligent. (I took such and such a course and it was very easy to me)

Others make a case for thier speciality being the smartest.

The OP certainly got the reactions that he was hoping for.

I would say physics and mathematics, yes.

yyy wrote:

Ed Witten arguably one of the best physicists have solved

problems in knot theory that mathematicians couldn't.

He got the Fields medal.

...thereby demonstrating that physics fans are incapable of comprehending the concept of Statistically Significant Sample Size.

PhysicsBuff wrote:

You know it's true.

Possible. Who knows?

The thing that I do know is that I am smarter than you.

Try taking a physical chemistry class. Hardest class of my life- and I found physics, organic chemistry and calculus to be a joke.

Wow. Coach D, you have successfully convinced us that you don't know what a physicist is, does, or what jobs they are capable of. Without Einstein, good luck having modern day computers.

Philosophy wins 2/3 of GRE tests, physics wins the math GRE, over the mathematicians!

On this GMAT from 2009, math is first, followed by physics, engineering, and philosophy.

But physics (614) was ahead of mathematics (around 606) in 2011-2012, philosophy still at around 589.

On the LSAT, among majors with at least 1,000 students taking it, philosophy was #1 or tied with economics, and with fewer than 1,000 students taking it, physics/math were #1 and overall. Interestingly, the difference between the top majors on the LSAT and departments like English was very small, only several points on average (from 157 for the larger participant majors):

That is why philosopher-mathematicians are considered the greatest minds in history.

Guess what my majors were.

jjjjjjjjj wrote:

On this GMAT from 2009 ...

On the LSAT ...

You have sample bias. Among other things, the physics and math grads taking the GMAT and LSAT probably weren't the best scientists in their major.

If you must go by test scores, look at SAT scores for all undergrad students at a school that requires the SAT. I suspect EECS wins by a country mile. (At Berkeley, I know it does.)

Physicists wouldn't last 60 seconds in an aggressive courtroom cross examination.

Oh Yes...Fluctuations, I Forgot