Physics is clearly far better. >.>

Actually, he was trying to say the forums *upgrade* WAS immediately started now. Still doesn't make any sense.

...if you're trying to say my grammar sucks, I get it. It does. Read an essay a just randomly wrote and the grade:
Level 1. Grammar sucks. Reread fifty times to at least a get a two. Maybe a two plus if the idea is better.
So, that always gets me away from the 90%...

Sentynel wrote: Aye, I was looking at one of my friend's STEP papers. They're effing ridiculous. Four As is way easier.
M3's really easy; it's just a small expansion of M2 and a lot of the methods make it easier anyway - being able to deal with energies and stuff.

Yeah, I took S2. Piss easy. Even with the roof leaking on me. >.<

Thanks for the confidence boost. We haven't started M2 yet; but we'll start it in a week or two. As our group size diminishes further...

What's this about the roof leak?

And Mathematics is better than Physics. Partly because any maths that you use in physics is easy, and that Maths research must be far ahead of the Physics that uses it, so that the Physics can proceed. Maths will always be more advanced than the Physics that uses it.


Grammar is easy. It's the essay writing that's dificult.

The exam hall's roof was leaking in the rainstorms. Right by me. >.<

But the whole point of physics is to find out how the universe works, not just to sit around coming up with abstract concepts with no use for them beyond "hey, that's cool." >.> We're very grateful for all you losers mathematicians for giving us all the tools to do the interesting stuff. :D

Oh, what lovely weather.
But you go "hey, that's cool" and then go "wonder what else does that too" Bit like music. You come up with one theme, then see what else along that theme works as well.
Physics may be interesting, but most of what you work with has to be real, and sometimes, the Physicists get things wrong. Maths doesn't need that. 4, 11 or 17 dimensions are fine, if you want them, and once proved, stuff is irrefutable.

Whereas we get to do stuff like, say, work out what was happening 13 billion years ago. :D
It's boring if old stuff's automatically absolutely right and you can't disprove it at all. Besides, we've got as many dimensions as you do. *points at string theory*

Only because you can't work out anything simpler that fits. Besides, it's more interesting to look to the future, than to the past. And, whilst a physicist might spend ages trying to get things to fit, a mathematician can come along and just say: Make that into that, and it's sorted.

That's the great thing about theoretical physics; it takes the freaky math and applies it.

Whereas we can discover more freaky maths for the fun of it, and then let you use it in a century or two.

Random wrote: Only because you can't work out anything simpler that fits. Besides, it's more interesting to look to the future, than to the past. And, whilst a physicist might spend ages trying to get things to fit, a mathematician can come along and just say: Make that into that, and it's sorted.

The universe is complicated. However, we don't give up on working it out and go mess around with imaginary stuff instead. (With the possible exception of certain particularly off the wall varieties of string theory...)

But the ideas of parallel universes comes up. And my view is that if you can think about it, then the concept must exist, even if we can't put it into practice yet. Not our fault physicists take ages working out how to put it into practice; we've done the basics well before you need them.

Parallel universes are probably the explanation of quantum mechanics that makes the most sense, in my opinion...
Exactly. You've done the basics. We do the complicated bits. :D

But you couldn't get started without the groundwork we lay down. And then frequently mess up the maths. And it always takes you ages to realise that there are miles of groundwork you just haven't started using yet, because you haven't a clue how.

Sure, but we're still the ones who do the real work and find out all the interesting stuff and the stuff with real practical applications. :P

I have to agree with Sent, physics is the better one :P

Oddly, my family has a huge history of good physics marks. Yet my sister and I both suck at it. :D
Though it is interesting.

I can tell why you would suck at it.:P

Yes, you find the practical applications, but only using maths that has already been discovered. For example, some of the links between symmetry and number theory, may lie behind sorting out String Theory. We've already done our bit; you're faffing about doing the rest.

The rest, as in applying your random abstract concepts to reality. If it was that easy you lot'd do it.

I'm not saying your stuff is easy, and most people would say that Maths isn't easy either. But we are creative in coming up with the abstract concepts - and they are very much needed. You look at the material in front of you, and see the links to real life, which we're not that interested in.