General > General Technical Chat

Why are physicists the electronics experts?

<< < (7/13) > >>

Sal Ammoniac:

--- Quote from: filssavi on August 21, 2020, 12:08:08 pm ---From what I have seen by working with universities around the world that used to be the case (and often still is) is Europe (Italy, Germany, etc.). Here the traditional teaching order is bottom up, starting with lots of math (complex functional analysis, linear algebra etc) physics, electromagnetism in particular, then device physics (pn junctions, BJT’s, MOS) and on from there.

Unfortunately it’s been some time that we are importing the Top down approach from the US (the UK has been the first, however it is not the only one now). This starts from system level and goes down from there, often times completely neglecting physics, math and even how semiconductor devices work. In a “makery “ type of way.
--- End quote ---

I went to university in the US and it was definitely what you describe as "bottom up".

Nominal Animal:

--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on August 21, 2020, 09:13:54 pm ---Whereas there may be some truth to that, you can't generalize. Again, this forum is a counter-example.

--- End quote ---
No facts in my post, just vague guesses as to why one might make the statement OP did in the initial post.


--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on August 21, 2020, 09:13:54 pm ---To elaborate a bit, I think professionals actually attract professionals.
--- End quote ---
Sure, I agree; but I think you're reading something in/from my post that wasn't there (or if it is, it is in error).

I was not talking about hard rules that apply to all sites, as in defining characteristics that are common to all discussion sites.  I was thinking about all the Q&A sites out there, and how the discussions and questions I most commonly see are hobbyist-level and not professional-level stuff.  Because there are lots more hobbyists than professionals out there babbling on the intertubes – and I'm not talking about EEVBlog here, or any specific site, but rather in statistical terms – on a random site, you're much more likely to engage with a hobbyist than a professional.

(So, to repeat, if one asks an electronics related question on some random Q&A site, and if it turns out you are more likely to get a response from a physicist than an EE professional, I think it could be because there are more talkative physicists who do electronics as a hobby than EE professionals on typical sites.  I am not even sure if that actually happens.  On EEVBlog, the situation is completely different.)

If we switch to discussing EEVBlog, then I absolutely love to read about real world experiences and advice.  That level of information and experience is not easy to get access to in general on the intertubes; EEVBlog is definitely unique in that sense.  (And I wouldn't want anyone to think that the net is full of sites like EEVBlog, because it isn't; there are not that many sites where professionals engage so much with hobbyists.)


--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on August 21, 2020, 09:13:54 pm ---
--- Quote from: Nominal Animal on August 21, 2020, 06:56:41 pm ---Like they say: Those that can, do; those that can't, teach.  :P

--- End quote ---
Whereas that's kind of true when people choose a career path, that's not an absolute truth in general.

--- End quote ---
No!  That was a self-referential joke.  As in, I try to teach, even though I'm just an uncle bumblespork.  I've been told it is in my blood.


--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on August 21, 2020, 09:13:54 pm ---So getting back to EEVBlog's forum, your statement is even kind of insulting.

--- End quote ---
Why would you consider it that way?

I've reread my posts in this thread, and can't see a reason why one would think that.  It certainly wasn't my intention.

eti:
Here's my very simplified understanding of this:

All physicists will generally (I should HOPE so, anyway) know electrons, protons, neutrons etc and how they behave, so electronics is just a practical manipulation/physical realm engineering of solutions based around those behaviours.

Not all electronics engineers will, or will need to know the above, depending on their area of focus. They know that electrons flow, in current, and they know that for X potential across Y resistance, Z current will flow, and all the variations of that. If you can solder, measure, test and diagnose, one isn't required to know all the aspects of the molecular realm that a physicist would generally know (at a bare minimum level, I'd think).

What I am trying to say is that, if I seek an expert on soldering, faultfinding, circuit repair and measurement of signals, I'd ask an electronics engineer. However, if I wanted a fine grained explanation of electrons and the molecular level behaviour of that kinda thing, I'd seek a physicist.

You get my drift?

Rick Law:
There are so many branches in Physics and many of them use electronics.  Electronics is a "must learn" if you are a Physics major.

Before I get into it, first some background.  There is Experimental Physics and Theoretical Physics, this is a function focused description.  Then there is the subject field focused description such as Particle Physics, Plasma Physics, Astrophysics, etc., etc.

A.  Why Physicist learns lot of electronics

Experimental Physicist uses a lot electronics and much of it custom designed by the Experimental Physicist themselves.  The equipment's function and manner of operations are designed by Physicist.  The electronics may be designed in collaboration with Electronic Engineers as needed.  As Physicist participate in such activities, they learn more EE stuff because whatever experiment they designed, EE may be the "what" that makes it happens.  After it happens, EE is likely the "what" that takes the measurement.  So they must understand EE to know how far they can push -- you don't want to design an experiment that cannot possibly be done.  Budgetary constrains also pushes more work to be done "in-house."  That is, have a Physics graduate assistant do the work and have him/her get advice from an EE guy.

A good example may be CERN/LHC (Large Hadron Collider).  There you have some of the most advanced electronics used by Physicist - In this case, Experimental Particle Physicist mostly but not all.  All custom designed by Physicist, again, in collaboration with Electronic Engineers as needed.

Another example is Carbon Dioxide, used in lasers.  Experiment Physicist working in that field (and other Physicist using lasers heavily) would know as much about Carbon Dioxide as most Climatologist.  They are the ones who like to argue with Climatologist about Carbon Dioxide's role in warming of the globe[1].  One more example is Computer Science, every Physicist has to use computer in one way or another.  So some Physicist became good computer programmers as the need arises.

B. Why Physicist is more likely to answer questions

Now above perhaps explained why Physicist typically understand some electronics, but that doesn't explain why Physicist tend to answer questions.  My opinion is: May be that is just a (self) selection bias.  Those going into Physics like to understand things instead of just applying things.  And liking to understand would likely lead to liking others to understand it too.  Hence, they are likely to take time to answer questions.  May be...

[c] What is a physicist

As to the question "What is a Physicist?"  From the perspective of someone with a mere master degree in Physics and having done some research as a graduate assistant...  I would say a Physicist is one who works in the field of Physicist.

Many would say a PhD in Physics is necessary to be called a Physicist.  But I think that would be unfair to those who is working in the field doing active research but without a PhD.  It would be rather hard to find work as a Physicist without a PhD, but if that person is good enough for others to pay him/her to do Physics, that person is good enough to be called a Physicist.

Footnote:
[1]  Princeton University Professor of Physics William Happer

At time mark 5:11 is the question posted by the interviewer "...What do you mean CO2 doesn't make much difference [with climate]...".
At time mark 5:20, he answered "...I know a lot about CO2 compare to most Climate Scientist because we make  CO2 lasers.   CO2  is a very interesting molecule..."

FransW:
I would say that there exists a lot of self-induced occupational myopia.
One sees what one wants to see. It often can be compared with the
difference between a pigeons intuition and occupational intuition, based
on knowledge and experience.
Knowledge and/or intuition often is present in a compiled version.
Reconstruction into parts can be quite a task.

I did like the contribution of "Rick Law".
He describes the fields in question in a broader context, without too much
limitations and an open view to whatever can influence any observations and/or
measurements.

Being aware of one's own limitations the question: "what do you not know"
(a silly question if put in this way) can be answered by oneself.
Curiosity is a gift, the brains to use it as well.

The solution for many questions is to reduce complexity.
When someone describes a problem as complex, chances are that the understanding
is still far away. The question that remains is: did you really understand the subject.
Calling it complex is not contributing to a solution.

Frans

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod