We are star stuff harvesting star light
I think I am approaching one of the most fundamental choices in my life, one that may well determine an awful lot about my future. By the start of next year I am going to have to choose whether to become a biological or a physical scientist.
( Ask the experts )
My decision in favour of physics rests on two main things:
1. You can be a physicist and then decide to research/practise biology afterwards at any level, but you cannot be a biologist with an interest in physics up to any very advanced level unless you are really brilliant. There's a pretty definite one-way path, and if you go towards biology at this stage you do effectively shut yourself out of hard physics. The reverse is not by any means true.
2. Biology involves a stupid amount of memorisation, especially courses like biochemistry. OK, it's interesting, but if you needed to know it wouldn't you just look up the names of the transcription factors etc in a book? I went to the first couple of sets of biochem lectures at the beginning of Mich term and was very put off. (the other bio courses may be better, I'm not sure).
I am 100% convinced that physics was the right decision and I'm really enjoying the course; something I disliked about 1A was that things didn't really link together much but the 1B course is a lot tighter in that respect. And the practicals are massively more fun and doable than last year, and really are usefully related to the theory we do as well.
Those are my thoughts; hope they're useful. Now ask a biologist :o)
Reply
Leave a comment