Not sure if this is a 'real' question, but what is the relation between physics and computer science? A lot of physicists are also computer scientists and vice versa. My professor has a PhD in Physics but is a Computer Science professor. Whats the relation? Why is this so common?
|
|
First off, physics tends to provide a very good background for people who move on to study problems in other areas, which is perhaps why there is a lot of cross-over to computer science. However, there are also a number of areas at the interface of computer science and physics which attract people from both sides:
Of these, perhaps the last one (TCS) seems the most surprising. However, in recent years, there has been significant success in applying ideas from thermodynamics and statistical mechanics to problems in computational complexity. An example of this would be the simulated annealing algorithm which works extremely well for optimization problems, as well as work done on phase transitions in 3SAT. |
|||
|
|
|
A lot of physical modeling can be done in computer programs. Physics is based on creating mathematical pictures of the way the universe works. Physics really builds on the logic that is integral to computer science. I think this blog post sums it up nicely when it says, "Without algorithms there would be no Physics! Physics is built on the fundamental assumption that we can model the world using algorithms. Computer Science is the most fundamental natural science." |
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
A lot of things are common.
|
||||
|
|
|
From my reasoning and knowledge of one CS professor who has a PhD in astronomy:
|
|||||||||||
|
|
I have an M.Sc. in CS and an M.Sc. in Physics (astro), from my experience the intersections usually originate in (at least) two areas. First, in many fields of Physics, experiments and simulation produce large quantity of data, eg. SDSS (dataset is many TBs), Pan-Starrs (will produce TB/day) in astrophysics, large colliders such as LHC in particle physics (producing 1PB/s). When dealing with the storage and processing of such large datasets, physicists get involved with CS and some of us enjoy it. Second, there's a field called "complex systems", such as spin glasses or stock markets, which can be modeled effectively on computers, hence the computer program becomes the experiment itself. Complex systems is an exciting field for physicists because fairly simple systems (eg. a pendelum) can produce very complex behaviour, they are relatively cheap to research (PCs are cheap, software is free), and they can be found in many fields of physics. |
|||
|
|
|
I think the main reason why this is so common is that many people who are of the tenured professor age now (50-60) were in graduate school before most colleges offered a Ph.D. in computer science. So back then, people who were interested in theoretical computer science got their doctorate in Mathematics, and people who were interested in applied computer science got their degrees in a field of the natural sciences. Since physics offers the most readily answerable questions computationally, particularly with the computational power available in the 1950s and 1960s, many applied computer scientists ended up in physics programs. When schools began to offer full bachelor's, master's, and doctoral programs in computer science, these people returned to their first love. (I gathered most of this from talking to a CS professor I had in undergrad who followed exactly the same path you describe.) I'm pretty sure there are a lot more physics Ph.D.s in computer science professorships than vice versa (even though I'm sure there are exceptions, and I'll get several comments pointing this out). I realize there is a lot of overlap between the two fields, but if you want to know the real reason what there are so many professors in CS from physics, this is why. |
|||
|
|
