Physicists are born, not made?

[KayyyCee]

Physicists are born, not made
I would like to know your opinion on this statement smile

[Vannak]

I don't know if that statement is more true for physics than other fields, but I knew I was going to do physics since before I was a teenager. But then again I am also the son of a mathematician and a computer scientist, so its not hard to see how I may have been trained by them in this direction, generally.

[Lilith Maura]

I am struggling with this very question myself right now. I have no natural math talent, and I have no history of scientists or mathematicians in my family; I was born to an NCO in the military and a stay at home mother, and I was the first person on my dads side to attend college. That being said, ever since I was just 4, I dreamed of being an astrophysicist. I knew then that I was going to get my PhD while I was in the 2nd grade, though at that time I had no comprehension of just how hard that would be. However, despite my keen analytical skills and curiosity, my poor math skills gradually pushed me away. In fact, just last year I was studying fine art in college, just to avoid mathematics.

It didn't help though, and I was very depressed. A part of me kept saying "stop this foolishness, and study astrophysics!" So last semester I switched, from art to physics. This is the hardest thing I have ever done. Right now I'm neck deep in calculus and barely able to swim, and its only going to get worse. However, I will try, and with some work, and help from those willing to give it, I just might succeed.

I don't know if astrophysicists, or artists, or pilots, or anyone else for that matter is born. Certainly there is genius out there, those who just get it right away and can apply it further (and I am not one of them). But, if you love something, its worth a shot.

[Princess Amelei]

Well, I think it does have to do with genetically based intelligence in combination with a healthy period of childhood development where children are encouraged to explore, grow, and shape their minds (literally). After that, it turns into an issue of personal work ethic. So no, it must be both.

[IronySandwich]

Like with pretty much everything, the aptitude you are born with and your environment both matter. Physicists are no more "born" than are athletes, a person "born" with good traits to be an athlete who sits in a chair and eats junk food all day will never run a 5 minute mile, a person with only mediocre to moderate aptitude who works hard can still excel, though it will take more time and work than with a prodigy.

As far as intellectual achievement goes though, I think it's generally accepted that the most important factor is education and encouragement during childhood.

[Fermionic]

There's nothing so special about physicists.

[logan the god of candy]

It seems a figurative or philosophical expression.

While a musician can be made through lessons, one must be born the artist. Physics is more a passion that one seems born with than a logical conclusion via free market or simple way to earn one's living. Hence the physicist is born.

[Hamelia]

I don't think there's anymore truth to that statement than "mathematicians are born, not made" or "biologists are born, not made", or "cooks are born, not made."

There are a lot of physicists in the world. Not every one of them is a headlining name - most of them aren't. Most who do research advance the field in minor ways. Physics, as with any science, requires a level of dedication and passion that anyone can choose to have, but not everyone does. I know that the amount of biology and mathematics that I've learned would simply not be possible if I didn't dedicate myself to it - much of what I know has not come from college classes, but from independent study.

[The Cat Band Fairy]

I think that's true for most subjects requiring deep maths, simply because it requires raw logic, which is very hard to improve with practice. I personally am not a very logical thinker, which is why I pull 100% in biology and chemistry, and barely scrape 50% in most maths papers, not matter how much I study.
I think the problem is, many people beat themselves up over it, as if the fact they can't do maths makes them less intelligent, which isn't the case at all. Maths is a man-made system, just because you can't get your head around something other humans have created doesn't make you less intelligent, if anything, you're better off because you'll be more creative and have a wider range of options in terms of creating new things. If you enter a maths based career, you're pretty much set to expand on principles and rules other people have set, which is fine if you think like everybody else.
However, if like me, you just think differently to everyone else, you'll tend to be much better at creating an entirely original concept, which is very good biological and chemical models, although, granted that this does require some logical thinking as well, but it's not nearly as strenuous as that required by physics and maths.
If you're not naturally good at maths, you can still learn it, it will just take much longer, and you'll more than likely require a teacher, instead of being able to just learn out of books like the other sciences. It would take much longer, but you could still have the potential to enter the field and come up with new ideas.

[Rationing]

KarinDesu16

Physicists are born, not made
I would like to know your opinion on this statement smile

definitely not, even einstein said it was mostly work that got results in that field

"natural" physicists like Lasker wasted a lot of their talent on other things like chess

[Villain Vanilla]

I think there are certain personality traits that make it more natural. Kind of like a painter, you can train to be one but it is more of an instinct than anything.

[banio]

Disagree. There are people whose natural interests and aptitudes make them well suited for a career. However, if a field were populated by only one or a few kinds of minds, it would suffer-- especially a field like physics. As long as a person is able to develop proficiency in relevant subjects, they can push their skills to create the basis for a career. No good being uninspired, but being well suited for something doesn't translate to being passionate, either.

Having to work hard to be good at something doesn't by necessity mean that your maximum achievement in that subject will be less than somebody it came easily to.

[Hamelia]

The Cat Band Fairy

I think that's true for most subjects requiring deep maths, simply because it requires raw logic, which is very hard to improve with practice. I personally am not a very logical thinker, which is why I pull 100% in biology and chemistry, and barely scrape 50% in most maths papers, not matter how much I study.
I think the problem is, many people beat themselves up over it, as if the fact they can't do maths makes them less intelligent, which isn't the case at all. Maths is a man-made system, just because you can't get your head around something other humans have created doesn't make you less intelligent, if anything, you're better off because you'll be more creative and have a wider range of options in terms of creating new things. If you enter a maths based career, you're pretty much set to expand on principles and rules other people have set, which is fine if you think like everybody else.
However, if like me, you just think differently to everyone else, you'll tend to be much better at creating an entirely original concept, which is very good biological and chemical models, although, granted that this does require some logical thinking as well, but it's not nearly as strenuous as that required by physics and maths.
If you're not naturally good at maths, you can still learn it, it will just take much longer, and you'll more than likely require a teacher, instead of being able to just learn out of books like the other sciences. It would take much longer, but you could still have the potential to enter the field and come up with new ideas.

What makes you think that thinking mathematically is a skill that can't be improved with practice, or is very hard to? I got C's in mathematics in high school, and now I'm minoring in it. It takes practice, just like everything else.


Honestly, I think a lot of people confuse natural aptitude, or lack thereof, with poor education. We teach mathematics poorly in public schools, and that gimps the ability of students to pursue it later on. The sciences, which usually come much later in a person's school life, are a lot easier to pick up on because they are taught later on, and students aren't gimped in them from the get go. It's largely the same with arts and humanities - for various reasons, the way they're taught aren't nearly as bad as the way mathematics and mathematics heavy disciples are taught in public school.

Everyone is capable of being good at mathematics. Everyone. The only way you aren't capable of it is if you have some specific problem with your mental faculties. It's a matter of learning it the right way, just like with everything else, and putting in the right amount of work. Even creativity, the kind that produces good art, can be learned and taught with practice. I don't think there's any substance to the notion that certain people have to be good at certain things.

[Avgvsto]