Theoretical physics (yes) or experimental physics (no)?

Asked by: JoeB315
  • Sheldon or Leonard

    Well... As soon as I saw this question I instantly thought Big Bang theory, now, I like Sheldon, he is an extremely analytical theoretical physicist, he has spent many years on the subject of string theory and hasn't found anything so that makes me wonder if it's worth it, but on the other hand it reaches deeper into the depths of science and the universe. I also like Leonard, he is a experimental physicist, he works with lasers and I'm sure lots of other cool and important stuff, but I would have to side with Sheldon as I think some experimental physics would come into certain fields of theoretical physics, like for example dark matter or maybe cosmology, that's just my opinion

  • Not sure, but I put yes because I had to.

    So I am asking the following in this opinion- Which contributes more to science? Which could I find more success in if I were to pursue it as a career? Which is more difficult? Which one has a better job outlook (US)? Which one is more fun to learn and research about? But mainly, which contributes more to science?

  • Science requires experiments

    Theoretical Physics is just mysticism that uses math. It is silly to call it a science. The scientific method is an empirical process, and without actually testing a hypothesis it is not science. Now, as mysticism goes, theoretical physics is much less inconsistent than other religions, so I give it credit for not being irredeemably silly.

    Experimental physics is actually grounded in reality and a worthy standard of what counts as knowledge.

    That is how engineers get information they can use to make things work.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.