Are science jokes fundamentally accurate?

[Moonbear]

For example, I and many people I know would agree that learning theoretical chemistry is easier than learning theoretical physics. What I want to know is do most people feel pure math or theoretical physics is harder to learn? Personally, I feel pure math is harder but I have only done first year level subjects and do not know many people who have done these two disciplines so your input would be appreciated.

The answer is really still the same. It depends. For the person who loves math and will likely become a mathematician, math might be the easiest subject for them; there are rules to follow and definite answers at which they will arrive. But, ask that mathematician to write a poem or learn molecular biology, and they will not be good at that.

hey how bout looking at things this way, what all of them scientist and mathematicians
be eating if there aint no farmers. U all'd starve. How bout a hand for them farmers.Everyones got their thing to do . RESPECT.

:rofl: I just got this picture in my mind of watching mathematicians trying to herd cattle. :rofl: "If we assume all cattle are points with the following Cartesian coordinates on the field..." :tongue2:

 

[chronon]

I think that if you want to be able to bluff your way in subjects other than your own, then its probably best to start off as a mathematical physicist. "Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynman" is full of examples of how Richard Feynman managed to succeed in other fields (and how he was eventually 'found out'). Maybe that was just the way he was, but I don't think that if he had started with a career as a drummer then he would have been able to take up theoretical physics as easily as the other way around.