Originally Posted by Noodle

Cassidy may rule with a iron fist, but he is a fair prof that won't just fail people on a whim.

That's true. I'll probably regret saying this when I have another class with him next year, but he really is a fair prof. Tough, for sure, but fair. I think the big difference between Cassidy and other profs is that he doesn't baby you in his classes: he doesn't do midterm reviews, he doesn't give you hints as to what material you should know and there are no 'free' marks in the form of easy assignments etc.

I had an optics class with him last semester and at the time I complained about it a lot, and hated studying for midterms, and it was basically one of the hardest classes I've ever taken... but looking back, it was probably one of the most useful too. I can remember a good portion of the material without looking it up/referencing my notes because I had to learn it so well, which is more than I can say for a lot of other classes.

I highly doubt the ENTIRE class fails the capstone course (I feel as though the Eng Phys department wouldn't be very pleased about having a whole year not graduate) but from what I hear its pretty killer. I'd bet that the class average was pretty low. Don't stress too much about it now, you have at least three years to prep for it: by that time you'll be an expert on surviving on little to no sleep, and completing seemingly-impossible assignments in a matter of hours.

Originally Posted by Noodle

Don't worry about it, I've heard that it is really hard but it is not impossible. Apparently the TA for this year was a giant d*ck about format, but the course is passable. Cassidy may rule with a iron fist, but he is a fair prof that won't just fail people on a whim.

At the beginning of the year, they hand out a course outline with a list of requirements for the weekly progress update letters. Basically every item in the list that's missing results in deductions. It's pretty straight forward.

In recent memory, I think the worst year we had for 4A was one where 4 or 5 people failed out of a class of 24 or 26. This year, my understanding was that everyone passed.

Take it from me, the ONLY people who fail the course are the ones who don't start their projects until two or three weeks before the first race. The most important thing you learn from this course is that your plans/designs rarely (if ever) work 'as intended', and that engineering is really something that takes multiple tries and a LOT of testing and refinement.

I'm a prospective student interested in Eng Phys, will i be able to see the faculty at [email protected]? I know at the fall open house it was just general engineering discussions.

Thanks guys for all your responses.
Im having a real hard time deciding between electrical and eng. phys.
I mean, i would love to specialize in nuclear engineering but i've been put off by people constantly telling me how brutal Eng. Phys is. Btw, what's the difference between a Bsc. in Nuclear Engineering and a specialization in Nuclear Engineering?

Originally Posted by jntyrhds

Btw, what's the difference between a Bsc. in Nuclear Engineering and a specialization in Nuclear Engineering?

McMaster doesn't offer a BSc in Nuclear Engineering (afaik), although some places in the US do have a program specifically called that. For a proper comparison you'd have to give examples of the particular program you're interested in.

As a rough generalization you should expect a Nuclear Engineering degree to be more focussed on Nuclear related topics, whereas the Engineering Physics with Nuclear Engineering & Energy Systems Stream is broader in scope with less focus on purely Nuclear technology. Whether this generalization holds true will of course vary program to program.

@adaption: Not sure. Asaik, Mac doesnt offer any Engineering courses during the summer. You might wanna email the department at: [email protected]
Good luck.

@dsahota: I was just a bit confused as to why some Eng Physics students in the nuclear stream write down "Bsc. in Nuclear Engineering" on their resumes.It seems to be a general misconception on campus as well that Mac's nuclear stream within the Eng Phys department is equivalent to a proper Bsc. in Nuclear Engineering. I know that the nuclear stream at Mac is supposed to be quite reputable but upon looking throught the program overview, i really did not see very many courses relating to Nuclear energy. I guess it's just a very,very broad scope on various energy systems. I mean, i dont know what a student would learn then. If you wanted to build windmills or water dams, wouldnt it be more advatageous for a student to study civil or mechanical engineering? Im not poking fun at any Eng Phys. students out there, im just a tad confused about what exactly they teach you in the energy stream.

Possibly some people put Bsc. in Nuclear Engineering on their resumes because they have done a specialization in the nuclear engineering and energy stream. Although from the way I have seen it presented, the engineering physics department seems to offer more of a degree in engineering physics with a general overview of how nuclear and other energy systems work. I imagine (could be wrong) that if you wanted to go into more depth on nuclear reactors and other nuclear systems, you would need to complete some sort of postgraduate degree.


P.S. Sorry about Thursday, everyone was tired or was going home that day. Nobody wanted to go out and party that night .

Do many Engineering Physics students find jobs as Electrical engineers?

Originally Posted by jntyrhds

Do many Engineering Physics students find jobs as Electrical engineers?

Certainly some do, although its more likely they would find a job in the range of electronics engineers / ECE rather than a purely electrical engineer. You should think of your chosen degree as foundation on which you build various experience. The experience you gain will have a far more significant impact on your job prospects than the title of your degree.

As a couple of examples, I did my undergrad in Engineering Physics but worked in embedded algorithms research after my degree (which would be more within the ECE/CS realm typically). I was able to get this job because of my project experience where I did a lot of algorithms research and was able to implement it into a working product. Another friend of mine did his degree in electronics engineering but was the defacto mechanical design / Solidworks guy in all of our projects. Due to that experience, he's now actually a mechanical engineer at a major renewable energy company (with just his electronics degree).

So if you work to build a broad base during your degree, an electrical engineering type job is certainly within the scope of an Engineering Physics graduate. You should recognize, however, that you'll need to spend some time building a solid skill set to supplement what you learn in your courses.

Well, well...so Germany has opted against nuclear reactors and are in the process of decommissioning its current ones' as well as scrapping the new designs.
Malaysia has also backed away from its nuclear prospects as well. This was gonna be big news within the Southeast Asian economy had the plan gone through.
Hope this isn't going to be a continuing trend globally, though it does seem naive to think that the nuclear industry is going to bounce back and that 'Fukushima' is just a phase.
Sadly (but probably rightly so), i do know some friends of mine who have transferred from Eng. Physics (nuclear) to Mechanical this year.

Originally Posted by jntyrhds

Well, well...so Germany has opted against nuclear reactors and are in the process of decommissioning its current ones' as well as scrapping the new designs.
Malaysia has also backed away from its nuclear prospects as well. This was gonna be big news within the Southeast Asian economy had the plan gone through.
Hope this isn't going to be a continuing trend globally, though it does seem naive to think that the nuclear industry is going to bounce back and that 'Fukushima' is just a phase.
Sadly (but probably rightly so), i do know some friends of mine who have transferred from Eng. Physics (nuclear) to Mechanical this year.

People fear what they don't understand. And the Japanese are Morons for putting nuclear reactors near the cost of Japan.

i agree with you but the fact is that public opinion is very easy to dissuade. The problem with nuclear is that it is a dangerous technology and if we dont have a thorough enough understanding of it, it could lead to disastrous consequences. People then have reason to fear if the technology and engineering are still being met with such negative results.
It's sorta like comparing airplane crashes to cars. Sure, airplanes are the safest way to travel but if something small occurs 30,000 feet up there, you're putting hundreds of lives at risk. I feel the same way about reactors, they've performed splendidly for the past 50-60 years but incidents like 3-mile, Chernobyl, and Fukushima have all contributed such a negative impact to the whole industry.

Do what you enjoy and don't let current events dictate your career choice. Everyone went into IT during the internet boom and then the dot.com bubble burst. Whoops! Same things happen all the time in the industry.

All the streams in Eng Phys provide a great job prospects including nuclear. You can also steal jobs from the other faculties because Eng Phys is so formidable. The final year capstone project puts all the other faculties to shame.

I'll repeat: Do what you enjoy.

Originally Posted by funkdmonkey

You can also steal jobs from the other faculties because Eng Phys is so formidable. The final year capstone project puts all the other faculties to shame.

Why is it so formidable ? There aren't a lot of employers who are looking for people with an Engineering Physics degree.