>>13605857OP, I posted a comparison between math and physics in a separate thread, but I feel it's applicable to you too:
A lot of the posts here and irl seem to be physics-biased, which makes sense, because it's applied. However, the study of pure math provides a deeper and more substantial understanding of reality than physics.
Philosophy of mathematics is grounded in Plato's theory of the forms. Math and Physics present two distinctively different ways to understand reality, and the distinction is in the different approaches to discerning what reality is in essence by discerning what it is ultimately reducible to.
The physicist will tell you it's matter all the way down, that reality in essence is matter, and that all matter is ultimately reducible to a particle which is indivisible - the materialist approach. Physics will give you technical expertise, but tell you little about what reality is in essence as materialism is an assumption.
The mathematician will generally describe reality in terms of the forms, that reality is ultimately reducible to principles of logic, the idealist approach. Pure math will give you a deep understanding of the nature of reality and technical expertise.
This is in my experience the distinction between the different intellectual fruits of labour for both fields anyhow. I prefer the abstract hence pursuing math while most others I know went for Physics (often with the intention to then branch off into engineering, programming, finance etc). I just want to spend the rest of my life studying logic and getting more of a glimpse at the Forms, but even going into my final year of undergrad I'm not certain how. Academia seems like probably the best route, if anyone can advise I would appreciate it.
