Like some guys already said, you might want to check out doing something like

biophysics or an MD/PhD in biophysics. MD/PhD programs are very competitive to

enter into, but they are pretty flexible, for example I'm pretty much doing a masters
in math, and the PhD in mathematical biophysics (as opposed to a more
biochemistry driven PhD). There are definitely areas of biophysics that are more
intense with physics and require you to earn a PhD awarded by a physics
department ... but I have my doubts that even if you did an MD too, that you'd be
practicing medicine much. I don't have any delusions that I will ever be doing much
practice as a physician, but the standard goal is to try for 80% research 20%
practice ... although with the PhD and the interest in research, most end up being
closer to 95% research or more. Maybe, if you don't mind the loss in potential
income / even small debt, you could pursue a masters in physics before heading to
med school. It would certainly not hurt the strength of your application, and you'd
be able to develop your physics skills more. Keep in mind this route would be more
"personal fulfillment" than practical career path. I have a very avid interest in
theoretical physics, but I'm not sure that anybody could really pursue both medicine
and physics professionally and still have any sort of personal life at all ... or sleep for
that matter. Clinical rotations during your 3rd and 4th year of med school usually
occupy 12-16 hours of your day, which leaves little time for hobbies, and when you
do have free time, most aren't motivated enough to crack open physics textbooks
and work problems ... I prefer to spend my free time with my significant other or
doing something relaxing. Residency only continues these hours ... plus, all this time
you are NOT doing physics, so who knows how sharp you'll be by the time your
schedule improves to the point where you can start to dabble in it again. I grew up
watching Star Trek, Carl Sagan's Cosmos, listening to Feynman's lectures, reading
Stephen Hawking, Brian Green, Michio Kaku, etc... so I've had an interest in physics
since childhood. For quite a while I wanted to be a theoretical physicist. I found that
many mathematically inclined young adults have romanticized dreams of either
working in high-end robotics (who can blame them when they grew up with
Transformers, Robocop, Starwars, Terminator, etc...) or theoretical physics ... mostly
because both fields are super awesome! However, I think this urge passes for a lot
of us, just like when we were young children who ardently proclaimed we wanted to
be astronauts and firemen ... until we realize that you have to run into smoke filled,
burning, structurally unstable buildings for very little pay, or that NASA's budget has
... well no need to get into that ... but it's not like the space program has bottomless
pockets like during the cold war and the skies were the limits. I'm not sure if we can
even call our astronauts astronauts anymore ... cosmonauts is more appropriate
now, right? haha. Most eventually realize that robotics and theoretical physics are
less glamorous than we had envisioned, and pursue other interests. Most engineers
who are in robotics aren't working on the the Rocky IV servant robot, they're
probably working on designing a machine for some major industrial company that
precision welds a sprocket onto a widget, and most theoretical physicists are, in
fact, working on Wall Street instead of doing ground breaking elementary particle
research, writing novels, producing TV specials about the workings of the universe,
serving as consultants to a sci-fy series, or even teaching physics at a college level.
Political commentary aside, I know that it will be unlikely that I ever develop real
skills in physics. I have enough knowledge of mathematics to be able to understand
the basic mechanical workings of E&M, QM, relativity, and yeah, I guess stuff like
field theory, and even string theory / other exotic theories. I'm fine with reading
what others are working on via articles in Science, Scientific American, Popular
Science, etc... and talking it over with buddies of mine on a slightly more academic
level than non-scientists, but that's about it. Hope something I said helps you out a
bit. Good luck getting to where you want to be. And yeah, keep in mind that you'll
have to have a very well rounded biological science education to meet the entry
requirements of medical schools, so that may cut into math/physics stuff depending
on your school/program. Most schools have pretty good pre-med academic
counselors that can guide you and help you fit everything into your degree, so
definitely go see them ASAP.

Reference https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/be-a-doctor-still-do-
physics.591907/

There are lots of ways to combine physics and medicine. There are less ways of
combining astrophysics and medicine. You've already mentioned radiology, but from
the medicine side of things you could look into radiation oncology, nuclear
medicine, or opthamology - all of which have a fair amount of physics involved in
them. Or what about space and aviation medicine? As technology advances there
are likely going to be more specialties that develop that will require a physics
background, particularly if you're interested in the research side of things.
Neuroscience (and thus neurology and psycholgy) for example is an exciting field
right now that has a lot of crossover with physics and other disciplines such as
computer science, mathematics, engineering, as well as the traditional
biochemistry. From the physics side of things you could look into medical physics,
biophysics, biomedical engineering, or back to neuroscience. You could also just
keep physics as a hobby. One of the medical oncologists I work with is a member of
our local astronomy club. Amateur astronomers have made significant contributions
to the field too, so that's always an option, no matter what career fate has in store
for you.

Reference https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/be-a-doctor-still-do-
physics.591907/

Very often, you may have an idea that a career is going to be a certain way, but after taking it up, you may
find it to be completely different from what you expected. At the time that I wanted to be a scientist, I
thought I could pursue my own curiosity. When I went to grad school however, I found that I could not
pursue the problems I was personally interested in. Rather, I had to work on what my prof was interested
in. Also I was constrained by the research interests of the research group I was in. Also, as a grad
student, there is a great pressure to work in so-called 'hot' areas so that it becomes easier to get a job
later on. However, the area which you are interested in may not qualify as a 'hot' area. The same story
continues as a post-doc. Throughout this period, the emphasis is on publishing papers in 'hot' topics so as
to increase your chances of getting a permanent job. If you are lucky enough to get a tenured professor
job, by the time you do this, you are probably already 45. Fine, now you have a permanent appointment
and nobody can fire you. So you can finally work on the areas which you are interested in. But, you've
already spent 15 years of your life working on stuff which didn't interest you. Rather, I would suggest, take
up something which you like doing as your profession, but not something you are overly passionate about
or interested in. In your case, you can continue working as a doctor(as long as you don't hate it), and
work on theoretical physics in your spare time, or on weekends, as a hobby. There is a lot of application of
physics in areas of medicine as well, various things like finding the distribution of weights in various bones
of the human body in case of weightlifters to find out which would be a safe limit or posture, simulating the
flow of blood in the heart, propagation of electrical signals in the nerves, etc.

Reference https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/i-am-a-doctor-can-i-be-a-theoretical-physicist.687841/

I studied engineering & physics in undergrad and almost went for a MD/PhD but decided to go
with straight MD instead. I might be able to give you some perspective on this.

My question for the OP is: how much experience do you really have with physics?

When you're not in the field, its easy to think that it is romantic and that you will be happy. (Just
like many people outside of medicine see it is as exciting and heroic all the time)

Modern physics is also very very different from classical physics and you should at least take an
introductory class in modern or quantum physics before you decide that a physics career is for
you.

Physics is a very very tough field and at least in the US, the job prospect in academics is not very
good. I know of people who have done PhDs who ended up with a job in finance or statistics
because the jobs just are not there. I may be wrong but I'm going to guess that the situation may
be even worse in Egypt.

To become a good researcher and professor in physics, you need to not only be good at math.
You need to be naturally talented in math or you simply will not succeed. You need to ask
yourself if that adjective applies to your math skills.

Becoming a good physician is much much easier than becoming a good physicist. I'd suggest
that you finish your MD and take a few physics classes in your free time. If after you get your
MD, you really still hate medicine and really do love whats going on in physics, then switch.

You're already almost a doctor. It will help you in the future even if you decide to switch to
physics. Don't throw it away.
I used concepts from physics and chemistry quite frequently, especially in physiology.
Cardiovascular = fluid dynamics, pressure, circuits. Pulmonary = pressure, some acid/base.
Renal = lots of acid/base. Neuro = concepts from E&M, such as potential gradients, etc.

You'd be surprised how much easier your life will be when going through some of these topics if
you have a solid understanding of the major concepts from your pre-req physics and chemistry
classes. Do you have to remember every single equation/detail from the pre-reqs? No. The
conceptual understanding is much more important, IMHO.

My suggestion would be to do the research APD suggests, and also start acting
like an engineer. Don't worry at all about what kind of engineer, just start. Some
part of engineering will capture your imagination. Find a bunch of old broken stuf
and take it apart. See what's inside, think about what makes the junk work. It's
fun. Try all diferent kinds of engineering fun projects. Build a model airplane,
build lego structures, build something out of wood, try an electronics kit,
program a computer. Have fun learning to use tools and make things with your
own hands. That's the skill that every kind of engineer needs.

I know lots of really good engineers who did not pick "what kind" until half way
through college. Don't work to hard to narrow down the choices, they are all great
and all fun to do for life.

Dylan - I remember having this same question about batteries. Batteries force
electrons out of the negative terminal, and suck electrons into the positive
terminal. Inside a battery there are actually two separate chemical reactions
going on at the same time. One reaction pushes electrons out and the other
reaction pulls electrons in. The electrons pulled into the positive terminal are
"retired" by that reaction; electrons don't actually travel through the battery and
come out the negative terminal a second time. (Deep inside the battery there is
another chemical pathway we never see wherepositive charged chemical
compounds move between the two reactions. This keeps everything electrically
neutral.)

When you buy a fresh battery it comes loaded up with chemical "fuel" to run the
two reactions for a while. When the fuel runs out, one or both of the reactions
stop and we say the battery is "dead".