Cambridge Part III Maths/Imperial QFFF

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the comparison between the Cambridge Part III Mathematics course and the Imperial QFFF course, particularly in the context of preparing for a Theoretical Physics PhD in the UK or Europe. Participants explore the implications of course structure, recognition, and research opportunities associated with each program.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express a strong preference for the Cambridge Part III course, citing its prestige and the belief that it is essential for pursuing a PhD at Cambridge.
  • Others question the assertion that Cambridge is the best place for a Theoretical Physics PhD, pointing out that many notable physicists did not study there.
  • Concerns are raised about whether the Part III essay is equivalent to a research project typically required in other master's programs, such as Imperial's QFFF.
  • Some participants argue that the shorter duration of the Cambridge course (nine months) compared to Imperial's (twelve months) raises questions about its adequacy in providing research experience.
  • There is discussion about the recognition of UK master's degrees in Europe, particularly regarding the Bologna Process and ECTS credits, with some suggesting that UK master's degrees may not meet the criteria for PhD applications in countries like Germany and France.
  • One participant speculates that Part III might technically be worth 60 ECTS credits, while other UK master's programs typically offer 90 ECTS credits, which could impact their acceptance for PhD studies abroad.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on which course is superior or whether Cambridge Part III is sufficient preparation for a PhD in Europe. Multiple competing views remain regarding the recognition and equivalency of the courses.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the recognition of UK master's degrees in Europe, particularly in relation to the Bologna Process and ECTS credit requirements. There is also ambiguity regarding the equivalency of the Cambridge Part III essay to a research project.

tarnhelm
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Hi, I've received offers for both of the above courses and I'm trying to weigh up the pros and cons of both, bearing in mind that whatever I choose will be preparation for a Theoretical Physics PhD in the UK or Europe.

I'd just love to spend the year at Cambridge, if only to be able to say I've done it. I also understand that doing this course is the only way I have a shot at doing a PhD at Cambridge, which is the best possible place to do a Theoretical Physics PhD in Europe. But it seems to me that it doesn't really offer the opportunity to do research - only a Part III essay. Since European PhDs, in Germany say, require a lot of research experience at Masters level, will Cambridge Part III be seen as sufficient preparation to apply for a PhD there?

Imperial QFFF on the other hand is specifically designed to be an internationally recognized Masters course with 90 ECTS credits and a long research project. The only negatives that I can see are that it won't get me into a Cambridge PhD, and I don't get the Cambridge experience.

Does anybody have any advice on which would be the better course to choose? You can assume that cost isn't an issue. Is anybody doing one of these this year?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What makes you think Cambridge is the best possible place to do a Theoretical Physics PhD in Europe? Many great physicists (Feynman, Einstein...) didn't study at Cambridge. Why do you think it is the "be all and end all"?

Is the part III essay *really* not the equivalent of an MSc research project? Part III and the MSc are both year long courses at the same level, and I be surprised if part III was held not to be equivalent to an MSc, and just as good a preparation for a PhD in theoretical physics as QFFF (assuming you have taken appropriate courses, and the essay/research project is in the right area...)
 
Because it is the best place in Europe. Einstein went to Zurich ETH, which is admittedly also up there, and Feynman didn't study in Europe. However, when I look at lists of professors at top universities, Imperial included, it's pretty amazing how many of them got their PhDs in Cambridge.

Part III is actually a nine month course, and the essay is written during the year. Imperial is a 12 month course, with the thesis written over three or four months during the summer. I have absolutely no doubt that Cambridge Part III is as good at preparing you for a PhD as Imperial QFFF, but my issue is whether it would be seen as sufficient in Europe outside of the UK, simply because they don't seem to worry much about the Bologna accord!
 
tarnhelm said:
Because it is the best place in Europe.

They would like you to think that :)

But I don't think it holds up.

Many universities are the best at something, and none are best overall.

If, say, your interest is in "graphene" then Manchester University may be the best place in Europe (last I heard...) If "observational X ray astronomy" is your bent, then Leicester University may be the best.

tarnhelm said:
Part III is actually a nine month course, and the essay is written during the year. Imperial is a 12 month course, with the thesis written over three or four months during the summer. I have absolutely no doubt that Cambridge Part III is as good at preparing you for a PhD as Imperial QFFF, but my issue is whether it would be seen as sufficient in Europe outside of the UK, simply because they don't seem to worry much about the Bologna accord!

How can it be as good if it's three months shorter and skips the research project?
 
I was wondering about that myself. Do MSci/MPhys/MMath/MSc/MASt graduates typically go outside of the UK for PhD study?

I reckon that within the UK, there shouldn't be any problems, but France, Germany, and Switzerland seem to be quite strict when it comes to this (Bologna Process). Their master's are 2 years long and amount for 120 ECTS, while UK master's degrees are typically worth 90 ECTS, as the OP mentioned.
 
Mépris said:
I was wondering about that myself. Do MSci/MPhys/MMath/MSc/MASt graduates typically go outside of the UK for PhD study?

I reckon that within the UK, there shouldn't be any problems, but France, Germany, and Switzerland seem to be quite strict when it comes to this (Bologna Process). Their master's are 2 years long and amount for 120 ECTS, while UK master's degrees are typically worth 90 ECTS, as the OP mentioned.

Exactly. I'd imagine, though they don't reveal it anywhere on their website, that Part III is technically 60 ECTS credits. You can get a Physics Masters at ETH Zurich worth 90 ECTS credits. UK Masters courses manage to do this in one year by using a calendar year rather than an academic year. For this reason, I think a UK Masters might technically just meet the criteria for a European PhD, though not Part III. This is just a guess though.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K