Finding the Right Master Program: Advice for a Physics Grad Student

[Aroldo]

I got admitted into three different Master programs in my country, and I would really appreciate if you give me some advises.
I have been working with a really productive professor since the beginning of the second year of my BS. The project we have been working with is to develop spectroscopy instrumentation, which I think is really entrusting.
The second option is to work with data analysis produced on CERN LHCb experiments. I really enjoy programming and I think I would enjoy to work with particle physics.
The third option is to work with light scattering on cold atoms, which I have been studying by myself and it is an amazing field, which I am really passionate with.

They are completely different fields, and I suppose I could do a good job in any of them.
As many physics graduation student, I am really concerned about finding a position after PhD.
All being said. Which one I should consider the must?

 

[BL4CKB0X97]

I cannot say for certain, I have yet to even start a degree. However, CERN seems to be drying up a bit. Although data analysis will always be a good bet.

 

[mfb]

However, CERN seems to be drying up a bit.

Why do you think so?
The LHC will run at least until ~2035. Data analysis will continue until 2040-2045 or longer. After that we'll see what comes next. There are SPS experiments running, and some more are planned. ELENA started recently, the antiproton program is making rapid progress, and so on.

And CERN is just one of many institutes (okay, it is the largest...). SuperKEKB/Belle II are just starting, they will take data for a similar time period, maybe even longer. DUNE is planned/under construction, with an even longer time horizon. Various other particle physics, neutrino or dark matter experiments are running, under construction, or planned. We might get the ILC or a similar project. The Chinese Circular Collider might get funded. And so on.

Which one I should consider the must?

Whatever interests you most. If you do the Master and PhD well, you'll find a job afterwards. It is easier to produce good work if you are interested in the topic.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

I got admitted into three different Master programs in my country, and I would really appreciate if you give me some advises.
I have been working with a really productive professor since the beginning of the second year of my BS. The project we have been working with is to develop spectroscopy instrumentation, which I think is really entrusting.

Instrumentation skills can be more marketable than other skills, depending on the geographic constraints of your eventual job search. Strong instrumentation skills (along with my PhD) got me a lot of jobs and earned me a lot of money.

Another thing to consider is the prospects for co-authorship of multiple papers during your MS degree. Since you are already with a "productive" professor you have less of a learning curve and can more likely publish more papers.

Finally, there is the issue of funding. Are you borrowing money, spending savings, or does one of these programs offer a well-funded MS so that you don't end up accruing debt or paying out of pocket?

 

[mfb]

Another thing to consider is the prospects for co-authorship of multiple papers during your MS degree. Since you are already with a "productive" professor you have less of a learning curve and can more likely publish more papers.

If you go by raw publication and citation count, LHCb will win by a huge margin (for PhD students - not for MSc students). You can easily end your PhD with 100 papers and thousands of citations. Both are meaningless, as the whole collaboration is listed as author for every publication. What actually counts are the publications you contributed to directly.