Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the potential implications of conducting research in fluid mechanics with a geologist, particularly in relation to graduate program admissions in fields such as astrophysics or high-energy physics (HEP). Participants explore the perceived value of interdisciplinary research and the qualifications of the geologist involved.
Discussion Character
- Debate/contested
- Conceptual clarification
Main Points Raised
- Some participants express concern that research with a geologist may be viewed unfavorably by graduate programs in astrophysics or HEP.
- One participant suggests that research with a physicist or engineer specializing in fluid mechanics might enhance a resume more than research with a geologist.
- Another participant notes that the geologist in question has a background in physics and atmospheric science, which may lend credibility to their expertise in fluid mechanics.
- There is skepticism about the geologist's specific involvement in fluid mechanics research and the potential questions that graduate faculty might ask regarding the geologist's qualifications.
- One participant argues that labels are less important than a record of scholarly achievement, indicating that co-authorship on a relevant paper could mitigate concerns about the geologist's background.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants do not reach a consensus on whether research with a geologist is advantageous or disadvantageous for graduate program admissions. There are competing views regarding the value of interdisciplinary research and the qualifications of the geologist involved.
Contextual Notes
Participants express uncertainty about the specific contributions that a geologist might bring to fluid mechanics research and the criteria that graduate admissions committees prioritize beyond academic credentials.