Is the Twistor World at Oxford a Viable Alternative to DAMTP for Physics PhDs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter h0dgey84bc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Group
AI Thread Summary
The mathematical physics group at Oxford is considered a viable alternative to DAMTP, with some overlap in research areas like string theory and general relativity. Although there is no equivalent to part III, the group accepts students from both physics and mathematics backgrounds, with half of the students reportedly coming from physics. The emphasis on twistor theory may require additional preparation, as many prospective students feel underprepared for the mathematical intensity of the research. Communication with faculty suggests a willingness to provide necessary training before diving into research. Overall, applying to this group is seen as a worthwhile opportunity despite potential challenges.
h0dgey84bc
Messages
159
Reaction score
0
Anyone ever consider the mathematical physics group at Oxford as alternative to DAMTP?
(i.e. the department headed by Penrose in the actual maths building at oxford http://www2.maths.ox.ac.uk/mpg/people.shtml ). There is no equivalent to part III to my knowledge and some of their research seems to overlap with DAMTP (indeed seems so members have later gone on to DAMTP from here); strings, Gen Rel etc with the added benefit of twistor stuff.

I've never seen this group mentioned on these boards. Do physics undergrads go onto PhD's here, or is mathematicians only? The requirements say mathematics or related degree but I take that with a big pinch of salt.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
There's definitely no equivalent to the CASM. I don't think Penrose heads it though as he's emeritus now? I've certainly had a look around the group pages... but then half my degree is in maths, which helps :biggrin:
 
yeah he is emeritus, still seems like a very good group. I've emailed a prof there and explained my background and modules (theoretical physics) and he seems happy for me to apply, and says half students there come from physics backgrounds...So I guess nothing to lose by applying (except £25, darn Oxford). Research does seem wayy more mathematical than a theory degree would prepare for though, so I still have my doubts, although it is ultimatley what I want to get into...wish I had done joint math phys
 
The emphasis seems to be on twistor theory, about which I haven't got the foggiest... maybe having a look at some introductory material on that would be the best way to find out if you're adequately prepared to do a PhD there?
 
Yeah, I mean I read some of Penrose's biggg thick book (Road to Reality) a while ago and got an overview on it, and I am pretty sure I couldn't just start research on it right now. That is the same with string theory though, I've had no formal training on string theory,just the prereqs like basic QFT/gen rel...so I'm going to need some lecture courses/tuition before trying to dive into research on these things either way. I think (I hope) that that is expected, and they will be willing to teach you such things before the research starts in full swing. If not I am screwed :smile:
I think I will just apply and hope for the best, nothing to lose except potential embaressment at interview, ha ha
 
Hodgey, you don't have nothing to lose, besides your sanity.
Good Luck!
 
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Back
Top