Admissions PhD Programs for Mathematical Physics (Experimental Condensed Matter Physics)

[jtbell]

For most of the top schools, you can't apply for a terminal master's. The only way you get a terminal master's from those schools is to (a) apply for and be accepted into a PhD program, (b) complete the requirements for a master's, and (c) not complete the requirements for a PhD.

I find it hard to believe that a school would refuse to award you a master's after you've completed the requirements for one, simply because you're (still) in a PhD program. Although I suppose anything is possible at some school or other.

While I was in the physics PhD program at Michigan many years ago, I simply filed for a master's degree, in the physics department office, after I had completed the required number of courses. I figured I might as well pick up that sheepskin just in case. At least one of my grad-student friends never bothered with this, and ended up with just a PhD. Of course, if he had decided to "bail out" of the PhD, like some of our other grad-student friends did, he could have picked up the master's at that point.

I even went to the degree ceremony for my master's, which was combined with the undergraduates in May. It was the only time I've ever been in Michigan's basketball arena.

 

[CrysPhys]

I find it hard to believe that a school would refuse to award you a master's after you've completed the requirements for one, simply because you're (still) in a PhD program. Although I suppose anything is possible at some school or other.

While I was in the physics PhD program at Michigan many years ago, I simply filed for a master's degree, in the physics department office, after I had completed the required number of courses. I figured I might as well pick up that sheepskin just in case. At least one of my grad-student friends never bothered with this, and ended up with just a PhD. Of course, if he had decided to "bail out" of the PhD, like some of our other grad-student friends did, he could have picked up the master's at that point.

I even went to the degree ceremony for my master's, which was combined with the undergraduates in May. It was the only time I've ever been in Michigan's basketball arena.

But I never said that you can't get a master's on route to getting a PhD. I wrote above:

"For most of the top schools, you can't apply for a terminal master's. The only way you get a terminal master's from those schools is to (a) apply for and be accepted into a PhD program, (b) complete the requirements for a master's, and (c) not complete the requirements for a PhD." <<Emphasis added.>>

A terminal master's refers to the final degree that you receive in the particular program that you apply to.

At some schools and in some majors, you can apply specifically for a master's program only. If you complete that program, the master's is a terminal master's, as far as that program is concerned. You of course can later apply for a separate PhD program, perhaps at the same school (if offered), or at another.

But at some schools and in some majors (physics being a common one), you cannot apply specifically for a master's program only. The only graduate program is a PhD program.

If (a) you apply for and are accepted to a PhD program, (b) complete the requirements for a master's on route, (c) are automatically issued a master's degree or request to be issued a master's degree, and (d) subsequently complete the PhD program and are issued a PhD degree, then the master's is not a terminal master's, because the final degree you received in that program is a PhD.

It is a terminal master's though, if you fulfill (a), (b) , and (c), but not (d). This is what I've referred to previously as a master's granted as a consolation prize (for having attempted, but not completed, a PhD program), and hence having diluted or dubious value (like some elementary schools in which students get an "A for effort" even if they failed miserably in exams, or everyone competing in a sporting event gets a "participation trophy" even if they finish dead last).

 

[advhaver]

My advice hasn't changed - you need to go through the list of people with whom you might want to work and see if they still active. Yes, that's a lot of work. But it is your future.

I have and am in the process of writing to professors at U Penn and Cornell (1 professor at each).

I was wondering if there are any other universities I might have missed or universities in my short list that I should replace with others from my long list.

 

[Vanadium 50]

am in the process of writing to professor

Be careful.

Dear Prof X:

I am wondering if you're still active. I mean you're pretty old and all. I suppose I could check out recent journal articles, but that's such a bother. It's easier to let you do the work for me. I very much want to become a research physicist. but reading journal articles = or even titles - is a step too far, I'm afraid. I'm on a deadline here, so you better get hopping! Chop chop!

 

[advhaver]

Be careful.

Dear Prof X:

I am wondering if you're still active. I mean you're pretty old and all. I suppose I could check out recent journal articles, but that's such a bother. It's easier to let you do the work for me. I very much want to become a research physicist. but reading journal articles = or even titles - is a step too far, I'm afraid. I'm on a deadline here, so you better get hopping! Chop chop!

The professors in who labs I am working in are guiding me with these two universities since they did their PhDs at these universities. I hope (and pray) that they write me good LORs and/or recommend me to the professors at Cornell/U Penn, but I am not relying on this degree of assistance, nor will I ask for it directly - it's not who I am.

The other universities on my list are Chicago, Yale, Northwestern, UCLA, U MD College Park, UT Austin, UC San Diego, University of Minnesota Twin Cities, and Rutgers. How does this list look? Too many dream options? Thanks.

 

[gwnorth]

Most programs in the US permit the student to exit the PhD with a Master's in Physics after completing the exams. Given the investment made by the university, I expect there to be riders, and this is only offered as an exception, but there is the option of an exit if you can justify it.

I'm talking about a standalone research master's, not a master's on the way to a PhD. A master's on the way to a PhD suffers from the same problem of needing to apply to a specific sub-discipline whereas many standalone research master's offer a more generalized program where there is still time for some exploration before needing to commit to a specific sub-discipline.

 

[gwnorth]

But at some schools and in some majors (physics being a common one), you cannot apply specifically for a master's program only. The only graduate program is a PhD program.

In the US.

The vast majority of countries outside of the US require a master's prior to applying to PhD programs and as a result offer research master's degrees. Now if the OP isn't willing to consider programs outside of the US, then that's a different story.

 

[gwnorth]

The other universities on my list are Chicago, Yale, Northwestern, UCLA, U MD College Park, UT Austin, UC San Diego, University of Minnesota Twin Cities, and Rutgers. How does this list look? Too many dream options? Thanks.

Well those are all still top ranked Physics programs (except for maybe Rutgers) so

 

[CrysPhys]

In the US.

The vast majority of countries outside of the US require a master's prior to applying to PhD programs and as a result offer research master's degrees. Now if the OP isn't willing to consider programs outside of the US, then that's a different story.

Yes. But my post that you cited was specifically in the context of the US system. If you backtrace far enough, my starting point was in response to Post #40 by adhaver:

" Most programs in the US permit the student to exit the PhD with a Master's in Physics after completing the exams. Given the investment made by the university, I expect there to be riders, and this is only offered as an exception, but there is the option of an exit if you can justify it."My post that you cited also had this passage (immediately preceding the specific passage you cited):

"At some schools and in some majors, you can apply specifically for a master's program only. If you complete that program, the master's is a terminal master's, as far as that program is concerned. You of course can later apply for a separate PhD program, perhaps at the same school (if offered), or at another."

E.g., even in the US, terminal master's in many engineering fields are common.

[Sorry, I can't seem to use the "Add Quote" feature once I hit "Reply".]

 

[advhaver]

Well those are all still top ranked Physics programs (except for maybe Rutgers) so

All the programs I seem to find are "competitive". I eliminated the obvious ones like MIT, UC Berkeley, Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, Caltech, Columbia, UC SB, Rice, U Mich Ann Arbor, JHU and U Colorado Boulder.

I kept 3 top colleges in Chicago, Yale, and Northwestern on the list just to include some dream options and was hoping that the University of Minnesota Twin Cities and Rutgers would be "safety" options.

If UCLA, U MD College Park, UT Austin, and UC San Diego are also too competitive for my profile, should I replace any including Chicago, Yale, Northwestern, UCLA, U MD College Park, UT Austin, or UC San Diego with either Penn State, UIUC, or Ohio OSU?

I am hoping to have a more balanced list and I suspect from the discussion here that my list is too "Dream Heavy". Suggestions are welcome. Thanks.

 

[CrysPhys]

Well those are all still top ranked Physics programs (except for maybe Rutgers) so

Well, if you give credence to US News & World Report (which I don't), here's their 2023 listing of the top US grad physics programs for condensed matter (no further partitioning for experimental though): https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-science-schools/condensed-matter-rankings.

Rutgers squeaks in at #24 at the bottom of their list; whereas, Northwestern and University of Minnesota Twin Cities didn't make their list at all.

 

[Vanadium 50]

All the programs I seem to find are "competitive".

Every PhD program in the US is competitive. All of them.

 

[gwnorth]

All the programs I seem to find are "competitive".

PhD admissions are competitive for everyone irrespective of program ranking.

I was hoping that the University of Minnesota Twin Cities and Rutgers would be "safety" options.

There's no such thing as a "safety" when it comes to PhD admissions, just more likely and less likely. Minnesota and Rutgers would probably be less "reachy" than others.

I am hoping to have a more balanced list and I suspect from the discussion here that my list is too "Dream Heavy". Suggestions are welcome. Thanks.

The best sugggestion was already provided to you. Your best bet for a PhD admission is to find programs where you would be a strong research fit and that means finding potential advisors whose research matches your goals.

 

[advhaver]

Well, if you give credence to US News & World Report (which I don't)

I don't, either. I have talked to at least four professors at my college and one outside, all of whom also echo this. US News Rankings have little to do with the quality of the education they offer. 40% of the ranking is based on something they define as "academic reputation". How they derive this parameter is opaque at best. Fortunately, my parents haven't pressured me to choose a "highly ranked" program, so I could consider myself lucky.

 

[advhaver]

There's no such thing as a "safety" when it comes to PhD admissions, just more likely and less likely. Minnesota and Rutgers would probably be less "reachy" than others.

Fair enough. There are 200+ PhD programs in Experimental Condensed Matter in the US, including Georgia Tech, Penn State, U Wisconsin Madison, Ohio State University, Iowa State, Purdue, Washington - Seattle, North Carolina (Raleigh),... It will be very difficult to research each of them; hence I was wondering if I could get pointers as to which ones might be less "reachy".

 

[Vanadium 50]

It will be very difficult to research each of them

Which is about 0.01% of the work needed to do the research for your PhD dissertation. If this is too much, getting a PhD will be orders of magnitude worse. Maybe rethinking your goals is in order.

Otherwise, your best shot is to do that work, rather than to try and convince us to do the work for you.

 

[gwnorth]

Fair enough. There are 200+ PhD programs in Experimental Condensed Matter in the US, including Georgia Tech, Penn State, U Wisconsin Madison, Ohio State University, Iowa State, Purdue, Washington - Seattle, North Carolina (Raleigh),... It will be very difficult to research each of them; hence I was wondering if I could get pointers as to which ones might be less "reachy".

The ones at which you are a strong research fit. Admissions is holistic. They are going to look at your entire profile including your research experience and goals. It is entirely possible for an applicant with a stellar profile to be denied admission to a "low ranked" program because they are not a good research fit. It's equally possible for an applicant with a less stellar profile to be accepted for admission to a "high ranked" program because they are. You need to find programs where you're a good fit, and that goes beyond program rankings.

 

[WWGD]

The question is not about passion -- I am of course operating under the assumption that the student applying for a PhD program has passion for physics in general. So according to you, @marcusl and @Vanadium 50 , every student who has finished their bachelor's degree in physics knew exactly what precise area of physics they wanted to research after finishing one introductory course (keep in mind that all undergraduate physics courses are ultimately introductory courses), and after attending a few seminars in such a field.

But the physics field is vast -- so vast that it boggles my mind that any student (apart from a very few) would have the knowledge after completing a bachelor's degree to know the exact area they want to research in.

Let me give myself as an example. I was studying mathematics at the university. Even by the time I finished my third year of my undergraduate degree (and when I started to think about whether to apply to graduate school or not), I had no idea of the vastly different areas of research within math. After taking a full course in mathematical statistics, I became interested in wanting to study statistics in more detail and decided to essentially double major in math and statistics, and applied for a masters. But I did not have any illusion of what precise area of statistics I wanted to pursue research in until after I was accepted and enrolled in a Masters program.

Not every undergraduate, but rather those with piqued interest in going further into research. You would expected them to take the initiative to go that extra mile or two.

 

[advhaver]

The ones at which you are a strong research fit.

Thanks, this is an excellent idea. Muchas Gracias!

 

[berkeman]

Thanks, this is an excellent idea. Mucho Muchas Gracias!

LOL. Fixed that for you.

 

[WWGD]

Not every undergraduate, but rather those with piqued interest in going further into research. You would expected them to take the initiative to go that extra mile or two.

Sorry if this was too harsh, but I think I'm making a valid point. I recommend a bookin the topic that was helpful to me : " Getting what you came for".

 

[CrysPhys]

Not every undergraduate, but rather those with piqued interest in going further into research. You would expected them to take the initiative to go that extra mile or two.

Not too harsh at all. This is precisely the point that I and others have been arguing. A PhD program is not the right choice for every undergrad. In particular, it would be a mistake for an undergrad who does the minimum or just a bit above the minimum for their undergrad program. It works best if an undergrad decides, "This is my future goal, and a PhD program is the way to achieve it," rather than, "I'll enroll in a PhD program, and hope it has value."

 

[CrysPhys]

I recommend a bookin the topic that was helpful to me : " Getting what you came for".

Could you clarify what you mean here? I haven't a clue.

 

[WWGD]

Could you clarify what you mean here? I haven't a clue.

Sure, it was a recommendation for a book that outlines the process of getting a Masters or PhD, for the OP. Hopefully it will shed some light on how the process works and what's expected of them. :

 

[CrysPhys]

Thanks. All clear now.

 

[jbergman]

HI,

I am an International Student studying in the US (at a "liberal arts" small college ranked in the Top 20 as per US News Rankings). I will graduate in 2024 and intend to apply for PhD programs in Mathematical Physics starting October 2023 for admission in 2024.

GPA: I am a double major in Physics (3.9 GPA) and Mathematics (3.8 GPA), with an overall GPA of 3.85.

Research: As an international, I was not qualified for any REU. However, I have worked part-time as a research assistant with a college professor during the school year (May 2022 to now), including working full-time during the two summers (2022 and 2023). The 2021 summer was a washout due to Covid restrictions.

Recommendation Letters: I have three recommendation letters from Physics professors, including one for whom I have worked as a research assistant. I can also muster a 4th recommendation letter from a Maths professor who will be my senior thesis advisor in Maths.

GRE: I have not done any GREs. Should I focus on the subject GREs (Maths and Physics) as I will not have time to do all 3 (General, Physics and Maths)? At first glance, the requirements of most universities state that GRE is optional.

I found finding universities focusing on Mathematical Physics tough, so I tried to find professors who spend time in this area. I have managed to identify a few professors, generated a list of universities, and have no idea how to shortlist them. I haven't written to any of these professors, so I won't name them below (where two departments are listed, the same professor works in both).

1. Princeton (Mathematical Physics)
2. Chicago (Physics)
3. U Penn (Physics)
4. Duke (Physics)
5. Brown (Physics)
6. MIT (Physics and Applied Maths)
7. Columbia (APAM and Physics)
8. Harvard (Physics)
9. Stanford (Physics and SITP)
10. Cornell (Physics and Applied Maths)
11. Yale (Physics and Maths)
12. Northwestern (Maths)
13. Northwestern (ESAM and Physics)
14. Dartmouth (Physics)
15. UIUC (Physics)
16. U.C.LA (Physics)
17. Georgia Tech (Maths)
18. Georgia Tech (Physics)
19. University of Maryland - College Park (Physics)
20. University of Colorado - Boulder (Physics)

I haven't had time to research Johns Hopkins, U. Mich (Ann Arbor), Carnegie Mellon, Washington St. Louis, U.N.C Chapel Hill, U. Wisconsin (Madison), Penn State, Arizona State, Purdue, U.C Santa Barbara, U. Minn Twin Cities, N.C. State Uni, and U of Colorado Boulder.

Are there other universities I should be considering?

It has been exhausting, and I felt my list was very "dream heavy". That's partly because I started using the US News Ranking system to make this list.

Any pointers on how to reduce this list? Should I have started from colleges ranked 50-100 instead of 1-50?

And lastly, what are the opportunities in Mathematical Physics? I understand that academia is crowded, but does the industry hire PhDs in Mathematical Physics?

Thanks in advance.

I just wanted to say that as I understand it, in Physics departments, most of what I would call mathematical physics is done in high energy physics with work related to quantum field theory, string theory, and AdsCFT stuff. So you really should be looking into those fields and seeing which excite you.

However, in general, I think mathematical physics is more commonly done in math departments. So, in my opinion, you should look at what some mathematical physicists do in math departments and some people working on QFT or something similar do in physics departments and decide which you find more interesting.

 

[CrysPhys]

I just wanted to say that as I understand it, in Physics departments, most of what I would call mathematical physics is done in high energy physics with work related to quantum field theory, string theory, and AdsCFT stuff. So you really should be looking into those fields and seeing which excite you.

However, in general, I think mathematical physics is more commonly done in math departments. So, in my opinion, you should look at what some mathematical physicists do in math departments and some people working on QFT or something similar do in physics departments and decide which you find more interesting.

Your Post #76 is replying to the original question (Post #1). But this has been a long, convoluted thread, and the OP started shifting direction in Post #32 and changed course in Post #38. Mathematical physics is no longer the end goal; experimental condensed-matter physics is.

Since my only exposure is in Condensed Matter Physics, I started looking for professors working in Experimental Condensed Matter at universities known for their condensed matter programs, even if the research being done wasn't in what I have worked on at my research assistant internship.

After talking to the professors at my college, I understand that I should focus on my primary interest (Physics) as I can still study Mathematical Physics at University as part of my PhD Prep (pre-PhD). So there is no need to select universities because they have Mathematical Physics as part of the Physics department. A college like Northwestern (for example) would permit me to study Mathematical Physics (MP) as part of (or alongside) my PhD in Experimental Condensed Matter Physics even though MP is part of their Mathematics Department. So MP is not an issue.

I would be much obliged if anyone could offer any input on the universities mentioned in my earlier post or suggest other universities known for their work in Experimental Condensed Matter Physics (E-CMP).

 

[advhaver]

experimental condensed-matter physics

LOL. Fixed that for you.

The ones at which you are a strong research fit. Admissions is holistic.

Otherwise, your best shot is to do that work, rather than to try and convince us to do the work for you.

Sorry for disappearing for several months. I was busy.

To end this thread, I finished my applications by the 15th of December. I got my first admit (U Chicago) yesterday. I await responses from the other universities before making up my mind. Thanks for all your help.

My takeaways:
1. Manage your time. I did not do a perfect job. I need a lot of improvement. I missed out on a few applications due to poor time management.
2. Talk to every professor you know. Don't be afraid to "cold call." I emailed several and was surprised that so many responded. Many of them asked me to read up on a topic and set up a second remote meeting to question me on the matter they asked me to read. This was a very pleasant exercise.
3. Keep your head down and work. Even after my applications were all out (December 15th), I continued to work on my research through Christmas. I suspect that professors get an intuition about the depth of your interest when they talk to you.
4. Do not forget to thank every professor you talk to sincerely. Many have very busy lives, and taking 20-30 minutes to help an unknown student should be considered a privilege.

I am now praying that at least a few other responses are also positive.

Thanks again.

 

[CrysPhys]

Thanking people who have helped you is a good habit to develop. You're welcome. Hope you receive more positive responses. I wish you great success in your PhD program.

 

[advhaver]

Thanking people who have helped you is a good habit to develop. You're welcome. Hope you receive more positive responses. I wish you great success in your PhD program.

I know that the program at U Chicago is excellent, but when I told my family about the Chicago admission, a couple of them were upset that I did not apply to MIT or Princeton (but I must qualify that by clarifying that everyone was happy) because they are more "reputed" whatever that means.

To be honest, I did not apply because I assumed my resume wasn't strong enough. So, I would add a 5th takeaway to the 4 listed above.

5. Do not assume anything. Apply, apply, apply. Do not let your "profile" or "resume" limit you. If you manage your time well and start early, applying to as many as 20 universities can be done. I have three friends who applied to 15, 17, and 20 universities (all in physics).

I hope this helps others.

P.S. Can an admin or moderator change the title from "Mathematical Physics" to "Experimental Condensed Matter Physics"?

Thanks.

 

[berkeman]

P.S. Can an admin or moderator change the title from "Mathematical Physics" to "Experimental Condensed Matter Physics"?

I've appended that information to the title, so that comments about Mathematical Physics by responders are still valid.

 

[gwnorth]

Congrats on your first admit OP! U Chicago is a fantastic option. Best of luck on hearing back on the rest of your apps!

I'm still anxiously awaiting to hear if my son will get into the programs he's applied to.

 

[advhaver]

I've appended that information to the title, so that comments about Mathematical Physics by responders are still valid.

Thanks!

Congrats on your first admit OP! U Chicago is a fantastic option. Best of luck on hearing back on the rest of your apps!

I'm still anxiously awaiting to hear if my son will get into the programs he's applied to.

Thanks.

Which programs did he apply to?

 

[StatGuy2000]

Sorry for disappearing for several months. I was busy.

To end this thread, I finished my applications by the 15th of December. I got my first admit (U Chicago) yesterday. I await responses from the other universities before making up my mind. Thanks for all your help.

My takeaways:
1. Manage your time. I did not do a perfect job. I need a lot of improvement. I missed out on a few applications due to poor time management.
2. Talk to every professor you know. Don't be afraid to "cold call." I emailed several and was surprised that so many responded. Many of them asked me to read up on a topic and set up a second remote meeting to question me on the matter they asked me to read. This was a very pleasant exercise.
3. Keep your head down and work. Even after my applications were all out (December 15th), I continued to work on my research through Christmas. I suspect that professors get an intuition about the depth of your interest when they talk to you.
4. Do not forget to thank every professor you talk to sincerely. Many have very busy lives, and taking 20-30 minutes to help an unknown student should be considered a privilege.

I am now praying that at least a few other responses are also positive.

Thanks again.

To the OP:

Congratulations on your admittance to the University of Chicago! It is an excellent school with outstanding research in various areas of physics.

I wanted to wish you much success in your PhD studies and research!

 

[advhaver]

Congratulations ....I wanted to wish you much success in your PhD studies and research!

Thanks.

I am getting bombarded by relatives who are "demanding" to know why I did not fancy my chances at MIT or Princeton. I should have managed my time better and sought out professors at MIT and Princeton. MIT, especially, was on my radar. One of my advisors told me that the environment at Princeton is toxic (his daughter is doing her Ph.D. in Physics there), so I do not regret that so much.

I did approach professors at UChicago, Cornell, UPenn, Northwestern, Yale, Rice, WUSTL, Georgia Tech, U. Michigan (Ann Arbor), U.Maryland, Georgetown, Penn State, Rutgers, and U.T. Austin and interviewed with the ones in bold. In some cases, I had multiple interviews. I could have started earlier (I started chasing professors only in November). I just ran out of time.

Best of luck on hearing back on the rest of your apps!

I got WUSTL and Georgia Tech but was rejected by Univ. of Minnesota (Twin Cities). I don't want to act like a "dog in the manger," so I will write to WUSTL and GT and ask them to take my name off their list so that other students can be offered a position.

Did your son get any responses yet? I have put up my list above. I am happy to help.

P.S
I talked to U. Chicago, and they told me that they would be happy to let me work on developing my Mathematics skills while doing my Ph.D. in Physics. Over Christmas, I developed an interest in Mathematics, specifically "Mathematical Finance" (universities also call it Quantitative Finance, Financial Mathematics, etc.; see links below). It involves knowing multivariable calculus, linear algebra, probability, topology, etc.

U. Chicago: https://finmath.uchicago.edu/admissions/admission-requirements/
Stanford: https://bulletin.stanford.edu/programs/CME-MS
Carnegie: https://www.cmu.edu/mscf/academics/index.html
NYU: https://math-finance.cims.nyu.edu/academics/
Oxford: https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/graduate/courses/msc-mathematical-and-computational-finance
LSE: https://www.lse.ac.uk/study-at-lse/Graduate/degree-programmes-2024/MSc-Financial-Mathematics
Imperial: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/courses/postgraduate-taught/mathematics-finance/

Oh well. There is so much to learn and only one life to do it in.

 

[DeBangis21]

Congratulations, @advhaver . Best wishes.

 

[advhaver]

Sure, it was a recommendation for a book that outlines the process of getting a Masters or PhD, for the OP.

View attachment 330471

Now that I got an admit, I ordered this book. It would have been a bit presumptuous of me to order it without an admit.

Thanks.

 

[advhaver]

Congratulations, @advhaver . Best wishes.

Thanks.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Congratulations.

Tell your relatives they should be happy for you, and not moan that you should have gone somewhere else.

1. If you get a PhD from Chicago and don't reach your goals, its not Chicago's fault and things are unlikely to have been different had you gone to Princeton.
2. Rankings are a blunt instrument even at the undergraduate level. And admissions is not a monotonic function of "potential physics greatness". Your relatives would probably pooh pooh Minnesota, bur they have a very strong program, even though they don't have the prestige amongh the uninformed than Chicago does.
3. The "big names" may not be the best overall. I can think of one area where the best in the world is Washington (Seattle). Stanford is a distant second. Another, Michigan State is tops. In another, Utah. In another, Rochester.
4. Programs improve and fall behind all the time. You can't predict where a given school will be 7 years now when you graduate, and it is foolish to try. Recently, Santa Barbara has moved up, and Wisconsin has moved down. Maybe in a few years it will be the other way around, New hires, retirements, projects starting, projects finishing, and such happen all the time. You can drive yourself crazy trying to prediect where a school will end up.

 

[CrysPhys]

I got WUSTL and Georgia Tech but was rejected by Univ. of Minnesota (Twin Cities). I don't want to act like a "dog in the manger," so I will write to WUSTL and GT and ask them to take my name off their list so that other students can be offered a position.

You might not want to withdraw your applications right away, unless you're absolutely certain that Chicago supersedes them. You also want to consider financial support packages. The most common is a teaching assistantship. Some do offer research assistantships to incoming newbies (at many universities, you need to pass the quals first, so they are not available to incoming newbies). But if a university really wants you, they will offer you a fellowship (no teaching or research responsibilities). Just something to consider, ceteris paribus.

You also want to consider locale,. At some point, there will be life outside the classroom and lab.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I can't resist. From The Simpsons episode Brother from Another Series:

Sideshow Bob: What about the buffon lessons? The four years at clown college?
Sideshow Cecil: I'll thank you not to refer to Princeton that way.

 

[CrysPhys]

Decades ago, when I was a senior in high school, I applied for early action (there was no early decision then) to MIT. I got in. I told my guidance counsellor that I was going to withdraw all my other applications, including the one to Harvard. Shortly thereafter I was summoned by the headmaster, who insisted that I not withdraw my other applications. I got accepted to Harvard (and all the others). My headmaster hauled me into his office again. I told him I was going to MIT and turning down Harvard. He was livid. Probably cost me several prizes (some with money attached) that I would have otherwise been awarded.

 

[advhaver]

1. The "big names" may not be the best overall. I can think of one area where the best in the world is Washington (Seattle). Stanford is a distant second. Another, Michigan State is tops. In another, Utah. In another, Rochester.

Wow, I'd like to learn which programs these are. Where do I find this data?

FYI, Georgetown also admitted me. With so many offers, one can't help but feel that I was too conservative in my applications.

You also want to consider financial support packages. The most common is a teaching assistantship. Some do offer research assistantships to incoming newbies (at many universities, you need to pass the quals first, so they are not available to incoming newbies). But if a university really wants you, they will offer you a fellowship (no teaching or research responsibilities). Just something to consider, ceteris paribus.

You also want to consider locale,. At some point, there will be life outside the classroom and lab.

Of the ones I have, Chicago offered me the best "package," including a small fellowship (in addition to a TA). I am waiting for other options, but I am trying not to be selfish and release those admissions so others can be considered. Chicago has invited me to visit them in a couple of weeks, so let's see.

I have other interests (outside physics), like mathematics, so I would be interested in programs that allow me to pursue both, even if I do not get official degrees. It's the knowledge that's important; the degree only serves to inform your first employer that you have some qualifications.

Decades ago, when I was a senior in high school, I applied for early action (there was no early decision then) to MIT. I got in. I told my guidance counsellor that I was going to withdraw all my other applications, including the one to Harvard. Shortly thereafter I was summoned by the headmaster, who insisted that I not withdraw my other applications. I got accepted to Harvard (and all the others). My headmaster hauled me into his office again. I told him I was going to MIT and turning down Harvard. He was livid. Probably cost me several prizes (some with money attached) that I would have otherwise been awarded.

Wow! You got MIT and Harvard! That must have been a tough decision.

 

[CrysPhys]

Wow! You got MIT and Harvard! That must have been a tough decision.

No; easy decision. As I mentioned above, once I got accepted to MIT on early action, I had planned to withdraw all pending applications, including the one to Harvard. The only reason I didn't was because my guidance counsellor and headmaster pressured me not to. Number of students who went on to Harvard was a key metric (bragging point) in my high school.

 

[gwnorth]

Congrats on getting more admits @advhaver. That's fantastic news!

Which programs did he apply to?

He wasn't sure if he wanted to a do a PhD so decided to test the waters by applying exclusively to master's programs. As it was most cost effective for him to attend programs in Canada he applied to thesis-based programs at UofT, UBC, McGill, and York Universities, as well as Perimeter (Waterloo).

I still hold out hope that he'll eventually decide to do a PhD and will then apply internationally .

Did your son get any responses yet?

Yes, this past week to my great relief! He has received offers from UofT (direct admit to the PhD) and UBC. At UBC he was contacted by a researcher at TRIUMF who could potentially be his advisor.

He also has interviews next week with 2 different researchers at McGill.

York and Perimeter had later application due dates so he may not hear back from them for a bit.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I'd like to learn which programs these are. Where do I find this data?

You read journals, you see who is publishing, and you see who is citing what.

You will not find a US News ranking of "The best places to study Langmuir-Blodgett films:,

 

[Ege Artan]

Now that I got an admit, I ordered this book. It would have been a bit presumptuous of me to order it without an admit.

Thanks.

Hello, I am a first year student that eventually wants to pursue mathematical physics as well (especially HEP), therefore, I also want to get a PhD as well.

However, I have been just demotivated thinking that I won't get a good learning experience with a good advisor because I won't be as competitive during applications. If you don't mind me asking what was your resume like? What are the great takeaways that I have to keep in mind as well?

 

[advhaver]

Hello, I am a first year student that eventually wants to pursue mathematical physics as well (especially HEP), therefore, I also want to get a PhD as well.

However, I have been just demotivated thinking that I won't get a good learning experience with a good advisor because I won't be as competitive during applications. If you don't mind me asking what was your resume like? What are the great takeaways that I have to keep in mind as well?

From 8th/9th grade, I had equal interests in physics and mathematics; hence, I wrongly believed that mathematical physics would give me the opportunity to pursue both. I later realised I could pursue Maths alongside my Physics.

My resume:

• 12th grade (IB) 44/45 in 6 subjects and a 7/7 in an additional subject of Further Maths.
• SAT was 1480 (800 Math/680 English), partly because I wasn't comfortable with the electronic format as it was the first year the SAT board implemented it in my home country.
• Subject SAT: 800 in Physics and Maths, but I discovered that no one cares about this.
• My first year of college was remote. It's a long story that involves Covid and Visa issues.
• For my sophomore year, I was a TA in the Physics Lab, and from the same summer on, I worked as an RA in a Condensed Matter Research Lab.
• Since I came into college with some credits (thanks to my IB results), I got the opportunity to take a few advanced courses in math and physics. My overall GPA was about 3.85, and my Physics GPA was 4.0. The college I attend is not known for grade inflation. I did NOT take the GRE.
• When I applied, I had 2.5 years (Fall 2021) of TA and a little over one year (Summer 2022) of RA experience. I also had a few months of internship experience in 2019 (between 11th and 12th grade). During my RA, I helped develop new testing mechanisms and protocols using skills I had learned during my 2019 internships. I suspect the RA experience was my "calling card."

I hope this helps.

 

[Ege Artan]

From 8th/9th grade, I had equal interests in physics and mathematics; hence, I wrongly believed that mathematical physics would give me the opportunity to pursue both. I later realised I could pursue Maths alongside my Physics.

My resume:

• 12th grade (IB) 44/45 in 6 subjects and a 7/7 in an additional subject of Further Maths.
• SAT was 1480 (800 Math/680 English), partly because I wasn't comfortable with the electronic format as it was the first year the SAT board implemented it in my home country.
• Subject SAT: 800 in Physics and Maths, but I discovered that no one cares about this.
• My first year of college was remote. It's a long story that involves Covid and Visa issues.
• For my sophomore year, I was a TA in the Physics Lab, and from the same summer on, I worked as an RA in a Condensed Matter Research Lab.
• Since I came into college with some credits (thanks to my IB results), I got the opportunity to take a few advanced courses in math and physics. My overall GPA was about 3.85, and my Physics GPA was 4.0. The college I attend is not known for grade inflation. I did NOT take the GRE.
• When I applied, I had 2.5 years (Fall 2021) of TA and a little over one year (Summer 2022) of RA experience. I also had a few months of internship experience in 2019 (between 11th and 12th grade). During my RA, I helped develop new testing mechanisms and protocols using skills I had learned during my 2019 internships. I suspect the RA experience was my "calling card."

I hope this helps.

Thank you a lot.

Indeed, it seems like the research experience is incredibly crucial for the applications.

However, aside from the previous topic, the "need" to have research experience for theoretical physics applications feels kind of weird don't you think? I mean, I am someone who wants to focus on the theory, equations, and predictions, not on the measurement side of things. Considering your past experience, do you think practical research and lab projects translate much to theoretical physics apart from the general scientific methodology? Isn't the purpose of the "need" of these qualities and experiences to choose an applicant that is the most ready for the program, if there is no direct translation then why are they "requiring" it in the first place? It feels kind of like a "burden" being obligated to do practical research to get into a theoretical program, which also seems to be a little paradoxical. What do you think?

Note: By "need" and " requiring" I tried to mean the practical need for these qualities. Correct me if I am wrong, none of the top programs ask for these directly afaik but they are pretty much mandatory to have a good chance to even be considered. Also, by "burden" I meant that these experiences are still fun but not as fun as the theory, at least for me. So it feels like a "burden" in a relative sense.

 

[Choppy]

However, aside from the previous topic, the "need" to have research experience for theoretical physics applications feels kind of weird don't you think? I mean, I am someone who wants to focus on the theory, equations, and predictions, not on the measurement side of things. Considering your past experience, do you think practical research and lab projects translate much to theoretical physics apart from the general scientific methodology? Isn't the purpose of the "need" of these qualities and experiences to choose an applicant that is the most ready for the program, if there is no direct translation then why are they "requiring" it in the first place? It feels kind of like a "burden" being obligated to do practical research to get into a theoretical program, which also seems to be a little paradoxical. What do you think?

I'm not sure where to start with this. There's a lot more to experimental work than just the measurement of things.

One of the observations that I've made over the years is that the most successful students tend to be the ones who take full advantage of the opportunities in front of them, over those who are just going through the motions because they see getting involved in research as a hoop that's required to jump through.

Another observation is that students earlier in their education who believe they have a preference for the theory side of things over the experimental side of things are basing this on experiences in first year labs where they're given three hours to run through a cookbook experiment they probably haven't read ahead of time, and write it up with partners they may or may not have chosen based on the order in which they arrived in the room.