Unsure about Content of Statement of Purpose

[Wolfman29]

Hi everyone. I recently finished a first draft for a statement of purpose for CalTech (I know, I know - I figured it would be the first one I draft - I have others I will be modelling off of this one soon enough), and I have a few (well, maybe more than a few) concerns about how I wrote it and about the content. Really, I am just not sure exactly how this should be written, and I would like advice from those who have written strong SOPs (and ideally gotten into their school of choice!). Just for reference, I got an 820 on my physics GRE (at least - I get my second score back tomorrow) and I have a 4.0 GPA, but I am from Arizona State University, which is not a "top-tier" school for most purposes.

So, my concerns:
- Did I talk too much about myself in a way unrelated to the school? I.e. should I have tried to match myself to CalTech more?
- I didn't mention any incredibly specific topics that I am interested in studying. Clearly, from the SOP, you can tell that I am interesting in general relativity, cosmology, and quantum gravity - should I be more or less specific about these fields? I know they are particularly common interests.
- My mention about my mathematical background seems out of place, but I also feel it is necessary for the admissions committee to know that I have a broad background there. Should I shorten it? Lengthen it?
- Were my research descriptions too detailed or not detailed enough?

Anything else that jumps out to you but isn't obvious to me would be super awesome, too. Thanks a million guys!

Here's the SOP:

The study of gravity, and cosmology as a whole, is one of the most elegant sub-fields of physics, utilizing beautiful mathematics and suggesting strange and wonderful phenomena while agreeing with experimental results. Yet, there are still many mysteries concerning both the study of gravity as well as the interface of gravitation and the other forces governing the universe. The collaborative nature of the Particle Theory Group at the California Institute of Technology encourages the development of new ideas, solving known mysteries and discovering new ones. This never-ending pursuit to deepen our understanding of the universe at the most fundamental level parallels my interests throughout my academic career.


For the past several years, I have worked with Dr. XXXXX on an experiment in kaon physics, called ORKA, which studies the rate of an extraordinarily rare decay mode. In particular, I was personally responsible for providing a deep understanding of the physics involved in the secondary beam system and developing a working model of this system that could effectively control the kaon beam. To achieve this, I was sent to Fermilab National Accelerator Laboratory to work directly with the physicists involved in the beamline design. This endeavor culminated in the writing of a document mathematically describing the most intricate optical element of the magnetic system as well as providing evidence that the current computational modeling tools were not sufficiently accurate. Further work was conducted to entirely remodel the beam line using mathematical optimization techniques not often used in the design of magnetic optical systems.


As a student of the Honors College, I am required to complete a senior thesis composed of original research. For this thesis, I am working with Dr. YYYYY on investigating a toy model of a tetraquark resonance state. This model was conceived to provide an accurate description of an exotic charmonium-like state first confirmed in 2003. My role in this investigation and the goal of my thesis is to explore the effects of the coupling of the observed resonance to nearby hadronization thresholds via the so-called “cusp effect.” While this research has only recently begun, I expect interesting results, regardless of the viability of the toy model.


While none of my research experience lies directly in the sub-field of theoretical cosmology or quantum gravity, it has given me both a strong background in the experimental side of physics and an initial taste of high-energy theoretical particle physics. I believe that both a background in experimental physics and experience in related sub-fields are necessities for a theoretician to be able to produce fresh, experimentally verifiable ideas, especially in an as competitive an area as theoretical cosmology and quantum gravity. However, despite these broad experiences, it is of course imperative that a theoretician know his or her field of study deeply: as such, I am currently enrolled in a graduate level course on general relativity and will be enrolled in a graduate level course on quantum theory next semester. These two particular courses are of obvious importance when investigating the universe at both the largest and smallest scales.


Yet, a successful physicist also requires a strong mathematical background. As such, I will be graduating with a degree in both physics and mathematics. I have sought out opportunities to familiarize myself with many areas of mathematics, including real analysis, abstract and linear algebra, and even number theory. While most certainly many of the courses I have taken will not find use in physics, it is often from seemingly-unrelated mathematics that elegant physics arises.


The opportunities at CalTech are extraordinary, and I feel that I would be able to take full advantage of all of the resources and excellent faculty that it has to offer. The research interests of both Dr. AAAA and Dr. BBBB parallel mine, and I believe that the CalTech Particle Theory Group has much to offer in the way of incredible research opportunities for graduate students.

In the Fall of 2015, I hope to continue my education as a graduate student at the California Institute of Technology, and I am excited to have the chance to work with the first-rate faculty in the Particle Theory Group in developing new models that describe our universe accurately at both the galactic and sub-nuclear scale. Armed with an exceptional graduate education from CalTech, I feel that my goal of achieving a professorship position at a university is quite feasible. With this goal in mind, I intend to hone my instructional abilities by becoming a TA once I begin my graduate studies. Hopefully, with the knowledge and research experience I gain from my graduate studies, I will be able to both unravel some of the deeper mysteries baffling me today and inspire students of the future to seek an ever-deeper physical understanding of the universe.

 

[jedishrfu]

I think your best bet might to run it by some of your professors and see what they think.

Personally, I thought it was well written and you didn't overemphasize yourself. Perhaps the only impediment will be coming from a second tier school and thus losing out to students with equivalent credentials from a first tier school. The fact that you've done papers and worked at CERN is a definite plus.

Graduate schools choose students to match the research that they are actively doing. It's a lot like hiring a job candidate so you need to somehow market yourself by emphasizing your strengths that you think they might like the most which is hard to do.

Can you get connections in the department at the university? Do any of your profs know profs who work there? Can you forward your paper for review separately from your application and get recommendations or advice from them on your it could give you name recognition and make you known to the committee.

 

[Wolfman29]

I plan on running it by some profs as well - figured I would get your opinions as well though!

I was afraid that coming from ASU would hinder me, but that's what I get, I suppose, for not doing extracurriculars in high school. Anyway, I'm really not sure if any of the profs I know here know any profs at ASU. I'll definitely have to ask around though. And what do you mean about forwarding my paper for review separately from my application? Like submit it to a professor there? It wasn't really peer-reviewed journal material - it was more of a technical manual. It was submitted to the Fermilab library though, if that counts for anything.

 

[jedishrfu]

I was thinking of somehow networking outside the normal graduate admissions process like get to know a prof there that can give you advice on how best to apply.

In order to start the conversation, you could be introduced by one of your profs or you could email them about their research with questions you may have showing some interest in it or you could target a prof that might have an interest in what you did and ask them to critique your paper, once you get a dialog going then you might be able to visit and talk witht the prof, get a sense of the place and get noticed.

In other words, just like applying to a job you have to go the extra mile to get to the front of the queue.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I found "I was personally responsible for providing a deep understanding of the physics involved in the secondary beam system" quite off-putting. It comes across as "those shallow-thinking dimwits and stumblebums I collaborate with come to me - ME! - when there is anything complicated that needs to be done with beamlines". Worse, it doesn't even say what that deep understanding is.

There are applicants who think they are God's gift to physics, and they will happily enlighten the poor faculty if only they are admitted. You don't want the committee to think "not another one of those". I would definitely rewrite that.

 

[Wolfman29]

I was afraid I was coming off that way. Thanks for point that out!

 

[jedishrfu]

I missed that. Perhaps if you say:

I was given the responsibility for...

And was then sent to FermiLab to supervise the integration of part X into system Y...

I learned a great deal about the internal operation of ...

Now in a job application you might to toot your own horn since the HR people need to be impressed enough to forward your application to the hiring manager...

Ah, the hurdles we must jump over and the hoops we must jump through to get where we're going...