Advice on how best to spend my time for graduate school applications

[QuarkyMeson]

Hello, I'm finishing my junior year in physics this spring and I am starting to get more serious about graduate school applications. I currently have a 3.6 physics GPA, around a 3.5 math GPA and a 3.75 total GPA over the last ten years.

I did community college for a few years and then transferred to a UC as an engineering phyiscs major for one quarter. I left after the one quarter because I needed to move back home to take care of my parents and honestly I was just unimpressed with the program there. Maybe it was just the weird hybrid program where I had to get permission to enroll in any physics courses, although they were required to graduate, and basically had to wait till the class started to get permission codes. At any rate, I left after the one quarter. I hope they've since changed this because it irritated everyone, faculty included, but I was told by admin to get bent.

While back in my hometown, I did some classes at a well known university there (I'd have to look at the transcript but I think I just did a summer session there.. Just some general stats and chemistry classes) and eventually we moved back out as my wife's mother had cancer. I did some more classes there at a private school in the math and computer science department (upper div probability, stats, linear regression, discrete, data structs, database systems, etc type stuff) for fun. After she passed away we decided to purchase a home and last year I started at a state school to finally just go ahead and do the physics program, which was kind of always my intention.

While at the private school I actually landed a job at oracle as a full time remote software engineer, which I've been doing ever since. The pay is amazing, the flexibility is amazing, I just don't really have a passion for the work. I want to be a physicist.

This long diatribe Segways ™ into one of my questions, how ****ed is I for graduate school admissions having this weird academic background? Is my age a factor that would be considered? Honestly, I do regret leaving UC still to this day, even though everything has kind of worked out so far.

A side question is this, I still work 40-50 hours a week at my salaried remote job, and I work 5-10 hours a week normally on the weekends at a lab at my current school, and I have a kid, etc. I have a very regimented schedule where I'm trying to squeeze in as much as humanly possible while not sleeping. I have E&M2 next semester along with Quantum I which are difficult courses along with fun courses like numerical methods and plasma physics, but I also need to study for the PGRE and just generally become better at physics. (I finished emag with a B+ and B in mechanics... which kind of sucks). What is generally the best use of time here? So far I've tried on the break reading Feynman lectures of physics volume I to help refresh/prepare for PGRE. I've read the first 11 chapters so far and minus the neat discussion about numerical methods in the chapter on motion which was nice to see and the very last bit in chapter 10 about fields it feels very underwhelming. Does this get better and/or more useful? Or am I better off just doing a bunch of a problems? Forgetting about the PGRE and just reading ahead for Quantum and E&M2?

I have close to 200 units completed, which is a bit insane, so I've only had physics courses since I've started the physics degree. Taking 4/5 physics courses a semester has been a bit hard. For grad school I've been dipping my toes into classes like Nuclear physics I and other specialized areas like plasma physics this spring to try to find the field I'm most excited about. So far I just know I don't want to do theoretical, I don't want to do high/low energy nuclear, I don't want to do biophysics. No med physics, no health physics, no rad physics, etc. I've taken one optics course and I'm keeping it as an option, I did enjoy E&M but classical E&M is about as complete of a field as physics is going to get. I'm looking forward to testing out plasma physics and I won't be able to do solid state physics until the end of my senior year. There's a big QI branch at current school, but I'm just a bit ambivalent on it. I do enjoy Astro. Is there a better way to decide what to pick than waiting to take a course on it? Next fall I need to start sending applications, so I won't have had time to at least have had a course in all the different areas. I would hate to apply to condensed matter to discover solid state physics or stat mech is the devil.

Do I have any sort of a realistic shot at grad school given my background?

Thanks for taking the time.

 

[CrysPhys]

For grad school I've been dipping my toes into classes like Nuclear physics I and other specialized areas like plasma physics this spring to try to find the field I'm most excited about. So far I just know I don't want to do theoretical, I don't want to do high/low energy nuclear, I don't want to do biophysics. No med physics, no health physics, no rad physics, etc. I've taken one optics course and I'm keeping it as an option, I did enjoy E&M but classical E&M is about as complete of a field as physics is going to get. I'm looking forward to testing out plasma physics and I won't be able to do solid state physics until the end of my senior year. There's a big QI branch at current school, but I'm just a bit ambivalent on it. I do enjoy Astro. Is there a better way to decide what to pick than waiting to take a course on it? Next fall I need to start sending applications, so I won't have had time to at least have had a course in all the different areas. I would hate to apply to condensed matter to discover solid state physics or stat mech is the devil.

This is your big problem. You have a list of fields that you don't like. But you haven't identified even one field that sparks your passion. Beyond courses, a great way for finding what sparks your passion would have been undergrad research experience. But it's rather late in the game for that.

Remember, in the US (and your profile says US), a PhD program takes ~6+ yrs. What is driving you to sacrifice much to pursue such a program? If you can't answer that, why undertake it?

From a practical perspective, how are you going to develop a list of candidate grad schools and fill out the applications if you don't know what you want and why? How are you going to persuade an admissions committee that you are a great fit for their department? As I've written several times before, "Don't enroll in a physics PhD program to find yourself (assuming you can get admitted). You'll likely lose yourself."

 

[QuarkyMeson]

This is your big problem. You have a list of fields that you don't like. But you haven't identified even one field that sparks your passion. Beyond courses, a great way for finding what sparks your passion would have been undergrad research experience. But it's rather late in the game for that.

Maybe it wasn't clear enough but I have been doing research. I did a summer REUs in CC with a biophysics group, which was alright but not my cup of tea. Thus no biophysics. I did more work on low energy nuclear, again not my cup of tea. I've never done any high energy nuclear research or coureswork, but judging by the publications they're mostly huge collaborations because of the cost of the experimental kit. So not super interested in that either. I'm currently doing multidisciplinary research work wrt physiology. I have one publication in the journal Cell.

Maybe it's different at other institutions, but here at this R1 it seems like it's get in where you can fit in and there's not many options other than Nuclear, Med/Bio, and QI for undergraduates.

There is a meta materials group (more CMish) that I was trying to get into to, it just depends on if they get funding for more undergraduates or not. They don't seem interested in taking any undergraduates unfunded.

Remember, in the US (and your profile says US), a PhD program takes ~6+ yrs. What is driving you to sacrifice much to pursue such a program? If you can't answer that, why undertake it?

That's easy, it's what I want to do. It's not like I would hate my life if I ended up in one of the fields I'm not super interested in because I'm still more interested in doing physics than anything else. It's just that I'd rather find something that resonates more strongly with my interests of designing and conducting experiments.

From a practical perspective, how are you going to develop a list of candidate grad schools and fill out the applications if you don't know what you want and why?

My current plan is to apply for experimental condensed matter at the schools that I've found that seem to be doing interesting stuff. I have no experience with the actual nuts of bolts of condensed matter research or coursework for that matter. I still haven't taken Quantum and won't till this spring semester and won't take stat mech until the fall. However, it seems like a large and varied field. If there's a more better way of sampling fields I would be all ears.

 

[Choppy]

Age isn't nearly the factor that a lot of people make it out to be when it comes to graduate school admissions. They will tend consider how long has it been since you've taken your undergraduate courses. But since you're enrolled now, I doubt that will be an issue. Where it really factors in, is more about the life stage you're at and your decisions in how you're going to balance everything. You likely won't be able to manage balancing a full time job with graduate school, or if you do, it will come at the cost of time with your family, sleep (and therefore your long-term health), or your length of time in graduate school.

As for how best to spend your time, I'm not sure there's an optimal strategy. Going through the Feynman lectures, practicing for the PGRE, reading ahead for your coming courses... these are all good options that will bolster your foundation in physics. Another option is taking the time to relax and spend with your family while you can, you so don't burn out in your senior year. Yet another one is taking the time to read up on those fields you haven't had the opportunity to explore much yet and maybe do some of your own self-led projects. If it were me, I'd pick some combination of latter two, but that wouldn't be the optimal path for everyone because the goals are less specific and can leave some people feeling like they haven't accomplished much.

 

[QuarkyMeson]

Age isn't nearly the factor that a lot of people make it out to be when it comes to graduate school admissions. They will tend consider how long has it been since you've taken your undergraduate courses. But since you're enrolled now, I doubt that will be an issue. Where it really factors in, is more about the life stage you're at and your decisions in how you're going to balance everything. You likely won't be able to manage balancing a full time job with graduate school, or if you do, it will come at the cost of time with your family, sleep (and therefore your long-term health), or your length of time in graduate school.

Hey, thanks for the feedback. Yeah I don't plan on continuing my current employment in graduate school. It's nearly untenable now, so I could only imagine how it would be then. That said, I like to joke with myself that I might be one of the few students who has a decreased workload going into graduate school.

As for how best to spend your time, I'm not sure there's an optimal strategy. Going through the Feynman lectures, practicing for the PGRE, reading ahead for your coming courses... these are all good options that will bolster your foundation in physics. Another option is taking the time to relax and spend with your family while you can, you so don't burn out in your senior year. Yet another one is taking the time to read up on those fields you haven't had the opportunity to explore much yet and maybe do some of your own self-led projects. If it were me, I'd pick some combination of latter two, but that wouldn't be the optimal path for everyone because the goals are less specific and can leave some people feeling like they haven't accomplished much.

This is good advice, I might pivot to reading up more on areas I haven't had a chance to really get to know yet.

 

[CrysPhys]

Maybe it wasn't clear enough but I have been doing research. I did a summer REUs in CC with a biophysics group, which was alright but not my cup of tea. Thus no biophysics. I did more work on low energy nuclear, again not my cup of tea. I've never done any high energy nuclear research or coureswork, but judging by the publications they're mostly huge collaborations because of the cost of the experimental kit. So not super interested in that either. I'm currently doing multidisciplinary research work wrt physiology. I have one publication in the journal Cell.

My current plan is to apply for experimental condensed matter at the schools that I've found that seem to be doing interesting stuff. I have no experience with the actual nuts of bolts of condensed matter research or coursework for that matter. I still haven't taken Quantum and won't till this spring semester and won't take stat mech until the fall. However, it seems like a large and varied field.

So, once more, you've tried several fields and you've crossed them off your list. But you haven't found a field that you're enthusiastic about. So your default strategy is to apply for PhD programs in experimental condensed matter simply because you have no basis to cross it off your list; yet at the same time, you have no basis to not cross it off your list (i.e., you have no basis to determine whether you will be enthusiastic about it). This is not a wise strategy.

And, once more, from a practical perspective, you'll not be a convincing applicant: "I tried fields A, B, C ... and I didn't like them. I haven't tried X yet. Your department is particularly strong in X. So I'm hoping that you'll admit me, and I hope I don't dislike X."

 

[QuarkyMeson]

So, once more, you've tried several fields and you've crossed them off your list. But you haven't found a field that you're enthusiastic about. So your default strategy is to apply for PhD programs in experimental condensed matter simply because you have no basis to cross it off your list; yet at the same time, you have no basis to not cross it off your list (i.e., you have no basis to determine whether you will be enthusiastic about it). This is not a wise strategy.

And, once more, from a practical perspective, you'll not be a convincing applicant: "I tried fields A, B, C ... and I didn't like them. I haven't tried X yet. Your department is particularly strong in X. So I'm hoping that you'll admit me, and I hope I don't dislike X."

Isn't that just intellectually honest?

How do other people manage to find the areas of physics they're interested in? Is it just serendipity that the first group they end doing work for is their passion?

How do people become interested in subjects such as HEP as undergrads other than a thought that it sounds interesting to them?

 

[Choppy]

How do other people manage to find the areas of physics they're interested in? Is it just serendipity that the first group they end doing work for is their passion?

Some ways of doing this...

• involvement in undergraduate research
• attending departmental colloquia/talks
• attending conferences
• if graduate students give public presentations at their defences - these are great to attend as well
• discourse with peers, graduate students, post-docs and professors
• reading review papers
• introductory courses in the field
• reading popular papers in each field (if you can wade through the field-specific jargon)

And in some cases the process is quite serendipitous... students might choose a supervisor based on personality, availability/accessibility of the project, or the skills that they hope to develop working on the project. Sometimes it works out. Sometimes it doesn't.

I might also add that, from my own experience, there are many students who simply love physics in general, and for these, the details of the project don't matter because they would be just as happy doing condensed matter experimental work as they would in theoretical cosmology. When this is the case, it's often the first opportunity they have that they end up following through to the completion of a PhD.

 

[CrysPhys]

That's easy, it's what I want to do. It's not like I would hate my life if I ended up in one of the fields I'm not super interested in because I'm still more interested in doing physics than anything else. It's just that I'd rather find something that resonates more strongly with my interests of designing and conducting experiments.

<<Emphasis added.>> That's just too vague and too abstract to pin your future on. Particularly since you have a secure job and family responsibilities. You need something more concrete.

Isn't that just intellectually honest?

Intellectually honest? For sure. But also a red flag that you're not ready to commit to a physics PhD program. And, again, consider this scenario:

Applicant A: "I'm applying to your university because it has a strong program in X. I have a long-term passion for X; I have taken courses in X; I have research experience in X; and I have a proven record of success in X. In support of the above, I submit the following evidence: ......"

Applicant B: "I'm applying to your university because it has a strong program in X. I have not taken any courses in X; I have no research experience in X. But I have taken courses in NOT-X; and I have research experience in NOT-X. Even though I have a good record in NOT-X, I do not find NOT-X to be satisfying. Therefore, I've decided to do my PhD program in X."

Which applicant gets admitted, and which applicant gets rejected?

How do other people manage to find the areas of physics they're interested in? Is it just serendipity that the first group they end doing work for is their passion?

How do people become interested in subjects such as HEP as undergrads other than a thought that it sounds interesting to them?

In addition to the comprehensive list provided by Choppy above, here are other routes:

* Some students enter undergrad knowing the general field they want to eventually specialize in. From elementary school on, I was fascinated with optical microscopy and growth of single crystals. I pursued many science fair projects in the field of crystal growth. So I entered my bachelor's program with the goal of pursuing research in experimental solid-state physics.

* Some students are inspired by particular professors, who pass their passions on to their students.

* I was fortunate to be an undergrad at MIT. Freshmen and sophomores had the option of an elective physics lab in which students worked with professors to develop custom lab projects. Junior physics majors were required to take 2 semesters of "Junior Lab", which introduced them to experiments in a variety of physics fields. MIT also had UROP (Undergrad Research Opportunities Program) which allowed undergrads to work in research labs.

* Yes, sometimes you luck out, and you fall in love with the first field you try. Sometimes you don't. But you have tried not just one, but several already. Are you holding out for "the one"? There was another poster who had identified one field that he was enthusiastic about, but he was hesitant to commit because he was afraid that there was an unsearched field that he might like even better. Do you fall into that category? It's just not viable to sample courses and undergrad research in all fields to decide which you like best. You just need to identify one field to which you are willing to devote 6+ yrs of your life to. You can switch fields after your PhD if you wish; in some instances, realities of the job market will force you to switch.

* Another option (though probably not for you) is not to go for a PhD program right away, but to find a job as a research assistant/technician in an industrial or government lab. One example I've cited several times: I served as an industry mentor to a physics senior. She hadn't found her calling for her PhD, and went to work for a company that designs and manufactures accelerators for medical physics applications. She quickly grew bored with her job, but developed a keen interest in medical physics. She then completed her PhD in medical physics and is now working on her residency. I've known several other technicians who worked in the semiconductor device industry who went for PhDs related to their work.

-------------------

An important question for you: What is your end goal? As I've discussed many times, a PhD physics can be an end in itself, not just a means to an end. If it is an end in itself, you do it to complete a piece of research that you are passionate about, and then you move on. That doesn't sound like you. If it is a means to an end, what is your end goal? If you're not sure, given your situation, you might want to delay your applications for a year. That way, you'll get the full benefit of your complete senior year to help you decide.

 

[gwnorth]

While at the private school I actually landed a job at oracle as a full time remote software engineer, which I've been doing ever since. The pay is amazing, the flexibility is amazing, I just don't really have a passion for the work. I want to be a physicist.

I agree with @CrysPhys. What do you envision being a "physicist" entails? What kind of role would you be targeting?

 

[QuarkyMeson]

Some ways of doing this...

• involvement in undergraduate research
• attending departmental colloquia/talks
• attending conferences
• if graduate students give public presentations at their defences - these are great to attend as well
• discourse with peers, graduate students, post-docs and professors
• reading review papers
• introductory courses in the field
• reading popular papers in each field (if you can wade through the field-specific jargon)

And in some cases the process is quite serendipitous... students might choose a supervisor based on personality, availability/accessibility of the project, or the skills that they hope to develop working on the project. Sometimes it works out. Sometimes it doesn't.

I might also add that, from my own experience, there are many students who simply love physics in general, and for these, the details of the project don't matter because they would be just as happy doing condensed matter experimental work as they would in theoretical cosmology. When this is the case, it's often the first opportunity they have that they end up following through to the completion of a PhD.

Hey thanks for the concrete feedback, I've been doing some of these and try to become more active in the department as time permits.

I guess I do find most peoples work when condensed down into a talk is interesting and I wouldn't really mind ending up in any field. There's just a personal preference I have for small teams over large collaborations (so no HEP, astro probably out too). I also don't really enjoy the labwork in biophysics as working with biological specimens tends to be rather tedious and feels rather random if the protocols produce the desired results or not. This isn't to say there isn't tedium in any other field, I'm assuming most fields have their fair share of work you might find boring (most of it in fact!), but the biological/human research element is something I'd rather avoid. (Thus no med phys, no rad phys, no biophys, etc)

I've been reading through papers and I've taken the last few days to dive back into BCS theory, which seems interesting.

<<Emphasis added.>> That's just too vague and too abstract to pin your future on. Particularly since you have a secure job and family responsibilities. You need something more concrete.

Yet, I feel like vague and abstracts ideals are all we ever pin our futures on.

Intellectually honest? For sure. But also a red flag that you're not ready to commit to a physics PhD program. And, again, consider this scenario:

Applicant A: "I'm applying to your university because it has a strong program in X. I have a long-term passion for X; I have taken courses in X; I have research experience in X; and I have a proven record of success in X. In support of the above, I submit the following evidence: ......"

Applicant B: "I'm applying to your university because it has a strong program in X. I have not taken any courses in X; I have no research experience in X. But I have taken courses in NOT-X; and I have research experience in NOT-X. Even though I have a good record in NOT-X, I do not find NOT-X to be satisfying. Therefore, I've decided to do my PhD program in X."

Which applicant gets admitted, and which applicant gets rejected?

If all those are true for applicant A then there was no shortage of luck involved. Further, obviously I wouldn't word my statement of purpose as applicant B and would try to tie in some of what I've accomplished into how I could be a net benefit for the grad program.

Take the example of Dr. El-Batanouny at Boston University, one of the schools I was looking into. He does thin film work. I could surely tie back some of what I've done both as a student and professionally to make myself seem useful. Even if they came back and suggested they would accept me but only for Dr. Bansils group working on soft CM (aka biophysics, looks like she uses gastric mucin mainly in her work) I'd still seriously consider accepting based on what other interest I could drum up.

I'm not applicant A and I'd hazard to guess that most applicants to graduate school aren't either, but I could be wrong.

An important question for you: What is your end goal? As I've discussed many times, a PhD physics can be an end in itself, not just a means to an end. If it is an end in itself, you do it to complete a piece of research that you are passionate about, and then you move on. That doesn't sound like you. If it is a means to an end, what is your end goal? If you're not sure, given your situation, you might want to delay your applications for a year. That way, you'll get the full benefit of your complete senior year to help you decide.

I mean obviously I want to use my degree. So after graduate school I would do a few post docs, ideally one at a national lab if those exist. I'd either want to be a career scientist in a national lab or at an university.

I agree with @CrysPhys. What do you envision being a "physicist" entails? What kind of role would you be targeting?

I feel like I have a pretty good idea of what a tenured physicist at university does. If they're experimentalists they teach a few undergrad courses, apply for grants, manage their lab and oversee the education of new experimentalists graduate students. I don't know what a physicist in industry does who isn't a software engineer or one who works at a national lab.

I would be targeting national labs or a tenured track university position. Whatever allows me to a career scientist. I.e. do experiments. There's currently two career tracks at my current job for my role that I can branch off into. One is more managerial and the other, staff software engineer, is more hands on. I would choose the later if I was planning on staying.

 

[Muu9]

From elementary school on, I was fascinated with optical microscopy and growth of single crystals. I pursued many science fair projects in the field of crystal growth. So I entered my bachelor's program with the goal of pursuing research in experimental solid-state physics.

How did you know your passion was solid state physics and not crystallography or optics?