Stanford

nb
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:16 pm

Stanford

Postby nb » Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:23 am

Did anyone received an e-mail regarding to admission decision ??

Richter
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 3:45 am

Postby Richter » Fri Mar 02, 2007 10:23 pm

I am waiting for it....

anyon
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:26 pm

Postby anyon » Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:17 pm

i got an email from them on Thursday.

nb
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:16 pm

Postby nb » Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:54 am

@anyon

What did they write in that e-mail ?

soluyanov
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:06 pm

Postby soluyanov » Sat Mar 03, 2007 6:39 am

Acceptances were sent out on the 1st of March, So, I suppose, those who got nothing are rejected.

I don't understand one thing. Why not to send decisions to everybody?

anyon
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:26 pm

Postby anyon » Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:39 am

They told me I was admitted to their program and give information about Open House (March 6-7), financial support, and Qual exam.

nb
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:16 pm

Postby nb » Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:50 am

Game over...0/4

An advice for an international student - invest all your time in the GRE Physics exam...I got 900 and I have perfect GPA and one publication and it is still not enough for the ive.

:cry:

soluyanov
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:06 pm

Postby soluyanov » Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:16 am

@nb, where did you apply, mate?

Didn't you have any safety school?

nb
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:16 pm

Postby nb » Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:39 am

Stanford, MIT, Harvard and Princeton. It seems that I aimed to high...

My safe school is my undergraduate school in my home country.

My girlfriend was admitted to Stanford so I guess that this one is the most hurting. Although right after I received the rejection from princeton I realized that I have no chance...one can see that the same people are been admitted to the top schools.

I wish all of you all the best and I hope that you will continue to do physics with the same motivation becuase I do not think that they have enough knowledge to tell what are our abilties in research.
Last edited by nb on Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:48 am, edited 2 times in total.

soluyanov
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:06 pm

Postby soluyanov » Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:46 am

And where are you from?

I think that we really do not realize, that to get into Harvard 990 +4.0 gpa + a couple of phys rev B publications will not be enough. Most of the guys enrolled are recommended by someone very special, and not on paper. By people who have joint projects with people from Harvard. It is really hard to find a decent student basing on GRE, gpa (a guy with C from one school may know twice more than the other with A from another one) and statement of purpose, which is sometimes written by someone else....

nb
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:16 pm

Postby nb » Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:50 am

I am from isreal.

soluyanov
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:06 pm

Postby soluyanov » Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:57 am

Then you have a pretty good choice of schools I think. Technion, for example, is well known abroad.

Try to take it easy (though I know it's not easy at all). All depends on how good you are, and not on the name of the school (though this name often reflects the average output level). I wish you all the best in your future career!

I'm also rejected by the ivies, but, fortunately, I have also applied to UW Madison and Rutgers, which have admitted me. I'm from Russia - it is really hard to do science here now. There is no funding at all for graduate students, so you have to combine work and studies, which usually leads to average results in both of the activities.

All the very best to you, mate.

nb
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:16 pm

Postby nb » Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:03 pm

My undergraduate school is indeed the technion it seems that I will stay here.

Good luck to you too :)

jormiga
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:30 pm

Postby jormiga » Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:35 pm

I'm sorry to hear that you didn't get into your top choices, nb. I think that if you really wanted to come to a US institution you should have applied to some back up schools. Almost any school would have accepted you, indeed.

Nevertheless, I believe you really applied to the schools you needed to. You are currently attending a very recognized and serious institution, and you can easily come for a postdoc to an American university. It would have been superfluous to apply to more schools here when your back up is Technion.

Good luck in your future endeavors and don't feel bad at all. I consider you are in the right path to become a great scientist.

mingsy
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:44 pm

Postby mingsy » Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:50 pm

Technion is a great school!!! I would have really liked to have taken a PhD under Joe Avron on the quantum hall effect. Unfortunately for me I am Malaysian and my country doesn't allow me to go to Israel. Muslim countries are like that. Wanna leave the first chance I get :D Would have really liked Japan too but I don't speak the language.

Anyway, best of luck and try not to feel down. The US PhD admission process is totally unfair and a freakin rip-off of my money. It doesn't gauge our true potential and achievements in a fair way. So don't feel bad that you've let yourself down, it's just that the system sucks.

I learnt that fate has a funny way of sorting out our futures, and if you are still determined, there is always next year to try again. I've wasted my whole year because I didn't try for the US last year and was stupid with my applications in the UK. But I was still determined to be a theorist and I am glad I didn't take the easy way out and get a 'REAL' job. I finally got one offer from UIUC so far which I will probably take unless I can find money for Birmingham.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter where you do your PhD, so long as you do a good one. Don't be too attracted by designer Ivy Universities in the US. Some of them are only famous because of clever marketing and because they have lots of $$$$.

Oh yeah, I have probably been rejected by Stanford too since I've not heard from them by now. TMD KKN CCB took my $100 bucks.

BTW 900 is a great score :wink: you should still be proud of that

braindrain
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 12:23 am

Postby braindrain » Sat Mar 03, 2007 2:19 pm

I can say what I've heard, but I have no proof.

One thing is that the admissions committees are suspicous of the high gre scores from foreign countries and some committees scale down those scores. This could be left over from an ETS security breach in China years ago. I don't think its fair how they treat the scores well, for anyone. It does seem that the score is more important than research ability, at least scores seem more correlated to acceptances than other factors based on stats people reported. It seems awfully strange for the universities to in a sense give their power away to the ETS corporation. If I were running a program (which I'm not - I'm not even running fruit stand :)), I would dump ETS and give my own admissions test. Then I think things would be different.

The other thing that seems apparent which I had no idea before I started this process is how important name recognition of your letter writters would be. I saw this in a few places that people said the committee's first cut is the scores and who wrote your letters. They are more comfortable accepting someone if they've heard of your recommender.

Then in another place I saw something even more shallow. Someone said that letters saying how great you are are useless. They want comparisons between you and every other student that person knows and where the compared student went to graduate school if relevant. Then this admissions committee member said summer letters are usually higher quality than letters during the year so they weigh them less. That was the dumbest thing I ever heard. Of course they are higher, the student worked full time and really got to know the people.

So, I think lots of problems lie in how the admissions committee interprets information. You would think physicists would be better at this.

soluyanov
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:06 pm

Postby soluyanov » Sat Mar 03, 2007 3:11 pm

I think that a phone interview may give a much better idea of the strengths of the applicant than any test.

Braindrain, how are you going? I mean where you go?

xtripledot
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:27 pm

Postby xtripledot » Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:32 pm

anyone here going for stanford applied physics or all you all talking about stanford physics? it seems to me that applied physics has sent out the first round of admits. i've heard of 5 admits and no rejections, and i've scoured the net...
hope that march 1 business you're talking about is for physics, not applied physics!

dbl
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 2:15 am

Postby dbl » Sun Mar 04, 2007 7:56 pm

If I were running a program (which I'm not - I'm not even running fruit stand Smile), I would dump ETS and give my own admissions test. Then I think things would be different.


Sure, but how would you administer it to everyone? A better question is why haven't universities banded together to create a new test. The answer from a professor I know is that basically, everyone realizes GREs are not a great tool, but no one wants to deal with writing a new test.

The other thing that seems apparent which I had no idea before I started this process is how important name recognition of your letter writters would be. I saw this in a few places that people said the committee's first cut is the scores and who wrote your letters. They are more comfortable accepting someone if they've heard of your recommender.


This is true, but not for the reasons you say I think. Let's say you get a letter from your professor that no one has ever heard of. He says you're the best student ever. Well, who else has he taught? How does the admissions committee know anything about this person and what he considers "best ever"? On the other hand, lets say your letter comes from someone famous who says you're this good. Then the committee knows specifically what that person means. Also, more famous people generally have more experience and can provide a better assessment of the student.

Peter
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:19 am

Postby Peter » Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:44 pm

Deleted
Last edited by Peter on Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

nb
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:16 pm

Postby nb » Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:31 am

@peter

As I said I prefer the Technion or Waizmann Ins' upon cornell. By the way all my professors told me that the people in MIT are not so briliant but I guess that you dont agree

Stanford publish in gradshooper that the avrage gre physics score for admition is 810 so I thought that this is safe scholl :oops:

Peter
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:19 am

Postby Peter » Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:10 am

I also got 900 on AGRE and did not get into Conrell, MIT, Berkeley but I was admitted to STONY Brook , Rochester, Rutgers and Maryland. For internationals the expectations are much higher.
My friend with AGRE 990 + publications was accepted to Chicago but was rejected form all the other top schools.

mingsy
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:44 pm

Postby mingsy » Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:22 pm

Honestly, to do well in the subject GRE, mostly requires practice. So it really isn't a good indication of actual potential, since the applicant who spends the most time on it, is obviously going to do well which is what most foreign applicants do anyway. Also, we have an unfair edge because undergraduate degrees from the rest of the world usually cover more material and with more depth that typical US programs (even if the US degrees cost more). These and other reasons are probably why admissions committees have higher cutoffs for their international applicants, unless the writers of their LORs know people in the US well or if they did summer work in an american department (very important it seems for astro applicants). I think most of us international applicants have learnt all this the hard way, I sure did.

soluyanov
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:06 pm

Postby soluyanov » Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:33 pm

Meanwhile, read the posts in acceptances thread.

There are two Europeans, one with 780 accepted to Cornell (he was going to do high energy theory), other with 680 accepted to Harvard astro.

Peter, when did you hear from Stony Brook? I haven't heard a word. They also do not reply to my emails. For my 80 bucks I do not deserve even being a little more polite with me.

I also have Rutgers and UW Madison. My result on GRE really sucks - only 730. However, I have 2 publications, 4 different grants awarded, MS degree with 4.0 for all grad courses... I think, we'll never know what makes our application go through or being sent away. One thing I know for sure - it was my GRE to loose Columbia...

soluyanov
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:06 pm

Postby soluyanov » Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:36 pm

I agree with mingsy. If your foreign adviser works with someone in US in the place where you apply to, and recommends you to this person, this is what really works.

Peter
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 11:19 am

Postby Peter » Mon Mar 05, 2007 1:55 pm

soluyanov your profile seems really strong to me with 2 publications and several awards. My admissions were 2 years ago I am in grad school right now. I got my Stony Brook admission via snail mail in February.

baksiidaa
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 6:35 pm

Postby baksiidaa » Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:16 pm

I just got a rejection email from Stanford Physics.

braindrain
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 12:23 am

Postby braindrain » Wed Mar 07, 2007 9:04 pm

mingsy says of international students: "Also, we have an unfair edge because undergraduate degrees from the rest of the world usually cover more material and with more depth that typical US programs (even if the US degrees cost more). "

But, didn't people say on this site, that upper level material does not help with the GRE?

mingsy: "I think most of us international applicants have learnt all this the hard way"

I think all of us learned about what really goes on with the admissions process by going through it. Unfortunately, some of the instances are expensive lessons, like the cost of whole school or not a picking a school.
Some of the instances seem like dishonesty or lies of omission on the part of the universities. If only we knew.

nb says: "all my professors told me that the people in MIT are not so brilliant".
peter says: "have to be a superbrilliant genius to get into any of the schools you mentioned as a foreigner."

What do I know, but from my 'top school' REU, I saw firsthand that the students are definitely NOT superbrilliant geniuses. I believe the professors were outstanding and some may be superbrilliant. But, the students, NO. The impression I did get is that the students are all super-aggressive, super-confident, and super-ambitious. I absolutely loved an environment where everyone around me is driven and ambitious. Together with some brains, that is a killer combination. Take the most aggressive person you know and multiply by 100 and that approximates how aggressive the students I saw were. Supergeniuses? Absolutely, NOT. I also believe that kind of over-confidence comes only from one thing - growing up wealthy. If you have money to fall back on and parents with connections, you become over-confident throughout life. That's just my opinion. The second type of student I've observed (not at the top school program) that seems to sail, is the children of professors. They know just what to do and how the system works.


@mingsy: "Some of them are only famous because of clever marketing and because they have lots of $$$$."

I totally agree with this. BUT, unfortunately I think part of the marketing is the enhancement of world reputation by overaccepting foreign students. They may be intrigued by a certain country that isn't supplying a lot of students and accept from there just so they can say "we have students from 80 countries" at this school. Increase the reputation in turn increases the demand, in turn increases the support of the school and it becomes a money cycle.

I saw a show on tv called 20/20 "privilege in America'. I was so disgusted I had to turn it off. It talked about undergrad admissions and it was shocking. That said some people are accepted without qualifications as development admits which means famous parents with money and connections. They showed Ralph Lauren's ( the designer) children going to Duke. I'm sure its not that blatent at the graduate school level, but it just confirmed my suspicions that this kind of stuff goes on. A better example is the president's children. Chelse Clinton was probably bright, but some of others went to Brown and were maybe were not. I was truly nausious after this show.


mingsy said: "At the end of the day, it doesn't matter where you do your PhD"

I agree, but unfortunately, the same game or worse happens when its time to get a job. If they haven't heard of your advisor or other applicants are from better schools, they may be looked at first. It seems that this admissions gig just placed us in the hierarchy of science. Do I think this is shallow of them and they are retarded for doing things this way? You betcha!


@soluyanov: Congratulations on your schools!! They look like good schools so you should
be happy, but its also my impression if I may say that your level is above them and your score really had an effect which is only a complement (thought you have great qualifications and seem like a thinking person). It makes me think the admissions committees really are stupid and depending too much on the gre score which they all admit is a bad measurement. It's odd. If you had a research result the equivalent a measurement as the gre score, you wouldn't think that was good research. I mean, if you wouldn't use a bad measurement for your research, why would anyone use a bad measurement to base decisions on. It's just frustrating to think about that. We should force them to use the score to make stock market investment decisions of their life savings - then they will finally realize the stupidity.

I would love to go to Israel also - think there is great research and a totally fascinating place to live, but I don't feel like being blown up on a bus.

For people who don't know why applications get accepted or not, did it ever occur to anyone that maybe our letter writers aren't writing what we think they are? I once had access to a summer jobs database and was shocked at what some professors wrote. The student thought they were wonderful and the professors said good things but were also candid about certain things. For example, if a professor says this person can't work independently, you are cooked. One professor said this student was Vietamese and it was part of her culture not to question authority and she really needs the summer job to see if its the right thing for her. I was shocked. I also had occassion once to see letters written about me - also different than what I expected. Makes me wonder if we should have waived our rights to see them or not. Did anyone NOT waive their rights to see their letters?
Last edited by braindrain on Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

artist
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 3:20 am

Postby artist » Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:55 pm

"That said some people are accepted without qualifications as development admits which means famous parents with money and connections."

I don't think this is true at all. For example, George W. Bush went to Yale, and he totally did that on his own.

soluyanov
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:06 pm

Postby soluyanov » Thu Mar 08, 2007 4:32 am

@artist :-))))) Before my application was kicked out of Yale's pool, I was thinking: They have admitted even G.W. Bush, why not to admit me then?

@braindrain Thanks for the words of support. Right at the beginning of the application process, I got the following from a professor at Columbia. "An international student with 730 GRE has to have something truly outstanding in all other parts of the application to get to top tier program." Well, I had not.... It is really painful to see the word "regret" starting the letters from elite schools and it really brakes my confidence.

But here is the main point of what I gained from the whole application process. F*ck rankings, all of them!!! I think myself to be a victim of those. We go mad about that U.S. News stuff and start to hunt for a "top" name in our "Ph.D. Whatever University". Probably, I'm thinking this way, because I did not get in in top10, but ranking programs in just "physics" is absolutely stupid in my opinion. Subfield ranking makes better sense, but still. Take condensed matter, for example. There are at least 4-5 subfields in cond mat, which are almost independent, besides some schools are good in theory, some in experiment... I doubt that people who apply for a PhD apply for "physics research as a whole", mostly, they have some specific interests. Those, who write "I'm interested in high energy theory" have some idea on what topic in this very vast field is good for them.

But, this "ranking stuff" really works, it made me apply to schools, where there are no people (or not really good people, compared to those in some lower ranked schools) working on those problems of cond mat theory, which are interesting to me. I was thinking, "I can deviate a little" - and this was a lie, I have enough experience (for this step, of course) to tell for sure, what I want to do now.

So my advise to all people, who plan to apply. F*ck rankings. Find people doing interesting stuff, and apply to their school. Be honest to yourselves. Being always honest is the only way to true knowledge.

mingsy
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:44 pm

Postby mingsy » Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:26 am

Just wanted to share one useful thing that I have learnt when deciding where to apply was actually to email a famous retired Professor whose area of research I wanted to get into. Actually I wished to have been supervised by him but he had long since gone into retirement. Anyway, I asked him politely about other ppl and groups who remain active and/or making breakthroughs in the areas I mentioned to him. He replies were very helpful, both in giving me some names and in deciding about which group might be a good fit. One of which was that it was really helpful for the theorist in CM to be close to their experimentalistal counterparts.

Anyway, the departments that he suggested were all not top tier. He did mention Harvard and MIT but actually reccommended Penn State just as highly because of his admiration for Prof. Jain whose work on composite fermions. Another was one of his PhD students (the best he had ever had) now at Texas at Austin where Alan MacDonald is also there now who also got his reccommendation. Princeton did come highly reccommeded, more than MIT and Harvard with at least 2/3 fauclty working on BEC/Quantum Hall things plus Dan Tsui is still producing good experimental data. There was Yale as well but only because of Prof. Read, not so much so because it was a well known. Stanford didn't even come up nor did Berkeley. But I alas decided not to try for Penn State because of the risk that I might not get the Prof. I wanted or that he might leave the department altogether later and I wouldn't be happy working on anything else. I did try Yale because I thought I would have more options but in retrospect after being rejected by Yale, I believe that it was as much as a gamble as it was with Penn State and I only wasted my 70 bucks there because I was attracted by the name Yale. I should've known better but hey I am human too. I only tried Princeton because of his advice even if I knew that my chances were slim and didn't give Harvard or MIT any second thoughts.

So I think all in all it was really helpful to get an idea of who is who just from writting enthusiastically to a retired emeritus Prof. who'd you'd admired to get honest opinions and to the hell with the rankings.

So far I have one offer from UIUC which I am still very happy about esp. since there are so many potential supervisors to choose from the faculty. I am only worried about the competition and the TA workload that I've been warned of by many.

nb
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:16 pm

Postby nb » Thu Mar 08, 2007 9:14 am

Braindrain says : "I would love to go to Israel also - think there is great research and a totally fascinating place to live, but I don't feel like being blown up on a bus. "

You can come and see for yourself, we live peacfuly and I think that the news broadcast diffrent reality. It will be great to see students from all around the world come to isreal.

JWC
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 1:44 pm

Postby JWC » Thu Mar 15, 2007 2:45 pm

(I posted it again at here, because it is a topic for STANFORD's guys.)

It is a little funny to let you guys know about this letter.

I just got rejection from Stanford with the letter as following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
STANFORD, CALIFORNIA 94305-4060

DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS

March 9, 2007

Mr. XXXXX
355 Church Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
China

Dear Mr. XXXX,
............
Professor XXXXXX (everyone know who he is)
Chair Physics Department, Graduate Admissions Committee
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I do not understand what the hell this Professor is, since he wrote for me the letter with my adress in USA but the country in CHINA.

I checked the website, he is a STRING THEORIST, he did his PhD in PRINCETON. I do not understand, how can he write the letter like this. Or he is theorist so he only know about MATH and he did not know what geography is? therefore he can move MI 48109 to CHINA.

IF you guys read the lecture notes from Professor Feynman that he wrote: MATH IS NOT A SCIENCE BUT THE GEOGRAPHY IS A SCIENCE. So you guys will see: IT IS QUITE TRUE, ISN'T IT!

SO WHAT YOU GUYS EXPECTED TO LEARN FROM THE STANFORD, WHICH THEY HAVE THE CHAIR GRADUATE ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE LIKE THIS.

braindrain
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 12:23 am

string theorists

Postby braindrain » Thu Mar 15, 2007 5:28 pm

You can't possibly think he addressed and mailed out his own letters. He must have had a secretary doing it. She obviously messed up by not erasing an extra line in an address. There may be a China-town in Michigan, but there sure ain't no Michigan in China :).

Speaking of string theorists. I was wondering if people thought they are harder on theory students than other theory people. I mean, they have to have a higher level of mathematical sophistication that some of the other theoretical or computation work and do they hold people to those same standards, or do other theorists see their theory just as difficult as string theory?

mingsy
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:44 pm

Postby mingsy » Thu Mar 15, 2007 5:42 pm

Even if it was his mistake, I wouldn't be too surprised :D There is always going to be that Professor who is really brilliant in physics and mathematics but who gets everything else utterly wrong.

@ braindrain
I definitely felt that they were harder on aspiring string theorists at Cambridge. I think David Tong said it best

"String theory is an ambitious project. It purports to be an all-encompassing theory of the universe, unifying the forces of nature, including gravity, in a single quantum mechanical framework. The theory involves many elegant mathematical ideas, woven together to form a rich and beautiful tapestry of unprecedented sophistication. It is also quite hard."

http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/research.html

But as far as hard theorems in pure/applied mathematics goes, you could do worse than String Theory like the Rienmann hyphothesis

artschoolapplicant
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:44 pm

Postby artschoolapplicant » Thu Mar 15, 2007 5:48 pm

At the risk of inflaming this board, let me just say that when CM theorists come up with a new model, they distribute it to spectroscopists and microscopists and materials specialists for testing.
When string theorists come up with a new model, they call their press agents with an abstract for their next book deal.

String theorist : "Dude! Brane totally sounds like brain. Maybe, like, the universe is totally created when big fat brains smash together. Awesome! I'm like wicked smart."

artschoolapplicant
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:44 pm

Postby artschoolapplicant » Thu Mar 15, 2007 5:56 pm

@mingsy's quote

Let's see what happens when we take all the press-release-ready adjectives and unnecessarily literary verbs out of that statement. Also, let's try talking about string theory without "purporting" action verbs to it.

Now what do we have?

"String theory is a project. We want it to be a theory of the universe that explains lots of stuff that's not explained purty yet. The theory has lots of maths, that we keep splicing together. Give me funding, I'm like totally a weaver loom tapestry lady thing. A Fate. Right. I'm one of the Fates. No one can do this awesome stuff 'cept me."

mingsy
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:44 pm

Postby mingsy » Thu Mar 15, 2007 6:20 pm

@artschoolapplicant
Chill dude 8)

At the current moment in time, string/brane Theory is at best, fun but hard mathematics. It still has a very pure math flavour to it and will do so for a long time to come. So just treat it as that. It may be different from mainstream physics, in that it's not really an acceptable physical theory (yet), but that's no reason to hate it any more than there is any reason to dislike pure math. I've met a few string theorists and they aren't all "wankers". Most are just worried that their work will never be vindicated experimentally in their lifetime, which is a very sad thing for any true theoretical physicist. Which is probably why Witten and others have had a change of heart.

braindrain
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 12:23 am

Postby braindrain » Thu Mar 15, 2007 7:04 pm

I mean if the string theorists are on an admissions committee do you think they are harder on the theory students because of it than say a different type of theorist? I guess there's another question we have no way of knowing. I think I'm driving myself crazy overanalyzing the system unless I actually sit on an admissions committee or can transform myself into a fly on the wall and its not like it matters at this point. I guess I do like to know how things work.
I once judged a high school science fair with a mathematician from Russia and other assorted senior engineers and his grade for a good student that we saw was 50 points lower than our grades. The string-a-lings may have different standards which aside from the lack of money might be nuking all the theory applicants except for those capable of string-a-linging with them. I'm not a big fan of string theory. I kinda feel asleep during Brian Greenes NOVA special or was that because it was so watered down.

artschoolapplicant
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:44 pm

Postby artschoolapplicant » Thu Mar 15, 2007 7:22 pm

@mingsy

No no, I'm definitely not angry...and I fully accept and know everything you said [pure math, not experimentally vindicated which would be nice, and so on].

It's interesting how good prominent physicists are at not only doing their work but also currying favor with whatever societal segment funds them. The good CM theorists I know can write proposals which make tech companies salivate. Stringy people on the other hand have a knack for distilling their work into tight, coherent, and invigorating sound bites communicating the "ADVANCEMENT OF HUMAN KNOWLEDGE." Which is good for them, because it's [mostly] the public dime that erects the particle-smashers.

No...if I don't get off a certain waitlist (for a college with the ISM theory I think I'd most like to pursue right now), I'll be studying particle theory myself...

mingsy
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:44 pm

Postby mingsy » Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:04 pm

I really hope you get place, artschoolapplicant :) You really seem like a person passionate about physics and astro stuff.

schmit.paul
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 7:48 pm

Postby schmit.paul » Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:50 pm

braindrain:

I love the new verb "string-a-linging"!!! I think I'll mention it to Anton Kapustin when I meet with him next week at Caltech....way to put all of that mindblowing mathematical gymnastic effort into one delightfully fun-to-say word :-)




Return to “School Selection”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest