The h Bar

FenderLesPaul

7:01 PM

idk

I've never bothered to waste time reading it

0celo7

Waste time?

FenderLesPaul

yes

it's a waste of time reading it

0celo7

why

FenderLesPaul

it's just a bunch of proofs leading up to a proof of something that is so obvious from a physical point of view

I mean if you think you'd enjoy it then go for it

I just meant that for me it's a waste of time

dmckee

@0celo7 No much. The biggest thing is your letters of recommendation followed by indications of academic capability (good grades, mostly but maybe your GRE and subject GRE scores a bit).

0celo7

7:04 PM

@dmckee Does this depend on the field? I might go for applied math in grad school, but I want to write my thesis on some completely useless geometry thing.

dmckee

@0celo7 I only let them run in the dryer about five minutes and then hand them to finish. But you need enough shirts and enough space to hand them.

@0celo7 I've no idea about math. I speak only about physics.

user54412

I would hazard a guess that even in math that you did something is much more important than what you did

dmckee

@ChrisWhite Most of the people who are so liberal with the credit aren't scientists. So it's no more than I expect.

0celo7

@dmckee Ok, but regarding physics/applied physics: I probably won't be working for any of the fusion researchers at UT because they straight up told me they have no use for undergrads. So I'm working for a solid state physics researcher and I've been told I can write my thesis on the work I'll do there in the next years. Will this hurt me when looking at fusion/similar grad school programs?

dmckee

I look on Einstein's waffling about things as a model in some ways. He was willing to change his mind, which means that he was still questioning.

@0celo7 Physics grad schools will be intensely interest that you were doing real research as an undergrad.

0celo7

7:09 PM

Looks like UTK is going to be the next UVA if this blows up :(

dmckee

They'll be less interested in what it was. I mean, if it was in a related field that's a bonus. But the fact of research (assuming you get a good letter out of it) out weighs everything else.

FenderLesPaul

@dmckee I think that really depends on the caliber of the school

for top 20 schools you have to compete with people that did extensive research in their field of interest

0celo7

I think it's related. The work is on materials in high pressure, heat and radiation environments.

@FenderLesPaul My school is top 5 in my field.

FenderLesPaul

so it's not as easy as just doing research in anything

@0celo7 yeah so?

0celo7

@FenderLesPaul So if I can't do the undergrad research I want here, why would people anywhere else be able to do it?

FenderLesPaul

7:11 PM

Lol what?

dmckee

@FenderLesPaul I worked with a lot of particle people who went to top schools. Most had done some research as undergrads but only a few had done particle research as undergrads. So it counts, but it isn't an overwhelming factor.

0celo7

@FenderLesPaul So people who want to go to a top school in the field would come to my school. But what you're saying is that I wouldn't have a chance against those people even though I'm already here.

FenderLesPaul

@0celo7 how do you know they haven't done extensive research in the field at their undergrad?

@dmckee true for hep-th it's really hard to do research in the field as an undergrad

user54412

I think @0celo7 is saying no one does fusion research as an undergrad, which I sort of believe.

FenderLesPaul

but that's because hep-th has a lot of pre-requisites

0celo7

7:13 PM

@FenderLesPaul I think it's the same way for fusion

FenderLesPaul

@0celo7 @ChrisWhite oh I see what you're saying

Danu

@ChrisWhite I'm pretty stoked with ya know... GR, though.

FenderLesPaul

ok

0celo7

@FenderLesPaul I'm saying that if at a top 5 school literally no one is doing undergrad fusion research, why would I be competing against people who did fusion research as undergrads?

If there are any, they'd be few in number.

FenderLesPaul

well just because the other people aren't from top 5 doesn't mean they haven't somehow been able to access research in the field easier

they may have had a professor who was willing to take in an undergrad student

whereas at your university that might not be the case

0celo7

7:16 PM

I think getting into fusion is pretty damn tough. You can't just be a one-off fusion researcher.

user54412

Yeah, to do fusion research you probably need at a bare minimum fluid dynamics and several courses on plasma physics, which very few undergrads can get to in time.

FenderLesPaul

Sure but tough doesn't mean impossible

These people do exist even if they aren't the majority

0celo7

@ChrisWhite That reminds me...I should look into some fluids classes for next semester.

user54412

And all the precocious physics majors just take QFT and maybe GR if they're not that masochistic -- plasma just isn't sexy enough

0celo7

They might all require more PDE than I have...

FenderLesPaul

7:17 PM

@ChrisWhite that's certainly true

0celo7

I would never take GR at UTK from the physics department.

FenderLesPaul

Fluid mechanics is pretty sexy though

0celo7

And QFT would be Feynman diagrams for days because the physics faculty are all hep-ex people.

dmckee

@0celo7 It's quite a good hep-ex group.

0celo7

@dmckee Because of ORNL?

Now if my math adviser would teach a special topics course on Lorentzian geometry, that would be chill.

dmckee

7:20 PM

I'm sure that helped. Because these things need something to nucleate them, but I was just stating my observation that the group is well respected in the community.

0celo7

Ah, ok.

Is it normal that the undergrad and grad course catalogs are separate? It's really annoying.

FenderLesPaul

@0celo7 For most schools

yes

user54412

I was going to say no...

FenderLesPaul

I think caltech is an exception

:p

I don't even know if caltech has a notion of undergrad/grad after the first or second year

0celo7

> MATH 513 - Mathematical Principles of Fluid Mechanics I

3 Credit Hours
Equations of motion, incompressible and compressible potential flow, shock waves, viscous flows. Navier-Stokes equations.
Recommended Background: Advanced courses in ordinary and partial differential equations and advanced calculus.

Advanced courses?

user54412

7:24 PM

surely at most schools there are plenty of courses where grads and undergrads mix, right?

0celo7

@ChrisWhite Yes.

I'm saying the 100-400 courses are in one list and then there's another with the 400-600

The 400s are listed twice

FenderLesPaul

@ChrisWhite I think he was just asking if it's normal that the catalogs are separate

user54412

so much differentiation

FenderLesPaul

i.e. the course listings

user54412

we had the same idea, but it was 1-99 for undergrads (grad students don't get credit), 100-199 for mixed, 200-299 for grads (would never be a requirement for undergrads)

0celo7

7:26 PM

@ChrisWhite The 400s are mixed at UTK

My PDE course is 400 -- which is a joke, tbh.

Not the course, but the fact that it's 400.

I think it's perfectly reasonable for a freshman, I can't believe there are grad students in the class.

user54412

lol

0celo7

@ChrisWhite I know, right? The average engineer does really suck at math.

And the class is 95% engineers.

user54412

Our complex analysis, ODE, PDE class (basically all the applied math you need to be a physicist or engineer) was ACM 95. But then they realized most grad students never learned this stuff as undergrads, so they cross-listed to ACM 101 so all the grads could take it.

0celo7

I could have taken complex this semester, it might have been a mistake to not take it.

user54412

The average undergrad in any field, it turns out, spends 4-6 years doing... I really don't know what. But certainly not taking classes pertinent to their degree.

0celo7

7:30 PM

6?

People take 6 years for undergrad?

dmckee

I've been a school where mixed undergrad/grad courses were given a single number and at places where they got two.

Now, you might think the distinction would go with grading policy (one pool or two), but I never saw a correlation. The instructors would decided on the basis his or her own preferences.

0celo7

Ok, these prerequisites don't make sense. Why is analysis a requirement for what are clearly applied math classes aimed at engineers?

Unless "advanced calculus" is not analysis but just vector calculus

user54412

^ that

0celo7

Why can't they say you need this course and give the course number

user54412

it's probably just to dissuade people from having taken pre-calc in HS from thinking they're prepard

user54412

7:38 PM

@0celo7 most schools/profs aren't so organized with the curriculum

user54412

most of my professors teaching core, institutional requirements had no idea how the course fit in to the sequence every student took

Danu

Professors etc. don't give a crap, typically

user54412

for example stat mech was deliberately the term after statistics, but the prof thought he had to start with "what is a gaussian" and "what is expectation value"

Danu

especially not at the graduate level; courses for freshmen are sometimes different

user54412

so I've never actually had a stat mech course

Danu

7:40 PM

You had a statistics course in your physics undergrad? :P

Ah, the luxury

user54412

not any more -- they reevaluated the curriculum and concluded having one was too hard, and students should just take whatever feels good at the time

0celo7

@ChrisWhite But "advanced calculus" is the name of the analysis course at the undergrad level

Danu

My bachelor's was so god damn sketchy

I literally had never heard of "Lebesgue integrals", "open metric ball", "topology" at the end of it.

0celo7

I don't think most undergrads have...

Danu

At the end of the undergraduate degree? In physics? Hmm...

Engineers, sure.

0celo7

7:44 PM

If you believe DS, @Danu, they haven't

Is real analysis a requirement for most physics undergraduate degrees?

I kinda doubt that.

Maybe for a theoretically oriented program, which is probably what you mean

But e.g. the physicists in my lab who are all experimentalists have never taken analysis and are terrified of topology

Danu

No, but at least having heard the words :P

Not actually knowing how to prove things with them

0celo7

we should ask @dmckee

dmckee

I suck at topology. I've always like math, so I'm conversant with the mathematical approach to proofs at the level of a undergrad math major. But I don't have the depth of understanding needed to use the more abstract approaches to GR or even classic mechanics.

Marsden's book stumped me, and I took a B in a class where the professor admitted that all you needed to get an A was to turn in all the assignment.

Danu

@dmckee D'aww... So you handed in... half?

dmckee

I went to see him 14 weeks into semester and told him I no longer even understood the questions.

Danu

7:51 PM

The Marsden & Ratiu book looks really nice btw ;)

dmckee

I'd understood the first half or so and turned in some crap corresponding to another quarter or so.

0celo7

amazon.com/Marsden-Manual-Clinical-Nursing-Procedures/dp/…

Danu

But definitely not a walk in the park

0celo7

Wow @dmckee

Is this a really hard book?

Danu

lol

dmckee

7:53 PM

I think my sister in law has that.

Or had it.

These days she's studying for her MSN.

0celo7

> PHYS 571 - Mathematical Methods in Physics I

3 Credit Hours
Linear vector spaces, matrices, tensors, curvilinear coordinates, functions of a complex variable, partial differential equations and boundary value problems, Green’s functions, integral transforms, integral equations, spherical harmonics, Bessel functions, calculus of variations.
Cross-listed: (Same as Mathematics 517.)

Recommended Background: Advanced calculus and differential equations.

@dmckee Any clue if they mean analysis or just vector calculus there?

@ChrisWhite That seems similar to the class you were talking about.

dmckee

Could go either way.

The analysis is probably pretty light, but not non-existent. At least if they want to treat analytic extension to the complex plane properly and actually prove the residual theorem.

Not every math methods course goes that deep, though.

Danu

"linear vector spaces"

nonlinear vector spaces??

0celo7

@Danu That course description was probably jumbled together in 1965 and hasn't changed since :P

dmckee

In any case that is usually a toolkit course and may treat different subjects at different levels of rigor.

0celo7

7:58 PM

@dmckee Indeed, I doubt they treat Green's functions using distribution theory

Danu

lel

Actually

0celo7

But "Applied Analytical Mathematics" has "distributions" in the course description...

Danu

If you read the appendices to Mukhanov's QFT in cuvred spacetimes book

dmckee

@0celo7 None of my math methods course did.

0celo7

@Danu why is that funny?

Danu

8:00 PM

he manages to do everything extremely concisely, yet in simple terms and not egregriously neglegting the theory

@0celo7 Oh, just the dryness of your remark. I thought it was nice :)

0celo7

@Danu I said it because I want to learn about distributions...

but I can't take functional analysis until my last year

And of course this other math methods course covers calc of variations, but I want to take the real calc of variations course

Although judging by the prof it's just Arnold-style classical mechanics

dmckee

If you wanted to look at a "typical" graduate math methods text try Arfken (I think there is an edition with coauthors these days but when I took that course there was only one name on it).

There is no broad agreement on a "good" undergraduate level math methods text.

0celo7

My next semester will be the last time I take undergrad math classes, I think.

dmckee

Or rather everyone complains bitterly that Boas isn't the text they want but is much better than any of the alternatives.

0celo7

There are no undergrad math methods classes, anyway

dmckee

8:08 PM

UCSB taught one when I went there. So did NMSU, and we're trying it out at MSSU.

At UCSB it was separate from the graduate version. At NMSU they through the undergrads in the deep end with the grads. And of course that is not an issue at Southern.

0celo7

@dmckee I wouldn't take it, anyway. I'm fairly sure I'm ready for graduate level classes if they don't explicitly require calculus on Banach spaces

Danu

No undergrad math methods classes?!

dmckee

@0celo7 That would be a good call. But you're atypically prepared.

Danu

@dmckee Kreyszig no good?

dmckee

@Danu There is a long running debate about it.

Danu

8:10 PM

I think it's pretty good for a concrete, hands-on approach

dmckee

@Danu No idea. I haven't looked at it. WOuld that be for undergrad or grad?

0celo7

@Danu Oh, there are undergrad courses for all of those things IN Arfken, but no overview class

Danu

@dmckee Undergrad

dmckee

Some programs like to teach the math coincident with the application. Other like to teach the math in a unified context.

Danu

The math. methods courses for undergrads in Amsterdam are taught from it

dmckee

8:11 PM

Some places switch back and forth every decade or so.

Danu

It's called something like "Advanced Engineering Mathematics"

FenderLesPaul

does academia stack exchange allow for threads on choosing grad schools?

dmckee

@Danu Then I'll get a desk copy. Thanks.

Danu

Kreyszig is a functional analyst, I think

@dmckee I think it's very decent. I goes all the way from basic differential equations to conformal mapping problems for 2D electrostatics (Fourier series on the way---about halfway inbetween)

dmckee

@FenderLesPaul More or less no.

0celo7

8:12 PM

@Danu Well, undergrads are free to take graduate courses here, so they probably don't see a need to make an undergrad course

Danu

@FenderLesPaul What are your choices? ;)

@0celo7 ...but where does one learn to solve differential equations?

You guys don't have a course on e.g. PDE's, Fourier series and stuff?

0celo7

@Danu Differential equations class?

Danu

(in the undergrad)

0celo7

What kind of question is that

I'm taking undergrad PDE right now

Danu

@0celo7 Oh, that's math. methods to me

FenderLesPaul

8:13 PM

@dmckee ok

0celo7

Probably the most boring class ever

FenderLesPaul

@Danu UCSB, UChicago, Cornell, MIT

Danu

@FenderLesPaul sick.

Congrats

0celo7

I wonder how many times the prof can write $X''+\lambda X=0$ before dying

FenderLesPaul

my interests and background are classical and quantum gravity

@Danu thanks!

Danu

8:13 PM

You have officially secured "the easy road" to being a well-known physicist!

Did you apply to Princeton?

FenderLesPaul

heh

I did

Danu

They're most strong in the gravity related things

FenderLesPaul

didn't get in

Danu

Ah, :\

me neither ;D

FenderLesPaul

:)

Danu

8:14 PM

But I didn't get into MIT either :P

Can you give me links to faculty members in the relevant research groups @FenderLesPaul?

I can give you an indication of who I think are well known/ good

FenderLesPaul

I'm probably not going to consider MIT because they don't really have a classical or quantum gravity group

but for the others yeah sure

UCSB: web.physics.ucsb.edu/~relativity/people.html, physics.ucsb.edu/research/hept

UChicago: physics.uchicago.edu/research/areas/general_relativity.html

Danu

"gravity people" lol

FenderLesPaul

Cornell: physics.cornell.edu/research/…, physics.cornell.edu/research/…, physics.cornell.edu/research/…

@Danu haha yeah

0celo7

Just to be 100% clear, does getting into grad school depend on the undergrad school's department or overall reputation?

FenderLesPaul

@Danu right now my top choice is UCSB

but I wanted to get others' views

Danu

8:18 PM

Btw @FenderLesPaul you're purely interested in theory, right?

FenderLesPaul

@0celo7 not directly no

@0celo7 possibly indirectly

Danu

So things like lensing are not of interest, I assume

FenderLesPaul

@Danu yes indeed

yeah not really into that

0celo7

@FenderLesPaul No, I mean which is more important

Danu

(because it's boring, in terms of theory)

0celo7

8:19 PM

@FenderLesPaul Obviously work for Polchinski or Srednicki

FenderLesPaul

Mainly into things like gauge/gravity duality

black hole information

Danu

Okay.

0celo7

I don't see how this is an issue, @FenderLesPaul

FenderLesPaul

Hamiltonian structure of general relativity

things of that nature

Danu

I'll go the reverse order of what you provided me

FenderLesPaul

8:19 PM

@0celo7 I would say department

not overall ranking

Danu

McAllister I know---he's doing inflationary models from strings

0celo7

@FenderLesPaul Ok.

Danu

Very phenomenological

Not very mathematical/"beautiful" in my opinion

0celo7

Your grad school struggles have me worried since my school, overall, isn't great, but the department is

Danu

If inflation gets (more?) experimental support it could be hot again though

FenderLesPaul

8:21 PM

@Danu yeah I should have mentioned that I'm not too interested in string pheno

actually not interesting in it at all

Danu

Okay so then McAllister is not really who you wanna be working with

I don't know Hartman---he's very young

Seems like mostly CFT stuff, I think that's interesting

FenderLesPaul

@0celo7 well hep-th is pretty brutal all around for admissions so I wouldn't use my situation as a gauge for your interests

@Danu yeah I really like CFT/formal field theory research as well

Danu

and entanglement entropy

FenderLesPaul

not as much as gravity but I really do like entanglement entropy/pure field theory stuff

Danu

So maybe he'd be okay. I'd also take him being young as a plus, though it means he's probably less famous

Third Cornell guy nvm him cause he's more applied

btw none of these pages list postdocs

which is a shame

Would be much better if you could find the postdocs too

FenderLesPaul

8:24 PM

as far as I know Cornell has like 2 theory post-docs

Danu

Though probably at the rate at which they get replaced the info is essentially useless to you

FenderLesPaul

I have no idea about UChicago

Danu

You won't be doing research for a few years

So little? Funny. One guy I did a little project used to be a postdoc there.

FenderLesPaul

Oh btw I didn't link to UChicago's HEP theory group because it's essentially just one guy

Danu

On to Chicago: Geroch and Wald are old

FenderLesPaul

8:25 PM

Savdeep Sethi

and he does the same stuff as Liam more or less (i.e. pure string theory) which I'm not into at all

Danu

Wald's research is very interesting IMO but only because I like QFT in curved spacetimes

FenderLesPaul

@Danu oh Geroch is retired I should've mentioned

0celo7

@FenderLesPaul If I could get into Princeton for applied physics with a fusion focus I'd be pretty happy...but according to @ChrisWhite they're terrible to grad students

Danu

The third guy is again too applied

FenderLesPaul

so it's just Wald

Danu

8:25 PM

Okay, so not very nice then I'd say

FenderLesPaul

and yeah Wald is like 70

Danu

UCSB is amazing

0celo7

In my junior year I'll go back to the fusion guys and see if they'll do anything with me

Danu

Those guys are all very good

0celo7

Work for Zee

He's very rigorous

FenderLesPaul

8:26 PM

@0celo7 lel

@Danu yeah I was interested in a bunch of people

at UCSB

Don Marolf, Gary Horowitz, Joe Polchinski, David Berenstein, and Srednicki

all of them do stuff I like a lot

and I guess UCSB has the added benefit of KITP

so lots of theory post-docs and seminars/workshops

Danu

Yeah, very good

Easy choice, I'd say

FenderLesPaul

ok cool

Danu

KITP is very nice too, yeah

FenderLesPaul

I was just wavering between that and UChicago because of Bob Wald

Danu

Berenstein seems to do AdS/CFT

FenderLesPaul

8:27 PM

and his classical GR research which I really like

but like you said he's really old

Danu

Yeah

FenderLesPaul

so he's probably not as dynamic with his grad students now

0celo7

Wald is a legend...he cannot die

Danu

I have very bad experiences with old, famous guys

FenderLesPaul

and I think in today's age doing purely classical GR research and no quantum stuff at all (which Wald doesn't really do) would be career suicide

Danu

8:28 PM

I think they're not the best to be with when you're just getting started.

Well, Wald does QFTCS

which I think has a lot of potential

FenderLesPaul

@Danu that's true

but most of his recent papers seem to be purely classical GR

0celo7

@FenderLesPaul You'd have to assassinate him if he wrote $\Gamma^a{}_{bc}$

FenderLesPaul

not that they aren't interesting

0celo7

that would suck

FenderLesPaul

I like his recent papers very much

@0celo7 haha fair

Danu

8:30 PM

Btw

0celo7

Does anyone do pure GR?

Besides Wald

Danu

Doesn't UCSB also have a lot of geometry?

FenderLesPaul

@Danu I think if either Marolf or Horowitz are still into doing combinations of classical and quantum gravity then I'd be sooo down

@Danu like on the math side?

@0celo7 not that I know of, other than Flanagan at Cornell who does some stuff similar to Wald

Danu

Yes

I think they have some really interesting conference on mirror symmetry and such right around now

FenderLesPaul

@Danu yeah there's Morrison and some other people

0celo7

8:31 PM

you and your mirror symmetry

FenderLesPaul

@Danu ok sweet, thanks for the help!

Danu

@0celo7 Well I'm going to be working on that, so yeah I'm psyched about it haha

FenderLesPaul

I think your views are basically the same I'm going to get from anyone I ask so it's basically tipped entirely towards UCSB

yay :)

0celo7

@Danu My number of possible thesis topics is growing out of control

FenderLesPaul

@Danu in fact like 4 months ago before I was applying my top 2 choices were Princeton and UCSB

0celo7

8:33 PM

I've only got like 2 more years to decide

Since I have to write two of them, I'll probably be starting early

FenderLesPaul

so I'm happy I got into one of them

@Danu actually I have a more general question to ask as well

0celo7

@FenderLesPaul I have a proposal

FenderLesPaul

have you ever worked for some time (maybe a year or two) in a specific research subfield that you like a lot but you know wouldn't be a good career path in the long run

and were given opportunities to enter into more promising/contemporary fields

but were having a hard time letting go of working in that subfield you like so much?

@0celo7 sup?

0celo7

@FenderLesPaul I might be doing the opposite right now. Solid state research is VERY hot

But I don't think I'll enjoy it

@FenderLesPaul To celebrate your being accepted into UCSB, you should buy me Beem, Ehrlich and Easley

Danu

@FenderLesPaul Sure, what I'm doing now? :D

I'm very young (still in the MSc., as you might already know) so I have never really worked on something for multiple years.

0celo7

8:38 PM

@FenderLesPaul I'm not sure @Danu is the best to ask about that

Because he's European

Danu

But what I'm going into right now is quite esoteric

In general, I think HEP is a bad career choice. It might be best, career-wise, to keep close contact with at least condensed matter theory and stuff like that.

FenderLesPaul

@0celo7 what's Beem et al?

@Danu I see

fair point, I would agree

0celo7

@FenderLesPaul a bible of Lorentzian geometry

they do Morse theory, comparison theorems, etc.

FenderLesPaul

@Danu in that case it would also be good to go to a place that's strong in CMT

right?

0celo7

no connection to physics as far as I can tell