how to deal with a significant interest other than physics?

[axiomofchoice]

So here is my situation: I'm a pianist and I'm a physics major and wanna-to-be physicist. I love piano/music enough that I will be getting a bachelor of music degree from piano performance in a major music conservatory along with my bachelor of science in physics; I might even end up with a master of music since it involves so little extra work. But I want a career in physics not in piano (reasons irrelevant ).

My question is: how and how much should I mention my involvement in music in my internship application and eventually grad school application? Coursework-wise I'm basically on track as a regular physics major, and I've been getting mostly A, and the rest A+'s and A-'s in my physics and math courses, so my physics part is certainly no weaker than my music part of the degree. However, because of the extra workload and demanding practicing schedule (typical for a piano major) I can never fit any time for research during the semester, and because of the higher number of classes required of a bachelor of music degree, more than half of my classes per semester are music classes (not many credits are involved though; they are 1- or 2-credit courses; but do people actually look at the credit amount per class?).

Does anyone have experience dealing with a major interest other than physics similar to mine?

Should I mention it as an excuse for the lack of research experience (I did do research in the summer though)?

Should I mention it briefly in statement of purpose to clarify that even though I put significant time/energy into music, I'm still serious about physics?

Would my application be viewed negatively since I seem to be setting feet on two different boats?

[grae313]

Should I mention it as an excuse for the lack of research experience (I did do research in the summer though)?

Should I mention it briefly in statement of purpose to clarify that even though I put significant time/energy into music, I'm still serious about physics?

Would my application be viewed negatively since I seem to be setting feet on two different boats?

My opinion, schools like interesting, unique, and well-rounded applicants. I'd say, highlight your interest and achievements in music--it will make you stand out as a dedicated and talented individual. It would explain why you don't have a lot of research experience, but be careful not to give the impression that music will come before your physics phd. Give them the impression that you are dedicated primarily to physics, or they might be worried that grad school will stretch you too thin.

[dlenmn]

I seem to recall an admissions committee person (Harvard?) mentioning someone with a music degree, and that they viewed it as a (slight) positive (since it might make for a more interesting student body). I'll see if I can dig up the reference. I think it would certainly be worth mentioning as a reason for why you haven't done more research. I have a friend who was an editor for his school's newspaper, and that prevented him from doing research. He mentioned it as the reason, and he did find admissions wise.

[dsperka]

If I were you, in my applications I would say that my number one passion is physics, even if that is a lie. Then spin your music background somehow that it seems like it makes you a better applicant. For example, you will be able to provide diversity in the academic community, it makes you more creative, etc. I did this in my personal statement for grad school. I don't have a music major like you, but I play in a rock band and play gigs two or three times per month and practice once a week, so it has been a significant interest of mine.

[twistor]

Don't mention it at all. If it's not physics related the committee has no business knowing about it. Remember, they judge you on whatever you write, so tell them what they want to hear.

[cato88]

I think it explains your lack of research a bit. It also gives you something to write about in that essay for UC schools asking about diversity that people with no interests at all other than physics complain is racist.

[nathan12343]

Don't mention it at all. If it's not physics related the committee has no business knowing about it. Remember, they judge you on whatever you write, so tell them what they want to hear.

Wouldn't that be gaming the system?

Anyway, I think playing an instrument at that level is something that's definitely worth mentioning, especially in light of the lack of research experience. If you plan on playing less while you're doing research, I'd mention that too.

[tokamak]

just tell harvard people that there is no difference between a musical composition and our universe, they both require strings....they love to hear that kinda sh.it.....throw in a composer as well and you will be most welcomed in bible belt with tons of fellowships...

[cato88]

Wouldn't that be gaming the system?

Gaming the system would be taking only required classes plus the easiest filler and using all your extra time for research and studying for PGRE.

[quizivex]

just tell harvard people that there is no difference between a musical composition and our universe, they both require strings....they love to hear that kinda sh.it.....throw in a composer as well and you will be most welcomed in bible belt with tons of fellowships...

Yeah, tell them you're a one-man-band and mention you'd be happy to play at their colloquia. You sing vocals, do the drums with your hands, take some viagra and strum the guitar with your dick! They love BS like that...

Oh wait, no... having a dick puts you at a disadvantage when applying to Harvard. Nvm!

[cato88]

Oh wait, no... having a dick puts you at a disadvantage when applying to Harvard. Nvm!

wish we had the smiley face that plays the drums like in some of the music forums.

[quizivex]

[cato88]

I meant this one with the snare snare bassdrum/crash

I still cant beat a whole band

[tokamak]

just tell harvard people that there is no difference between a musical composition and our universe, they both require strings....they love to hear that kinda sh.it.....throw in a composer as well and you will be most welcomed in bible belt with tons of fellowships...

Yeah, tell them you're a one-man-band and mention you'd be happy to play at their colloquia. You sing vocals, do the drums with your hands, take some viagra and strum the guitar with your dick! They love BS like that...

Oh wait, no... having a dick puts you at a disadvantage when applying to Harvard. Nvm!

why are you up in the middle of the night??...did you just wake up to take a leak and decided to quickly check this forum??......
for me it's middle of the day right now...

[quizivex]

I'm in a messed-up sleep schedule. I can never seem to get into a good pattern. Today I slept from 5pm to 11ish so I'll probably be up the rest of the night . I often check the forum for fun when I check e-mail and such. Blah

[Theoretischer]

.

[grae313]

Don't mention it at all. If it's not physics related the committee has no business knowing about it. Remember, they judge you on whatever you write, so tell them what they want to hear.

But what they want to hear is *not* that you are a physics automaton. I have read many anecdotal instances, from students, and directly from admissions persons, that people look for things that make your application unique, and interesting. They admit students to give a diverse and well-rounded student body. Being an accomplished musician is no small feat, and I think it's something that will look good on a resume and that he should be proud of.

Theoretischer, all the SOPs I wrote were two pages (except UW's, which I had to trim to 1 page).

I had a professor at Cornell tell me that one of the reasons my application stood out to him was because in my SOP I mentioned that, while I was dropped out of school for two years, I became the regional women's billiards champion. ::shrug::

[trani]

I had a professor at Cornell tell me that one of the reasons my application stood out to him was because in my SOP I mentioned that, while I was dropped out of school for two years, I became the regional women's billiards champion. ::shrug::

Honestly, that does not sound surprising at all... things like that are basically better proof of character than any letter. It shows that once you fixate on doing something you don't stop until you are the best. Combined with your record on physics at the time of application. It seems, current fixation is physics. Of course, they love it.

[YF17A]

OK, I actually feel qualified to answer this because this is exactly my situation (I'm a double major in horn performance and physics). I've decided that I'm going into physics, while doing music on the side, because honestly, no one would take me seriously as a physicist if my occupation was "professional musician."

Don't worry about half the credits being music, that's just what happens, and it doesn't need to be mentioned as long as you have a good long list of physics classes. My advice, if you're applying next year, is to try to start doing some research this year...as a horn major, I'm required to play in orchestras, chamber ensembles, etc., which takes up time, but my piano major friends say that they spend basically all their time practicing. So if there's some way to juggle your practice hours to make room for research, by ALL MEANS do that. I didn't happen to mention music in my statement of purpose, but I listed music-related things on my extracurricular activities and talked about it in my Berkeley personal history statement. Good luck!

[twistor]

Don't mention it at all. If it's not physics related the committee has no business knowing about it. Remember, they judge you on whatever you write, so tell them what they want to hear.

But what they want to hear is *not* that you are a physics automaton. I have read many anecdotal instances, from students, and directly from admissions persons, that people look for things that make your application unique, and interesting. They admit students to give a diverse and well-rounded student body. Being an accomplished musician is no small feat, and I think it's something that will look good on a resume and that he should be proud of.

Theoretischer, all the SOPs I wrote were two pages (except UW's, which I had to trim to 1 page).

I had a professor at Cornell tell me that one of the reasons my application stood out to him was because in my SOP I mentioned that, while I was dropped out of school for two years, I became the regional women's billiards champion. ::shrug::

I am a physics automaton. Your response does not compute.

[astrofan]

I am sorry, but WTF. I went to a good school (not top 10, but still good) and researched at a top 10 school. None of the professors I talked to said to mention my activities outside of physics. Mentioning your hobbies, or that you are good at music/sports/other activity might help you get in at Cornell, but not at the two Universities that I have been associated with. By the way, the people I talked to were on the admission committee at both schools.

Perhaps admissionsprof could weigh in on this, as I am very interested in hearing if this is a common factor among admission committees and how big a role it plays. Does being a talented musician/athlete mean more than having a publication, make up for a lower PGRE score or GPA, or make it acceptable to have not taken essential physics classes. I can see with two completely equal students, then you are flipping a coin anyway to decide, so it doesn't matter how they do it. However, I would be both shocked and annoyed if it was a bigger factor than that.

Where does it end? If you are attractive, should you send a picture of yourself to the committee? In addition to making the deparment more "diverse" and "well rounded", more undergrads might take physics courses if they have hot TAs (at least at my school, that was definetly a motivating factor for many liberal arts students). Why should a genetic gift of beauty be less important than a genetic gift of athleticism when considering an aplicant for a physics PHD.

[grae313]

I am sorry, but WTF. I went to a good school (not top 10, but still good) and researched at a top 10 school. None of the professors I talked to said to mention my activities outside of physics. Mentioning your hobbies, or that you are good at music/sports/other activity might help you get in at Cornell, but not at the two Universities that I have been associated with. By the way, the people I talked to were on the admission committee at both schools.

Woah, hobbies are very different than a degree in music. I think everyone would discourage against talking about your hobbies, or "extra curriculars." Those are not important anymore. I needed to mention wtf I was doing with myself while I was dropped out of school for two years, so that's why I had to mention it in my SOP. It was literally one sentence. The rest was academics, goals, and research. However, if you are extremely accomplished in a certain area, beyond a "hobby," I think it is quite relevant to grad school.

Perhaps admissionsprof could weigh in on this, as I am very interested in hearing if this is a common factor among admission committees and how big a role it plays. Does being a talented musician/athlete mean more than having a publication, make up for a lower PGRE score or GPA, or make it acceptable to have not taken essential physics classes. I can see with two completely equal students, then you are flipping a coin anyway to decide, so it doesn't matter how they do it. However, I would be both shocked and annoyed if it was a bigger factor than that.

Of course it doesn't mean *more* than having a publication. In the end, it's about your ability as a physicist and a researcher--that's what you try to get across in an application. But if you don't have a publication and it happens to be because you are an accomplished musician, that's worth mentioning. It does not make poor grades, GRE scores, or a weak classload look OK.

Where does it end? If you are attractive, should you send a picture of yourself to the committee? In addition to making the deparment more "diverse" and "well rounded", more undergrads might take physics courses if they have hot TAs (at least at my school, that was definetly a motivating factor for many liberal arts students). Why should a genetic gift of beauty be less important than a genetic gift of athleticism when considering an aplicant for a physics PHD.

Being attractive does not tell the admissions committee anything (or at least anything relevant) about you as a person, but being an accomplished musician does.

Remember you are trying to paint a picture of yourself as a motivated person who will add to the intellectual community at the school you attend, and who will be a successful researcher and scientist. You are also trying to make yourself stand out to the committee. In a sea full of great grades, great GRE scores, and publications, a researchless application might otherwise go into the trash pile if not for the fact that this person was actually busy doing something remarkable in its own right. It's not a ticket into any school, but again, it's worth mentioning.

[cato88]

Where does it end? If you are attractive, should you send a picture of yourself to the committee? In addition to making the deparment more "diverse" and "well rounded", more undergrads might take physics courses if they have hot TAs (at least at my school, that was definetly a motivating factor for many liberal arts students). Why should a genetic gift of beauty be less important than a genetic gift of athleticism when considering an aplicant for a physics PHD.

Havent studies shown that your more likely to get a job if youre attractive and taller. I doubt it happens consciously but instead is due by people looking for the good rather than bad. This also might explain why the sciences like chemistry that require an interview for PhD programs have more attractive/social TA's.

[dsperka]

If looks counted I'd be going to Harvard.

[excel]

Havent studies shown that your more likely to get a job if youre attractive and taller. I doubt it happens consciously but instead is due by people looking for the good rather than bad. This also might explain why the sciences like chemistry that require an interview for PhD programs have more attractive/social TA's.

I actually heard from a friend who was a student member on the admission committee at such a program that the program director had brought up the point of whether a candidate was not too quiet during his visit in the decision process. Of course, this is a weak piece of evidence (anecdotal+hearsay) and there are circumstances in which quieteness of a candidate can be of genuine concern.

[astrofan]

@grae313

How does being an acomplished musican tell the adission committee anything about how good a physicist you will be? The goal should be to get the best physicists and that is it. That is how you make the field better. I will take the guy with the research experience over the one who can play me a tune any day. The guy researching has shown that he loves to research (which is what we will be doing) and is willing to dedicate himself to physics. The guy who plays music in his free time has not shown me that, and I must guess about his ability to research. It annoys me that I worked my but off to be ready to study and research physics in grad school, and someone can simply say I was too busy with music to do the same.

This is entirely the problem with med schools, who take students that don't know their ass from their elbow when it comes to medicine because they were too busy pursuing humanities majors. There are many doctors in my family, and I have had lengthy discussions about the problems with medicine in this country. They all agree it starts with which students are accepted to medical school (The standard theory is to not do a science major so that you can keep a high GPA taking bull *** classes). They all agree that the physics method (at least, what I thought was the physics method) of choosing students is much better than the med school way. I guess physics is not imune to the same problems.

For example, I understand why you explained what you were doing in the interm in your application, and I am sure you got into Cornell because of your acadmic record. However, if you had spent the time off researching in physics, shouldn't that look better than taking the time off to be a billiards champion. Doesn't it prove that you have skill/dedication to the field.

[noojens]

How does being an acomplished musican tell the adission committee anything about how good a physicist you will be?

Um. Being a successful researcher involves doing a lot of stuff that physics undergrads don't really do, and can't effectively demonstrate on an application if they have (e.g. public speaking, technical writing, interpersonal skills, ability to deal effectively with extended bouts of sleep and sex deprivation...) Citing achievements in other areas at least suggests that you're the kind of dude (or dudette!) who's capable of working and excelling in areas other than book learnin'.

("You know... nunchuck skills, bow hunting skills, computer hacking skills... [admissions committees] only want boyfriends with skills.")

Plus, what sane committee would want to surround themselves with a bunch of kids who can't hold a conversation about anything other than physics? ZzzZzzZZzzZz.

[dsperka]

If someone can be an accomplished musician AND get great grades in physics and do physics research, it shows that this person is not only very smart but can also balance their time. It also shows that if this person were to begin to focus on only physics, they could probably do even better than they already were doing.

Now, if someone were to be an accomplished musician but have no research experience, this is obviously a negative on their application. The OP realizes this, and so should everyone else.

[cato88]

They all agree it starts with which students are accepted to medical school (The standard theory is to not do a science major so that you can keep a high GPA taking bull *** classes). They all agree that the physics method (at least, what I thought was the physics method) of choosing students is much better than the med school way. I guess physics is not imune to the same problems.

Youre all being idealist if you think it is only medicine. Taking the bare minimum is always suggested because it gives you time for research or studying for the PGRE. The bare minimum would probably be the required classes for physics major and a few math courses above that.
Ill let you in on another little secret no matter what your major is knowing people is going to trump your skills and talent. No matter how talented you are if there is a privately controlled company and the owner wants to give the CEO position t o his son over someone more talented he will have that job.
It is real life dealing with real people. Real people like making decisions easier by choosing friends.

[grae313]

For example, I understand why you explained what you were doing in the interm in your application, and I am sure you got into Cornell because of your acadmic record. However, if you had spent the time off researching in physics, shouldn't that look better than taking the time off to be a billiards champion. Doesn't it prove that you have skill/dedication to the field.

It should, and it does! I'm *not* trying to say that the music major looks *better* than research, only that as far as excuses for not having research go, it's a pretty good one.

I think the music major shows that a person has the ability to dedicate themselves to something challenging and excel at it, which is a skill they want grad students to have. There are certainly other ways of showing this that are more related to your physics ability, and that would look even better on an application. My entire point, again, is that having no research + music degree is better than having no research + nothing, and by making his application unique, will give him the benefit of standing out a bit. People will remember his application, for better or worse, they will notice it and be thinking about it because it is unusual--just how the human mind works.

[naseermk]

In grae's case, I think what stood out as a billiards champion is the fact that she sought to excel in whatever she did even though she 'lost' [not meant to offend]. We all face such situations in our lives and the fact that she confronted it and learned from it made her a strong candidate as well.

The case of a person choosing to do music instead of research could possibly hurt him rather than help. Given a choice between music and research, if one decides to pursue music rather than improve one's skills in Physics, that might hurt an application [again this will depend on the faculty who evaluates it].

[twistor]

I think grae313's application stood out because the department knew that if they were ever short on money they could take her to a local bar and hustle the townies for some quick cash.

[grae313]

I think grae313's application stood out because the department knew that if they were ever short on money they could take her to a local bar and hustle the townies for some quick cash.

hehe

[naseermk]

I see why the threads are so long, twistor.

Listen to your cat for once

[YF17A]

@astrofan: Your arrogance astounds me. Do you really think top grad schools are so gullible as to take someone with a music degree because of "diversity requirements"? Your comparison of a music degree from a major conservatory to sending a picture to show how attractive you are is offensive and simply highlights your ignorance. I'm sorry you are unable to see that people who pursue rigorous music/physics double degrees are not doing it for brownie points, but because they are actually passionate about more than one thing.

[cato88]

YF17A

Astrofan is right, You know damn well that Mother Teresa was only helping for a future Harvard MBA or Physics application. People love feigning interest on something for 8 years for a very slight boost instead of a few months on PGRE for a big boost.

[axiomofchoice]

Thanks to all your responses! To clarify, doing a parallel music degree is almost not a choice but simply a fact and it is something I'll do anyway even if my app to physics program will be negatively affected. I hope people can understand that getting in and getting a degree from a major conservatory is not easy and not for anyone who simply wants that degree on his/her resume, and I certainly did not do it to get extra bonus points in my applications. I tried very hard to make physics and music not interfere with each other, and I (repeat what I originally said) am just a normal physics major with perhaps below average research experience - I tried to do internships in the summer, so my research experience is not nothing. I'm simply asking how I should present my situation...

I'm especially interested to hear how the admission committee reacts on this kind of situations, so I really appreciate some of the anecdotes given.

YF17A:
Glad to hear someone on the same boat with me! I had problem with not even finding a common time slot with the graduate student who is suppose to get me started in research, and just gave up on doing research during the semester (plus I don't want to stretch myself too thin). Looking at your profile you certainly manage to find more time for research than I do; that's quite a feat. Good luck on your applications!

[YF17A]

Yes, finding time for research is tough...right now I've dropped the ball on my research because I need to finish composing a voice and piano piece...but I think the best option is alternation, rather than trying to do everything at the same time. My advice remains: go light on the chamber music and accompanying for one semester, and just throw yourself into research. (I'm sure you're not required to do much playing beyond lessons/recitals every single quarter you're in school, or your music school is a lot more ridiculous than mine.) You'll be surprised how much you can accomplish when you've made it your first priority. Then, once you've shown your research supervisor how fast you can learn and how quick you can produce results, you can ease up the research a little and still expect a good letter.

And again, don't make excuses for your amount of research experience. I think the way dsperka framed it is best...just casually mention that in addition to your near-perfect physics grades, you also completed a completely orthogonal major and excelled at it as well. That belongs not in the statement of purpose, but in the "Additional Information" section of your apps.

[astrofan]

People will remember his application, for better or worse, they will notice it and be thinking about it because it is unusual--just how the human mind works.

I misunderstood what you were saying about the Cornell prof., this makes more sense. I would ignore stuff not related to physics in the SOP if I was on the committee, but I agree with your statement that a lot of people wouldn't. Oh well.

@YF17A: I did not make myself clear, I think it is fine to pursue whatever interests you want. I am not singiling out music, though I could have made myself more clear that atractiveness is clearly different than pursuing music (meant that as an extreme). I don't think people do a double major in music for the "brownie points", I really don't care why you do it. I don't see how the passions are related. Maybe there are some world class athletes studying physics, and I don't think that is related to physics either. That does not mean that physics is my only interest or that other things are not important, just that I don't see the connection. Helping the poor and promoting world peace are great things to do, but I don't think these things should help you get into physics graduate school.