Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

  • This has become our largest and most active forum because the physics GRE is just one aspect of getting accepted into a graduate physics program.
  • There are applications, personal statements, letters of recommendation, visiting schools, anxiety of waiting for acceptances, deciding between schools, finding out where others are going, etc.

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1036
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by quizivex » Sat Mar 22, 2008 2:18 am

Whoa I take back my comment then. I was so convinced that 3/15 is a magic date too. Oh well.

Oh ok, so there does exist experimental quantum comp. Thanks. I keep learning the lesson over and over again not to accept as fact something you've only heard from one prof.

Edit: I stumbled upon one place that may have given me the impression that March 15 was a magic date. Princeton's graduate school's website says that all of their admission decisions are given by March 15. It's possible that I read this and/or another website and assumed this date was a convention for all American grad programs...makes sense since it's exactly 1 month before April 15th, which is an official convention.
Last edited by quizivex on Thu Jun 12, 2008 4:23 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1036
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by quizivex » Sat Mar 22, 2008 2:23 am

Wow, so there's no offical accept/reject date, grae's bday is not 3/13 and there is such a thing as experimental QC... I guess I should win the honor of making the most inaccurate post in the history of the forum...

User avatar
will
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 3:26 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by will » Sat Mar 22, 2008 2:31 am

Well, to be fair, the bulk of quantum computing is theoretical work. Some people really like to tell you what you can't do with computers you don't have. Unfortunately what went down at IBM was nearly a decade ago, and they know NMR won't scale effectively, so I'm all for more CME type people exploring implementation. Hell, let the HEP people in too; I want relativistic quantum computing.

... And 3/15 should be the damn official accept reject date. If the schools I'm waiting on accept me after this point, I won't have time to visit anyway, and so their chances of netting me are slim. Their loss.

ibbgs
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:20 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by ibbgs » Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:08 pm

I have a question for fermiguy. How does a guy who gets accepted at Princeton get Waitlisted at McGill? I didn't know McGill could be so competitive, particularly if you can get NSERC PGS. What kind of physics did you apply in?

User avatar
WontonBurritoMeals
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:43 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by WontonBurritoMeals » Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:30 am

Wow, so there's no offical accept/reject date, grae's bday is not 3/13 and there is such a thing as experimental QC... I guess I should win the honor of making the most inaccurate post in the history of the forum...
Please don't flatter yourself. There have been MUCH more innacurate posts on this forum, I promise you.

May the wind be always at your back,
-Wonton Burrito Meals

fermiguy
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by fermiguy » Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:28 pm

ibbgs wrote:I have a question for fermiguy. How does a guy who gets accepted at Princeton get Waitlisted at McGill? I didn't know McGill could be so competitive, particularly if you can get NSERC PGS. What kind of physics did you apply in?

How the heck should I know????? I technically applied to the applied math department at Princeton actually. There is a lot of back magic going on here and I think one thing the whole application process has taught me is that there is no real correlation. Getting into one place does not mean you will get into another. I should actually update that... cuz I did get rejected from Cornell as well. Go figure....

I'm guessing my verbal score might have hit some cutoff at McGill also because I transfered from one school to another during my freshman year because I HATED the school I started at... When I was interviewed at Yale they did ask me about it and it seemed to have bothered some people and they really wanted to know the context of me transferring. That said, these little things might have bothered McGill a lot and not Princeton... but then again.... I really don't know....

fermiguy
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by fermiguy » Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:53 pm

ibbgs wrote:I have a question for fermiguy. How does a guy who gets accepted at Princeton get Waitlisted at McGill? I didn't know McGill could be so competitive, particularly if you can get NSERC PGS. What kind of physics did you apply in?
One other thing I should mention.. first time I wrote GRE physics I scored 14th percentile :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :?

User avatar
dlenmn
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by dlenmn » Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:23 pm

Well, it's 4/15 now, so it's time for everyone to update/post their profiles! (And also use the Profiles and Results feature). Perhaps we should send some friendly private messages as reminders? (That way, they'll probably get an email, which is useful if they don't frequent the site).

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1036
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by quizivex » Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:50 am

Yeah, now that April 15th has passed, it'd be awesome to get some more profiles up before people start drifting away from the forum. Also, for those of you with existing profiles, feel free to specify which school you'll be attending.

All those newbies who've shown up recently, you know who you are... pretty please...post.

Also, those of you with incomplete or blank profiles should go back and post your data!!! Twistor! RG! VT! and all you others...

I think I've noticed that some users have, within the past few weeks, actually removed a profile that used to be there... such as VT, ender :twisted: ... Whyyy??? You're hurting what will be an invaluable resource to future classes...

After the updates are complete, perhaps in May, I recommend that grae313 clear all the blank posts and fix up the layout of the profiles that lost the standard formatting. :D Then she should "lock" the thread, preserving the thread for all eternity, to prevent anyone from from removing stuff or pulling a "davidchen" and adding garbage to it... :D

As for dlenmn, yea, would anyone like to take the honor of PMing those with incomplete profiles and request them to update them?!!!

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by grae313 » Wed Apr 16, 2008 1:41 pm

quizivex wrote: I recommend that grae313 clear all the blank posts and fix up the layout of the profiles that lost the standard formatting. :D Then she should "lock" the thread, preserving the thread for all eternity, to prevent anyone from from removing stuff or pulling a "davidchen" and adding garbage to it... :D
Will do, just tell me when

User avatar
twistor
Posts: 1530
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:47 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by twistor » Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:42 pm

Also, those of you with incomplete or blank profiles should go back and post your data!!! Twistor! RG! VT! and all you others...
Because my field is so small and my posts, regardless of whether or not they are an accurate representation of what I actually think, are often offensive I'd rather not reveal my profile.

User avatar
dlenmn
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by dlenmn » Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:50 am

quizivex wrote:As for dlenmn, yea, would anyone like to take the honor of PMing those with incomplete profiles and request them to update them?!!!
Well, no one jumped at this historic opportunity, so I guess I'll do it. (Maybe tomorrow).

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1036
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by quizivex » Thu Apr 17, 2008 2:39 am

Thanks dlenmn. No rush, take your time.

Edit: As for the admission results, does anyone know the reason why so few students are ever accepted to Harvard physics? Since the top 5 schools are pretty much equivalent in reputation, I don't see why so many of the strong applicants on the forum this year and in previous years who get accepted to all the other top schools are rejected by Harvard. I'm just curious why?

deyton
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:34 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by deyton » Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:10 am

It is strange. The top student in my class was rejected from Harvard, with a ~3.99 GPA, double honours in pure math and physics in THREE years, 990 Physics GRE, referees with connections at Harvard, research experience closely related to his proposed field, etc... I honestly have a hard time believing anyone got in. :lol: It makes me feel dumb for even thinking I may have had a chance.

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1036
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by quizivex » Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:45 am

yea those are exactly the kinds of stories i'm talking about. even look up the guy named "slee" from last year, a ridiculously qualified applicant accepted everywhere but harvard, and he said some of his friends who were even more qualified than him also were rejected. some people must get accepted, or harvard couldn't have a program... i thought maybe all admitted students had connections and were basically admitted before the app process and thus wouldn't come to a forum like this, but since connections didn't even help your friend, I do'nt know what to say. it really is strange.

nvanmeter
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:16 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by nvanmeter » Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:11 pm

well, when i was visiting harvard, i had a chance to talk to the head of admissions there for a long time about how they pick the accepted students - basically, they have more than enough 900's gres with perfect gpa applying and they really don't want a makeup of purely those students. so, having that is not at all going to guarantee your acceptance. for example, she's trying to really increase the number of girls in the program, even if it comes at the price of having the highest grades/gre scores - last year's incoming class had 40% women. (she said having the girls around keeps the guys in check from getting too nerdy, and i have to agree). they look for having a diverse incoming class, so the admissions is really unpredictable. i mean, they accept about 50 and i'm sure they are many more than 50 that are "tied" with the 50 that get in in terms of merit. so there has to be some way of drawing the line, and they seem to choose personality/diversity (at least what they can infer from an application) to do so. also, contrary to the myth that exists, she told me that they don't really admit by subfield (unless the student applied very specifically and a particular faculty member really wanted that person) - but admit on the more general theory vs. experiment categories. so a high energy theory kid really is against a condensed matter kid in this process; applying for CMT to get in and then switch really won't help you.

User avatar
twistor
Posts: 1530
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:47 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by twistor » Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:16 pm

That's really interesting. I wonder how much of that applies to other institutions as well.

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1036
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by quizivex » Thu Apr 17, 2008 6:02 pm

Ah thanks nvanmeter. Yeah, when I looked at their website back when I applied, I had a feeling the gender balance would affect their admissions. I commented on an old thread:
quizivex wrote:Harvard boasts on its website that over 1/3 of its students are women, and considering only about 13% of PhD students are women overall, they're clearly trying to level the gender ratio... makes it even more difficult for everyone else to get in.
But at least for the guys who do get in, they'll be a good bit happier.

I'll have to resort to staking out the art history department at Princeton... I received a tip that nearly all the guys in that field are gay and the girls are thus more often "available" :wink:

As for the policy on subfield specialties, that's something worth noting for future applicants. Sometimes top students are rejected from schools because they apply to a tiny theoretical field where the department only wants 0-2 new students that year. But since Harvard doesn't group students by interest, maybe that'll dissuade people from saying "condensed matter" when they want HEP... lol

User avatar
dlenmn
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by dlenmn » Thu Apr 17, 2008 6:29 pm

quizivex wrote:I'll have to resort to staking out the art history department at Princeton... I received a tip that nearly all the guys in that field are gay and the girls are thus more often "available" :wink:
Nevermind art history, how about any non science field? Women make up the majority of grad students (59% as opposed to 56% for undergrad) so it's not like there's a serious shortage in general.

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1036
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by quizivex » Wed Apr 23, 2008 2:44 am

@ grae313

Ok I think it's a good time to fix up and lock the profile thread, whenever you get a chance.

Thank you to everyone who contributed to the thread. I'm sure next year's class will be thanking us later too :D

User avatar
twistor
Posts: 1530
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:47 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by twistor » Wed Apr 23, 2008 7:04 am

But at least for the guys who do get in, they'll be a good bit happier.

I'll have to resort to staking out the art history department at Princeton... I received a tip that nearly all the guys in that field are gay and the girls are thus more often "available"
If you think you need to date girls from your field or even your school its no wonder that so many of you are complaining about not getting laid.

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1036
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by quizivex » Wed Apr 23, 2008 8:29 am

My post was not meant to be taken too seriously. It was just to be silly. I'm not actually planning to strut around the art building with a palette trying to impress passer-bys with my knowledge of Van Gogh or whatever...

Also, I never said or even hinted that I preferred to date girls from my field. Perhaps a few guys on this forum have, but I didn't. I have no such preference. What I have said previously is that whoever you are, it's FAR more feasible, easier (whatever word you want to use) to win over girls that you see on a regular basis (from class, at work etc..) and have the chance to get something going with, than it is to pick up that random girl you stood waiting for the elevator with for 35 seconds one Monday . That is why it sucks that there are no girls in physics. :wink:

User avatar
dlenmn
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by dlenmn » Wed Apr 23, 2008 8:58 am

quizivex wrote:@ grae313

Ok I think it's a good time to fix up and lock the profile thread, whenever you get a chance.
Wait, I haven't PMed people yet. I'll do that now...

megatron
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 6:09 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by megatron » Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:31 am

quizivex wrote:My post was not meant to be taken too seriously. It was just to be silly. I'm not actually planning to strut around the art building with a palette trying to impress passer-bys with my knowledge of Van Gogh or whatever...

Also, I never said or even hinted that I preferred to date girls from my field. Perhaps a few guys on this forum have, but I didn't. I have no such preference. What I have said previously is that whoever you are, it's FAR more feasible, easier (whatever word you want to use) to win over girls that you see on a regular basis (from class, at work etc..) and have the chance to get something going with, than it is to pick up that random girl you stood waiting for the elevator with for 35 seconds one Monday . That is why it sucks that there are no girls in physics. :wink:
The visibility of girls sucks because there aren't any in physics, perhaps, and since that's where we are, we see no one. But I'm not sure I'd be willing to date a girl in physics anyway (looks notwithstanding, since I've actually seen the odd goodlooking girl physicist).

User avatar
dlenmn
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by dlenmn » Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:48 am

Ok, 56 PMs sent out -- I only sent them people who had profiles whick looked incomplete (e.g. no final decesion, some places still maked as waiting, etc.). I may have messaged some people with complete profiles, and missed some with incomplete profiles, but it's good enough for govt work. Give people a day or two to update their profiles.

User avatar
dlenmn
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by dlenmn » Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:38 pm

So, under the assumption that private messages leave my outbox when they are read, 28 people -- half of them -- have read the message. So far, 11 have made edits to their profiles. Not too shabby.

excel
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:33 am

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by excel » Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:35 pm

good job, dlenmn...sending so many pms must have been a rather boring task! :mrgreen:

User avatar
zxcv
Posts: 402
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:08 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by zxcv » Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:38 pm

Seriously, nice work. Not that I have any good reason to care about people updating profiles at this point :D.

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1036
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by quizivex » Thu Apr 24, 2008 1:38 am

but if you fail out of grad school and need to reapply elsewhere... you'll be glad we updated the profiles :wink:


kidding :wink:


Thanks again, dlenmn!!!

User avatar
dlenmn
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: Discussion of 2008 Profiles/Results

Post by dlenmn » Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:14 am

Well, I needed something to do while waiting for my e-beam lithography to get done (it's a mostly automated process -- would be more automated if they'd fix the *** stage).

Also, it looks like there's a second member of the 700 club headed to Stanford.



Post Reply