As a high school senior passionate about physics and math. I aim to study Astro, Quantum, CMT, and Particle physics. Although I haven’t finalized my focus yet, I will narrow it down as I deepen my understanding of physics. At this moment, I am thinking of obtaining a Master’s degree but uncertain about pursuing a PhD. Currently, I lean towards experimental physics over academic research. That’s the reason I applied for Applied/Engineering Physics in some universities. I’ve been accepted to the following universities:
1. UC Berkeley (Engineering Physics)
2. University of Cambridge, UK (Physical Science)
3. Cornell (Engineering Physics)
4. Harvey Mudd (Physics & Math)
5. UCLA (Physics)
6. Georgia Tech (Advanced Physics)
7. UC Santa Barbara (Physics - College of Creative Studies Program)
8. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (Engineering Physics)
Presently, I’m primarily considering the first five, although I’ve listed the others for thorough consideration. I am California resident and financial aid isn’t a significant concern. Any guidance you could offer in making my decision would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your assistance.
Obviously from the first 5 - you have two large publics - both fantastic, one a bit sunnier and warmer. You’ve got a small LAC STEM focused but part of a consortium to make it larger. And a mid-large Ivy, that’s more rural, in a neat town - but cold and hard to get to.
Interestingly, UCLA and Cornell are both highly rated for food. Who doesn’t love to eat?
You might look at class sizes. In another thread, someone put out the UCLA schedule (for poli sci) and the enormity of the classes (even Junior/Senior level) was - a bit disheartening to me for such a top schools. Is Physics similar? Will a Cornell, as an example, be similar - I’ve heard of large classes there.
So I would check the school schedules to see class size in the major - if that’s a concern.
You also have calendar differences - quarter to semester.
Going abroad - that’s an entirely different equation - Cambridge - although from the US you can certainly go abroad for a summer, semester, or year.
You have some different aspects of the schools - which may help you to eliminate some (set them up head to head - if it were just #3 and #4, which would you pick? If #3, then lose #4 or vice versa.
For physics, and your interests, you’ll likely have more school - like it or not - so budget is a factor in that sense even if it isn’t a factor short term.
So I’d factor that in as well.
Congrats on such wonderful opportunities and best of luck.
It may be hard to turn down UC Berkeley, #2 in some global lists. Your choices are all excellent and it may be a matter of splitting hairs.
Not sure, though, about job opportunties in experimental physics with just a masters. Probably need computer sw or stat skills, from looking at openings at CERN, for example.
Many with just a masters may go into business or finance, or adjacent stem fields.
May gain some insight by perusing AIP’s Physics Today
Have you looked at course catalogues and four year plans?
Cambridge has a four year integrated masters.
There may be similar opportunities to start a masters as a junior at some of your choices.
I see this news, “ The UK government has announced its support for Cavendish particle physicist Professor Mark Thomson [of Cavendish Laboratory at Cambridge], to be the next Director-General of CERN, the European Laboratory for Particle Physics.”
My first full time job was at a cyclotron. We used a lot of mathematics and used a lot of computers. Since then I have had tours of a linear accelerator and a radio telescope, and again there is a lot of mathematics and computers used at both. As such I would think that you would want some experience and/or course work in both areas. Certainly regarding math you would at a minimum want to be solid with multivariate calculus, linear algebra, and probability and statistics.
However, of course you can get this at any of the universities on your list. You have a very impressive list of acceptances.
This might be helpful. You might want to look at what the graduation requirements are for each university on your list. You could consider both general requirements and major-specific requirements. One daughter got her bachelor’s degree in Canada, and it appears that she took quite a few more courses in her major and fewer general requirements compared to what she would have taken in the US. My impression is that something similar might be true for universities in the UK.
And you might be better off if you arrive at a bachelor’s degree with some money left in the bank or college fund for graduate school.
Congratulations those are really impressive acceptances and a lot of good choices.
1st and easiest way to cull is by checking all are within budget, ie., your parents can afford the net cost without loans.
The first 4 are all very different and all world-class in their own way. Each would be incredible for the right person.
Polar opposites would be HMC (small classes, a solid STEM core along with a solid set of Humanities&Social Sciences) and Cambridge (a mix of tutorials, labs, large lectures with very intense work in short bursts and no gen eds and narrow/indepth focus)… though HMC could be considered like a Cambridge ‘college’ on the Claremont campus and Cambridge much more individualized than the typical university experience!
What classes would you start with at each?
What does each program require (specific classes, specific categories)?
I mean cambridge is ranked higher than most of the other unis on here so I would go for that personally plus in the UK its a 3 year degree with no major or minoring so if you already have a clear mind of what you want to do the UK is the best because you just study the specific course you applied for
For UCB, the Engineering Physics major is fairly flexible, and the OP would likely start with several requirements already completed (UCB COE is generous with AP/IB credit), which would leave space for additional depth in the major, or breadth in other subjects of the OP’s choice. Since the OP’s major is in COE, they would have access to all the classes in CS/EECS and the other engineering departments.
Yes that would seem to be an important step, since these programs all may be quite different. Also be sure to note requirements covered by AP/IB etc., which may differ quite a lot between universities and may open up space for more depth or breadth. And then look at what other classes are available at the university that you could take.
Although I’m not 100% sure exactly which Cambridge course the OP applied for, I think it may be Natural Sciences (with the emphasis in Physical Science) which is actually a somewhat broader degree than you might think, with requirements in multiple science disciplines: https://www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/courses/natural-sciences
What kind of specific questions do you have? With so many options on your list, it would help focus the replies if you could be specific about some of your questions, or any more specific information you can share about what you are looking for.
I think you should also consider UIUC especially if you want to study computational physics or solid state physics in future. I would prefer UIUC over UCLA and maybe Cornell.
My daughter is interested in physics, and I’ve poked around some of these schools. This is what I’ve found, but please take this with a grain of salt. You should confirm these as they are purely opinions:
Cambridge for pure physics is known to have a tripos, which seems mostly like a liberal arts type curriculum where you must study a lot of different elements of natural sciences. You are only allowed to specialize in physical sciences after successfully completing an exam, I believe. So, if you don’t do well in the tripos, then you may not be able to study physics as it’s quite competitive at Cambridge.
At Cornell, my understanding from Reddit (again, you may want to talk to current students to confirm) is that engineering physics is not well taught there. Supposedly challenges with professors and the quality of teaching. Pure physics in the college of arts & sciences is supposed to be excellent.
Harvey Mudd looks excellent - great placement and with both a solid liberal arts curriculum and very practical elements for engineering physics. Looks like it would be well suited to jobs in industry or to continue studies in a graduate program.
I hadn’t done much research on engineering physics at the other schools on your list. UC Berkeley and UCSB are excellent for pure physics. UCLA also looks really good. I suspect you couldn’t go wrong with those, but I’m not sure about the applied side. Berkeley would give you potentially good access to Lawrence Livermore lab which is known for applied sciences.
From what I have been told, the engineering physics degree at UCB is similar in many ways to the pure physics degree except that it is in the college of engineering. Engineering physics majors have access to the same physics classes as pure physics majors. The biggest difference would be in the breadth requirements for the degree (COE has fewer than college of letters and science), and availability of other classes (COE students have access to the full spectrum of CS/EECS classes and other engineering classes).
Engineering physics is also frequently used as a double major to add more physics depth to another engineering degree. Its placement in COE therefore makes the double major more efficient in terms of classes required.
However if the OP decided they preferred a pure physics degree in the college of letters and science, it should not be difficult to transfer colleges from COE to L&S when they are a student (the opposite is more difficult).
All of the US options are excellent and, if you decide to study in the US, obviously you should choose based on things like academic fit and location/setting… and cost, if there are substantial differences.
The odd one here is Cambridge. Do you want to focus (more or less) solely on your major, or would you prefer the broader US education, where you will take roughly half of your courses in your major, and the other half in a mix of other subjects? The goal here is to educate you in the humanities, social sciences, physical and natural sciences, math, arts, etc. The focus of a (or… most…) British bachelor’s degree is much more narrow.
UIUC Engineering Physics is one of the programs to which my daughter was accepted. The rest of her list differs from yours, probably because she wanted to study in the US in the northeast or midwest, but also because she is interested in also studying philosophy. She recently attended the dedicated accepted students Physics Day at Grainger and was really impressed with the undergraduate research opportunities and the approachability of the professors. Also, in high school in Chicagoland, about 3 hours away, she was engaged in programming at Fermilab, America’s national particle physics and accelerator laboratory, which she likely would be able to continue if she attends UIUC. Something to consider for future career possibilities (https://fermilab.jobs/).
I am a big fan of small private schools for undergraduate education as compared to large and/or public schools. Cornell may be the best balance between teaching, small size and still great undergraduate research opportunities?
Large high ranked Universities like Berkeley are fantastic for graduate studies IMHO.
Cambridge of course would give you small cohorts and close interactions with tutors but I feel UK studies usually are extremely focused on the major you choose with very little opportunity or requirement of diversity which I feel is important at undergraduate level.
I’m not sure how it works at other universities, but at UCB, engineering physics majors take the same physics classes as pure physics majors (they’re not taking separate applied physics classes… was that what you meant?) They can swap in engineering classes (with related content) for some proportion of the physics ones, though.
I just typed several paragraphs explaining all the requirements in detail, but then it occurred to me that you probably don’t care so much about that, so I deleted
The bottom line, though, is that being admitted in engineering physics is advantageous, regardless of the OP’s ultimate interests. Being in engineering physics gives the OP access to everything in COE, and also CS classes, which are more difficult for L&S students to access. If the OP wants to go more in the applied direction in the future, being in COE opens up the possibility of switching to (or adding) another COE major if desired. If the OP decides they prefer pure physics, they would be able to switch to L&S without much difficulty and it should be fairly seamless, because the lower division math and physics are the same, and upper division physics classes are the same. Switching colleges in the opposite direction (L&S → COE) is more difficult.
Although this is true of many UK programs, the specific Cambridge program (Natural Sciences with an emphasis in Physical Sciences) is not as specialized and actually requires classes in other sciences. More discussion in the thread above.
Yes what I meant was physics classes with engineering electives. Also, engineering physics and applied physics are often used interchangeably. As most colleges don’t offer engineering physics majoring in applied physics with engineering electives will give you the same outcome. The only difference is it will be under the physics department rather than the engineering department.
Are you 100% set on your major? Cambridge is one of the best colleges in the world. The name is recognized everywhere. It will probably be cheaper than other options, unless you’ve been awarded a fabulous scholarship elsewhere. You will be done in 3 years. The social scene is awesome and there is no question you will be surrounded by academic peers in a charming small city bustling with activity. London is 1 hour by train. I’d go for Cambridge, personally.
those are really impressive acceptances and a lot of good choices.