What is the possibility that I'll get a PhD job for research in String Theory and Particle Physics? I'm currently in my 3rd Year of Undergraduate Studies and have done research work in Photonics. Due to unavailability of faculty specialized in relativity, cosmology, particle physics etc., I chose to do research in Photonics. To manage my interests, I studied relativity, particle physics from online resources. What are the chances that I'll get a PhD job at institutes like Perimeter Institute of Theoretical Physics, Institute of Theoretical Physics, Stanford, Kavli IPMU etc.?
Before you start investigating textbooks and study programs in these fields of science, you should seriously contemplate whether you really want to invest your life and talents in them.
The Standard Model of Particle Physics were completed in the mid-1970's. Try to explore which new, experimentally verified, ideas have emerged in the field of theoretical particle physics since then. Likewise, string theory was invented in the late 1960's, and superstring theory during 1970's. Try to find out what these theories have contributed to observed physics.
The recent discovery of gravitational waves has opened new ways to explore cosmology and astro(particle) physics. This will hopefully lead to new insights and increased activity in these fields, both observationally and theoretically.
For starters, there are some good books on these subjects available to the undergrads so perhaps it could be a good idea to start with these.
For instance, for string theory one has
http://www.cambridge.org/en/academic/subjects/physics/theoretical-physics-and-mathematical-physics/first-course-string-theory-2nd-edition?format=HB&isbn=9780521880329
see also
https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-251-string-theory-for-undergraduates-spring-2007/
https://www.quora.com/What-is-a-good-introductory-book-on-string-theory-for-the-advanced-undergraduate-in-physics
while for particle physics see
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521852498
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0521852498
and also these discussions
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-book-to-start-particle-physics
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/the-best-elementary-book-to-study-particle-physics.385339/
Before you start investigating textbooks and study programs in these fields of science, you should seriously contemplate whether you really want to invest your life and talents in them.
The Standard Model of Particle Physics were completed in the mid-1970's. Try to explore which new, experimentally verified, ideas have emerged in the field of theoretical particle physics since then. Likewise, string theory was invented in the late 1960's, and superstring theory during 1970's. Try to find out what these theories have contributed to observed physics.
The recent discovery of gravitational waves has opened new ways to explore cosmology and astro(particle) physics. This will hopefully lead to new insights and increased activity in these fields, both observationally and theoretically.
FWIW, string theory is a highly saturated field, one that underwent two "revolutions" with very little experimental output (I stress the word just to compare it with two actual revolutions, Einstein's theory of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics). Definitely, there are better areas for a future PhD nowadays. Try to read something related to topological insulators, two-dimensional physics, topological quantum matter, etc. Your previous training in Photonics could be of use there.
@JoséAntonioVallejo: Just curiosity: could you please elaborate what do you mean by two-dimensional physics, and which parts of it do you find most interesting? Thanks in advance
For a person who like theoretical physics very much, he can choose Ph D program in theoretical physics,such as GW, Gravity and BH, (astro-)particle, etc. And he should have solid bases of physics and mathematics. If don't like it very much, do not waste time in it.
dear Ayush, find the failures/errors of the theory, and when you have one- there are more utopies in physics- then start to correct it. this is a way to...
better to choose some different problem in astrophysics, It takes lot of time publish in string theory. Anyways don't want to discourage you if you have passion for it then nothing is impossible.
@Artur Sergyeyev: By two-dimensional physics I mean the phenomena occuring in monolayer materials (or superlattices), such as graphene, molibdene bisulfide, gallium arsenide, etc. These phenomena are really striking (such as superconductivity at room temperature) and calls for some nice mathematical tools for explanation (Berry's curvature, non-abelian theories, topology of defects, etc.) To give it a try, look for instance at the paper (this is just a sample, but it is one of my favorites) https://www.nature.com/articles/nphys384 or this one http://science.sciencemag.org/content/340/6129/167 . Of course, it is all a question of taste, but I find this area much more exciting than string theory (probably due to having devoted some years of my research to the mathematics of supermanifolds and being a little tired of that)
Hello,
It is indeed possible to continue your studies on other topics of physics, and I am sure your previous background (on photonics) will be very helpful !
Research on particle physics will be a good for you if you want to do the ''real'' high energy physics !
Good luck.
As to your original question about whether shifting from condensed matter to String theory is possible, the answer is yes. In my nearly 30 years in Academia, I have yet to come across a student asking about the economic value of String Theory. String theory is apply known now as M-theory today. It is highly complex and requires in fact far more mathematics than physics, including specialized sub fields. And these are simply too long to list here. M-THEORY is still in it's infancy stage. As such, Mathematics runs this theory, a unique dynamics otherwise rarely seen in other fields.
I agree with most of the answers posted thus far: (1) If you are curious about these theories, you must first read as many technicals as you can absorb. This is a healthy habit. It ought to establish whether you get it and deep down, whether you "love" it and could contribute.(2) You are missing something about working on these theories. First and foremost, you must truly enjoy doing physics and mathematics, and associated formalisms, enjoy spending as much as 8hr/day glued to your office chair, doing your calculations, love posing questions, tackling difficult problems, conducting intense research and keeping up with a deluge of preprints posted on ArXiV. (3) Indeed it is a life long comittment, and one of love. (4) You also missed something important: if you are truly good at something, regardless of the field, you will be hired. It's that simple.
So instead of circling the real issues, I will dive in, revisit my questions and ask whether I am smart enough to contribute something to the field. This is the only standard of importance you will ever face in academia.
Your undergraduate research projects are largely irrelevant to what you can do in graduate school (i.e. PhD). The first question you should be asking yourself is whether you really want to do Theoretical Physics (not particularly string theory or anything else), which means you are highly motivated, mathematically minded and have a deep, insatiable desire to really understand how nature works at the deepest level. If you tick all these boxes and this is your passion, then go for it. Some answers here are misleading: String theory is not what it used to be or what is portrayed in accounts for nonspecialists, it is a vast area with many different corners, and people who do 'string theory' are really working on and discovering many new aspects of quantum field theory (QFT), gravity and black hole physics, including applications to real systems such as hydrodynamics of plasmas and condensed matter systems. QFT is also the main tool in all the cutting edge condensed matter topics (some of which were mentioned above). All these topics are being actively and vigorously pursued around the world. To get into the top graduate programs such as the ones you mention, you will need to have a stellar academic record (at least in certain areas), plus whatever other requirements they may have (top GRE scores etc.) and in order to stand out (because many applicants will have such records) it will help if you have done projects in theoretical physics, and can get strong letters from active physicists (doesn't matter what their specialisation is). You also need to keep in mind that Theoretical Physics is a `high risk' activity -- there are few jobs available after a PhD and the competition is therefore very heavy. People do postdocs after PhDs which are very competitive, with significantly more competition for permanent faculty jobs. If your motivational levels override all this then you must go for it, as do all of us who do theoretical physics for a living.
Don't waste your time with string theory and particle physics ! Study basic physics and then look at mainstream physics, see and understand the mess and do something about it ! Relativity, cosmology and particle physics all have a heavy fever and need to be cured !!
I am the first who Quantized the Gravitational Field!
“I quantized the gravitational field with gravitons”
Adrian Ferent
“Gravitational field is Gravitons”
Adrian Ferent
You learned from your professors, from your books that the gravitational field g is a vector at each point of space and time, a vector pointing directly towards the particle.
In my Gravitation theory, the gravitational field is not continuous and differentiable function.
Gravitons do not exist in Einstein’s gravitation theory, because General relativity is not a quantum theory.
“In my Gravitation theory, the gravitational field is not a vector at each point of space and time, where there are not gravitons there is not gravitational field”
Adrian Ferent
“In my Gravitation theory the density of flux lines is replaced by graviton flux”
Adrian Ferent
“Gravitation field lines are gravitons”
Adrian Ferent
“Each graviton in the gravitational field has a speed v and a negative momentum p = -mv”
Adrian Ferent
“The graviton flux is defined as the number of gravitons per second per unit area”
Adrian Ferent
“The power density is the graviton flux multiplied by the energy of a single graviton”
Adrian Ferent
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322356244_Quantized_Gravitational_Field
string theory is not yet proved as a part of physics subject !!!!!! better you take particle physics....
dear Berndt, . You are right, but I`d suggest: the whole physics is to revise. (see ultimate physics decalogue, that I`ve published here on RG).
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physics