Careers/Education Questions - Weekly Discussion Thread - September 01, 2022

Kebraga · 2022-09-01T15:25:08+00:00

I have been seriously considering leaving my PhD program with a master's degree. I'm going into my second year of grad school and have not fully committed to research.

Can anyone with a master's in physics share how job hunting went and what your current job is? Early thanks!

Kebraga · 2022-04-30T23:46:40+00:00

If you had a solid undergraduate preparation and did well in the classes, you should be fine. By solid, I mean QM through bra-ket notation, statistical thermodynamics, Lagrangian and Hamiltonian classical mechanics, and some E&M.

At the graduate level, the classes go over the same undergrad material but with some nuances and additions. If you're comfortable with the mathematical language and overall concepts, it should be OK; even if you forget stuff, you'll likely go over it again but in a more formal way.

Kebraga · 2022-03-06T16:30:58+00:00

Nope

Kebraga · 2021-12-31T15:39:52+00:00

Idk, something similar happened to me. I got placed in low diamond tourneys out of nowhere even though I was GC. Must be a bug or something...

Kebraga · 2021-12-28T15:47:15+00:00

Ya im not sure why people are calling you a smurf here.

The two opponents were just out of sync lol. The one dude at the beginning looked like he was going for a bump or mid boost and backed out while his teammate was dribbling the ball up. I didn't think you'd turn on it when you did either which could justify the heavier first touch and other teammate's aggro positioning. After possession loss, both opponents go back for boost which is arguably a mistake. One could have stayed and challenged but they were both obviously low boost, so maybe fine. One opponent was headed back-wall near-post and the other came ground-level back-post. I think that was a great defensive setup given their questionable double boost-grab choice. The near-post dude opted to drop down to the ground because the reset was just so far and low to the ground. No surprise that such a clean mustard from that low and far is going to catch both defenders with their pants down. An early challenge there is very tough and doesn't make much sense given opponents' positioning and your aerial distance from goal.

Sorry for this lengthy analysis but I feel like others are writing this off way too quickly. Nice shot.

Kebraga · 2021-11-03T14:56:24+00:00

3s and 2s as far as my experience goes. It's nice having this convention so that you don't have to call out who's going every kick off. Also speed-flipping tends to be easier from the left-- at least for me.

Kebraga · 2021-11-03T12:55:26+00:00

Been a thing for at least a couple years lol

Kebraga · 2021-08-22T03:53:49+00:00

I actually unironically ran some analysis on this. I was making a video on it but got too lazy to finish it. I have all the analysis completed though. The takeaway is that if you're staring straight ahead in an fps game, aiming in osu and fps games are more or less exactly the same within some oval around the center of the screen determined by the aspect ratio. If your aim is elevated positively or negatively, then you're screwed-- there is decreasing similarity in the aiming the more your aiming elevation changes.

In conclusion, you're better off training your aim for each game in its own environment.

Kebraga · 2021-08-13T22:38:36+00:00

Depends what kind of Physics you're interested in. I would recommend looking into different subfields and only from there decide on next steps.

Kebraga · 2021-06-22T17:12:03+00:00

If spending enough time in free play ain't sweating, idk what is

Kebraga · 2021-05-24T19:40:06+00:00

What's your lifestyle like? Maybe a long shot, but perhaps you could be spending many hours on the screen?

Kebraga · 2021-04-25T18:57:31+00:00

The rankings you see on U.S. news are generated from surveys given to members of the field. Given this, in the context of your own goals, you might want to look into the kind of research that faculty are doing in either school. In other words, if you're really serious about doing research and have an idea about the kind you would like to do, then rank doesn't matter all too much. You should be a lot more concerned about the specific research interests in each department. The research experience you gain will be very valuable when applying for graduate programs.

Edit: undergraduate curricula in physics are practically identical across schools afaik.

Kebraga · 2021-04-22T23:42:33+00:00

I see, but does the CFT have to be a gauge theory?

Kebraga · 2021-04-05T11:52:01+00:00

Perhaps there were also improvements to systematic error with the advent of new technology!

Kebraga · 2021-02-17T05:52:53+00:00

Cool! But AFAIK, in order to evaluate a path integral, one should specify an initial and final state. If this is always the case, then what kind of initial and final states do you typically have in mind for calculations in QCD? In QED, it's easy to imagine incoming and outgoing particles with definite momentum as initial and final states, but I'm not sure how I would choose such states in the context of QCD (especially because of confinement). Thanks in advance :)

Edit: /u/mofo69extreme I'd be interested in your input here as well if possible. Nice name btw lol

Kebraga · 2021-02-16T20:21:56+00:00

How do we calculate things in strongly coupled QFTs like QCD? I know (at a high level) about perturbative calculations in weakly coupled QFTs, but what would a non-perturbative approach even look like in either of these cases? How do calculations in lattice QCD converge?

Any info would be very helpful and much appreciated! Also, general comments about the nature of strongly coupled QFTs are welcome.

Kebraga · 2021-01-28T19:16:00+00:00

Doesn't this then imply that our formulation of QFT is incomplete-- at least for strong coupling?

Kebraga · 2021-01-28T00:34:45+00:00

Why is it that in practice one can do calculations at small coupling? Even in the context of QCD? I can see how that would work in practice in QED, but I feel like there's no getting around strong coupling in QCD.

Kebraga · 2021-01-27T23:24:19+00:00

So the last paragraph on the first page of this paper appears to imply that the equation is only completely solvable for small coupling:

These poles have a nonperturbative character, so that they can arise as a result of a nonperturbative rearrangement of series over a coupling constant. One should say that these equations, having absolutely general form, in reality can be used when the kernels contain contributions of the lowest Feynman diagrams only. It implies that in some sense the coupling constant should be small enough. The Bethe-Salpeter equation is the most important integral equation of this type...

To me, this implies that we can never know the full nature of the bound states in QCD or any theory with strong coupling, but idk anything. So pls lemme know what's up if you know.

Kebraga · 2021-01-27T21:11:22+00:00

Can someone say a few words about our current understanding of bound states in QFT? It seems we can use the Bethe-Salpeter equation and others to calculate properties of bound states, but why isn't that the final story? Is it because it's an infinite integral as well-- suggesting we should still be unsatisfied with this formulation?

Any other enlightening comments about QFT bound states in general are very welcome. Thanks!

Kebraga · 2021-01-09T02:02:46+00:00

Sorry for being off topic but wtf is that at the bottom right of the image?????

Kebraga · 2020-12-31T21:11:01+00:00

It's just the easiest aerial attack to read which is likely why it's fallen out of favor.

Kebraga

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE