The Student Room Group
Reply 1
No-one has any idea then?
Reply 2
Not as competitive as undergrad entry? But then again, they do have Stephen Hawking, so I imagine it would be more competitive than PhD entry to say, Manchester or something.
Kavanne
Not as competitive as undergrad entry? But then again, they do have Stephen Hawking, so I imagine it would be more competitive than PhD entry to say, Manchester or something.


what are you on about? Way more competetive than undergrad.

MB
Reply 4
musicbloke
what are you on about? Way more competetive than undergrad.

MB

...and you say this on what basis?
edders
...and you say this on what basis?


erm, knowing physics postgrads.

MB
Reply 6
I don't really know that much about post-grad (and certainly not physics or cambridge even...), *but (before i sound totally useless!)* from the people I know applying for various postgrad things, the competition for funding is a lot more fierce than that for even getting a place.
Reply 7
My tutor once told me to get funding a first is pretty much obligatory. So, given roughly the top 25% of students get first (I think that percentage's right, anyway), it seems about for times as competitive.
grey faerie
I don't really know that much about post-grad (and certainly not physics or cambridge even...), *but (before i sound totally useless!)* from the people I know applying for various postgrad things, the competition for funding is a lot more fierce than that for even getting a place.


That's more in the arts as you apply to physics PhDs more like you would a research post. Nevertheless, the competition is pretty hardcore.

MB
Reply 9
It also depends on whether you're interested in theoretical or experimental physics. The former is more competitive than the latter, for example. From what I've seen of undergrad admissions in Cambridge, though, I'd say competition at grad level is somewhat less competitive.
Reply 10
musicbloke
what are you on about? Way more competetive than undergrad.

MB


I did put a question mark at the end of it, cause I wasn't sure. Thanks for being sooooo nice.
Reply 11
Radagasty
It also depends on whether you're interested in theoretical or experimental physics. The former is more competitive than the latter, for example. From what I've seen of undergrad admissions in Cambridge, though, I'd say competition at grad level is somewhat less competitive.

Ah, interesting. I'm on a theory course (ie doing a bit more maths), but I suppose that doesn't exclude me from being an experimentalist. In a way you'd think they might like someone with higher mathematical ability than usual? I would have thought a 1st from Imperial is pretty strong, but I suppose they look at percentages? Would they rather someone who got 85% over 75% I suppose? But then, do you think extra-curricular stuff counts in the applicant's favour? ie, instead of studying insanely for 4 years actually did debating/newspaper and stuff, and still got a (albeit low) first?
Reply 12
edders
Ah, interesting. I'm on a theory course (ie doing a bit more maths), but I suppose that doesn't exclude me from being an experimentalist. In a way you'd think they might like someone with higher mathematical ability than usual? I would have thought a 1st from Imperial is pretty strong, but I suppose they look at percentages? Would they rather someone who got 85% over 75% I suppose? But then, do you think extra-curricular stuff counts in the applicant's favour? ie, instead of studying insanely for 4 years actually did debating/newspaper and stuff, and still got a (albeit low) first?


I don't know that the precise bias of your undergraduate studies is all that relevant: most PhD candidates don't come with any significant experimental background. (I was one of the few who had in my year.)

What I meant, rather, was that you would probably face stiffer competition if you were to apply for admission to theoretical physics. Unless you have a very strong background, you would probably admitted (this step is not too difficult), in the first instance, to read for Part III of the Mathematics Tripos (formally the CASM for non-Cambridge undergrads) and if you do sufficiently well (you'll be facing stiff competition at this stage), i.e., pass with distinction, you will be permitted to continue to a PhD programme in theoretical physics. Direct entry to the latter is also possible, albeit rarer and quite competitive.

For experimental physics, on the other hand, a first from any reputable university should be good enough, although you can almost guarantee that they will look at percentages. The remainder rests on the strength of your research proposal -- the Cavendish Laboratory does not require a detailed proposal, merely a statement of interest -- and the interview. A first in physics from Imperial will certainly stand you in good stead. Any other attainments you may have, e.g., scholarships or awards you have won, etc., will of course improve your chances.

Much as they are loath to admit it, extra-curricular stuff, AFAIK, count for almost nothing. Of course, they would welcome candidates who demonstrate that they could maintain high grades despite being heavily involved in other activities, but, at the end of the day good grades win out over breadth of interests, etc.