[HN Gopher] Physics Student Earns PhD at Age 89
___________________________________________________________________
Physics Student Earns PhD at Age 89
Author : adharmad
Score : 752 points
Date : 2021-11-02 03:18 UTC (19 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.brown.edu)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.brown.edu)
| soheil wrote:
| I did a masters in physics when I was 24 and thought not getting
| paid a meaningful sum of money was incredibly frustrating. If my
| two remaining brain cells still function at 84 I'll certainly
| take on a PhD program.
| boberoni wrote:
| As a university student in my last year of undergrad, I've been
| tempted to go work as a software engineer, even though I'm
| interested in doing research. The opportunity cost just seems too
| large to give up. Working as a SWE will allow me to earn a
| massive income in my 20s, during which I have few defendants and
| a lot of leisure time. While many of my peers are planning to do
| graduate school right away, I feel like my quality of life would
| simply be better by going to work in industry right now.
|
| With that said, I still love learning and diving deeply into
| topics like math and the history of science. I hope that I can
| one day retire off my savings as a SWE and return to graduate
| school (maybe in my late 30s or 40s). Has anyone done this
| before? Is there a stigma against graduate students (both Masters
| and PhD) who are not in their 20s?
| Bobylonian wrote:
| The issue with software developers is that in some places there
| was no requirement to finish uni to work. Though, I would
| advise to finish studies asap, as later you won't have that
| much energy to share among work, relations, family, health and
| studies.
|
| I am planning to finish my course after a very long gap in my
| 40s. Not sure if I need to, but for the sake of finalizing it,
| so it does not bother me anymore. The long gap seems to bother
| my university at my home country more than it should bother me
| and they have still the same irritating procedures in place
| that I do not like... but why should others care about how you
| spend YOUR money and time?
| [deleted]
| jeffe wrote:
| Why do you associate learning and diving deeply into topics
| exclusively with research? A phd program will only require you
| to dive deeply into your topic of research. You can get very
| far in many fields by reading through relevant texts and sci-
| hub papers.
|
| In addition, even though their is a dearth of theoretical
| experience in industry, at FAANGs and similar you will find
| opportunities to learn a lot in areas such as systems design,
| networking, and machine learning from senior/principal
| engineers who are as savvy as professors, albeit with a
| practical lean.
|
| Even the hands on aspect of a phd can be done on your own time
| with a little know how and income, see applied science[0] on
| youtube. Full time engineer who often tinkers and replicates
| scientific publications in his garage in his free time.
|
| [0] https://www.youtube.com/c/AppliedScience/videos
| ghaff wrote:
| Be aware that the meme that any developer with a pulse can make
| so much money they can retire in their 30s plays out very
| rarely. (ADDED: And if you're in that top tiny percent of
| success, will you really just drop out?) That said, you'll
| almost certainly make more money as an SWE than in academia.
|
| I do know someone who got a PhD in their early 40s or so in a
| pause from tech and is back in tech. I gather they thought it
| "OK" but basically are back doing the same thing in industry as
| before.
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| Yeah, this is important to consider. The barrier to entry is
| lower than ever, but truly excelling in software development
| is still non-trivial.
| baby wrote:
| I'd assume anyone on HN already has an advantage
| _fat_santa wrote:
| I think about it like this. Software Engineering is still a
| damn hard industry to break into AND be successful in, but
| that barrier is masked by the democratization of tools and
| resources.
|
| I've had many friends ask he how they can get into SWE,
| they see me, a 20 something, making more than their parents
| make. I used to give the advice "anyone can do it, you just
| have to practice". I've since stopped giving that exact
| advice.
|
| My advice now is "you can do it, but it's going to take at
| least 2-4 years of almost complete dedication". The
| disconnect for all my friends is I think, is none of them
| see what I do on a daily basis. Coding, coding, more
| coding, reading articles about coding, and more coding.
|
| I realized the only reason it was so "easy" for me is that
| I really liked it, so spending hours in front of a screen
| learning all this wasn't a drain on me like it would be on
| other people. Looking back it was by no means easy, and you
| have to keep working on it. I don't put in the insane hours
| i used to in my early 20's, but my Github history still has
| commits every single day except for maybe Thanksgiving and
| Christmas.
| ghaff wrote:
| Well, it's not just about excelling. But presumably winning
| the startup lottery or hitting the fast-track at a handful
| of companies in specific locations. (Or becoming an exec at
| a variety of companies but that's presumably not a path
| that's being contemplated here.) Most competent engineers
| make respectable salaries relative to the US population as
| a whole but they're not retiring at 40.
| evancharles wrote:
| Entering the working world does not mean you have to give up
| diving deeply into new topics!
| zahma wrote:
| This resonates with me as someone going back to get an MD. I'm
| early thirties and a new father. Working through undergrad
| science classes is kicking my ass, so I'm really impressed that
| this guy's brain was plastic enough to handle the rigors of
| theoretical physics. Inspirational on many levels!
| vmception wrote:
| That's because brain/synaptic plasticity _in relation to
| learning_ was made up on the spot and simply repeated ever
| since. It 's just been a convenient shared crutch to not learn
| new concepts after a certain age because the incentives are not
| strong enough for most people.
| esond wrote:
| Is this true? I would love to read further on this. For one
| reason or another, I am experiencing some concern lately
| about my waning ability to learn new concepts as I age, or at
| least my perception of it. I would be chuffed to learn that
| it was all just in my head (so to speak).
| vmception wrote:
| Its not known yet, and is only an idea.
|
| The only thing we do know is that there is a shared
| experience that seems to make learning new concepts
| difficult as we get older. We also have plenty of examples
| of people thriving when placed amongst people that
| prioritize learning those concepts and have the same lack
| of encumbrances as those other people. This points to
| willingness and lifestyle being the primary limiting
| factors over mental ability.
|
| The plasticity concept has only been extrapolated to
| learning ability but is as well studied as phrenology. It
| still needs studies to both prove and disprove it in
| relation to learning ability. People have shared
| experiences about supernatural deities, the similarity
| being that the prevalence of an experience doesnt provide
| answers about the experience.
| Aromasin wrote:
| Additionally, and apologies for not linking the study as
| I simply can't find it anywhere but remember it in brief,
| if older people are exposed to younger people on a more
| regular basis it was found that their capacity for
| learning new things was substantially higher.
|
| Of course the major questions from this were, 1. Are
| older people with the capacity to learn more interested
| in spending time with younger people, and 2. Are younger
| people more likely to distance themselves from older
| people without the capacity to learn. Both are probably
| true, but it would be interesting to see how much these
| factors skew the results.
|
| This was of course also done in the West, where older
| parents live separately to their children on average. It
| would be interesting to see whether, if this study was
| done across multiple nations, the result continues to
| ring true.
| silisili wrote:
| Seriously? Brown was removed from the title, because one person
| took it in bad faith?
|
| Would Harvard have been removed from a title?
| throwamon wrote:
| Just wait until Elon Musk founds Texas Institute of Technology
| and Science.
|
| https://nitter.net/elonmusk/status/1453954994546229253
| batman-farts wrote:
| Yeah, when I saw Brown and PhD in the same headline, I assumed
| Brown University.
| 8589934591 wrote:
| I'm in my late 20s and my wife works on her own startup (non tech
| tangible product). I wonder if there are others who have their
| spouses working and how the marriage factored into their decision
| to pursue a CS PhD. I'm not from USA.
|
| My primary concerns are her startup tanking, me being unavailable
| for her mental health and of course a steady income.
|
| I sometimes wonder maybe I should pursue a CS PhD after settling
| down financially by late 40s.
| wanderingmind wrote:
| For all the fantasy here, let me remind you doing a PhD at an
| early age is one of the worst things you can do to your financial
| security (CS Ph.D being a major exception). It does not teach any
| employable skills, leads to a very high level of
| depression/anxiety compared to regular jobs and creates a huge
| opportunity cost where you miss out saving money early that has
| true compounding capability. The 2019 Nature survey has more
| information
|
| https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03459-7
| throw63738 wrote:
| PhD in information science or mathematics can be good
| investment. But it is bad idea to star career in academia.
| IneficientPgons wrote:
| Mathematics is closer to the least in-demand humanities than
| CS in terms of investment quality... actually, it's probably
| one of the worse fields in which to do a phd. History or
| Philosophy might be better... at least there you're free to
| live a life of the mind. If you sign up for a Math PhD in the
| USA, you're almost certainly just signing up to be a
| university College Algebra/Calc I teacher for like 1/2-1/3rd
| of what middle school teachers are making.
|
| Seriously. Don't get a PhD in Math. It's a miserable field.
| mkl wrote:
| I disagree completely (my PhD is in maths). I don't know
| about the USA specifically, but this doesn't match my
| experience or that of anyone I know. Many maths PhDs don't
| go into academia, and those that do earn decent money
| (definitely more than our equivalent of middle school
| teachers). I don't know anyone who would describe the field
| as miserable, and I'm sorry to hear you have reached that
| conclusion (and confused, to be honest).
|
| Seriously, if you're really interested in maths, look into
| a PhD in it. It's an exciting and fulfilling field. There
| are decent odds you won't end up in academia, so aim for an
| area with practical applications or that will teach you
| useful skills.
| IneficientPgons wrote:
| _> I don 't know about the USA specifically_
|
| My post was specific to to the USA.
|
| _> Many maths PhDs don 't go into academia, and those
| that do earn decent money (definitely more than our
| equivalent of middle school teachers)._
|
| I meant during the PhD. In the USA, it's very common for
| math folks to teach for most of their PhD. Teaching every
| semester + summers is not common at all in the rest of
| STEM. Between the higher salary and pension (!), middle
| school teachers are making _a lot_ more than PhD
| students. It would be a weird apples-to-oranges
| comparison for most phd programs, but, unlike mot phd
| programs, math phds spend an enormous amount of their
| time TAing baby math classes.
|
| _> but this doesn 't match my experience or that of
| anyone I know._
|
| It matches the experience of almost everyone I know
|
| _> Seriously, if you 're really interested in maths,
| look into a PhD in it._
|
| But also consider PhDs in other fields.
|
| Or just take an under-paying/low-time-commitment in
| industry and study math on the side; in a math phd
| program in the usa, your College Algebra/Calc I teaching
| load will be almost a full-time job anyways.
|
| But, even more than that, if you're considering a PhD,
| choose a mathematically-adjacent field that isn't math
| and pick up a co-supervisor from the math department. The
| only parts of math that you can't do in other departments
| are exactly the areas that don't match the criteria of
| "area with practical applications or that will teach you
| useful skills".
| mkl wrote:
| That does sound quite different. In NZ TAing during a PhD
| is completely optional, something you do for extra money.
| It's definitely a good idea to do some, but in general
| you wouldn't be allowed to do more than ~10 hours per
| week.
| amitport wrote:
| It depends what you want to do and what you're good at.
|
| For example, if you're good in the academy thing and manage
| to get papers into top tier companies you will finish your
| PhD faster if you won't take breaks in the industry. If your
| PhD is on desrible topic (e.g., ML) there are plenty of
| academy _and industry_ jobs waiting for you, regardless of
| your work experience.
| lokimedes wrote:
| I realize we're mostly US-centric here on HN, but I have
| greatly benefited from my Physics Ph.D. Obtained in Denmark,
| while being paid $55000 a year throughout the study (standard
| rate for PhD students in DK). In Denmark most people will hold
| a state sponsored Masters degree, so it has served me well in
| the private industry as a differentiator. Combined with an MBA
| (yes, I hear the snuffing sounds guys) it has been the perfect
| package for senior engineering management.
| bitwize wrote:
| A Ph.D. is pretty much a license to do science in many fields,
| such as biochemistry. Unlike CS, you just don't get to do the
| cutting edge work without one -- you will remain forever a lab
| tech unless and until you get your doctorate.
| wanderingmind wrote:
| maybe that is a good enough reason to avoid those fields and
| focus on fields that actually value your ideas and
| implementations rather than a credential.
| brailsafe wrote:
| > huge opportunity cost where you miss out saving money early
|
| Either direction only works out if a bunch of things line up in
| your favour over a relatively long period of time. If you
| choose the academic path and succeed, you end up with little
| money and a higher credential. If you choose not the academic
| path, you end up with _potentially_ more money. However, you
| might fail at one or both paths, so it doesn 't really matter
| at all, and you're better off trying both if you're not so
| confident. I initially chose the employment path, but as that's
| failed miserably over that 10 years, I have no money at all to
| show for it, and I've dipped into school from time to time and
| generally like it for the most part. If I traded that block of
| time for _just_ academics or _just_ employment, I 'd probably
| be equally depressed and anxious, just for different reasons.
| ekianjo wrote:
| > For all the fantasy here, let me remind you doing a PhD at an
| early age
|
| A PhD is mainly if you have an interest (or could have an
| interest) in an Academic career.
| wanderingmind wrote:
| Most PhDs start because of an interest in academia and yet
| more than 90% of them never make it to academia.
| BeetleB wrote:
| Not sure why you're being downvoted - most PhDs have almost
| no chance at becoming a faculty member - although it is a
| lot easier in engineering than in other disciplines.
| BeetleB wrote:
| Previous discussion regarding your comment:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28679234
|
| (I'd repeat what I said before, but dang wasn't happy the last
| time I copy/pasted).
| localhost wrote:
| I was fortunate enough to pivot from Chemistry PhD (which I
| completed) to a career at Microsoft that has provided me with
| more than enough financial security to fund an adventure like
| this when I do decide to retire. While I may not be typical, I
| do use skills (though not specific knowledge) from my PhD all
| the time in my day job - mostly around communications both
| written and oral. The act of writing my thesis and papers
| really taught me the value of being able to communicate
| technical information clearly to a technical audience.
|
| I think that the structure of pursuing research would be a
| great way to avoid losing a "sense of purpose" that I fear
| might await me when I do decide to retire. The tricky part of
| this is finding the right advisor and the right project in the
| right field.
| [deleted]
| gspr wrote:
| But in return you might get to do amazing research and discover
| things that our species did not know before. That's worth
| something to those of us who don't view life as a monetary
| optimization game.
|
| Sheesh, HN is depressing sometimes.
| jarenmf wrote:
| A PhD is a journey of self discovery. There's something
| uniquely fulfilling about being on the edge of human knowledge
| on one particular subject and pushing that edge a tiny bit. No
| one does a PhD for the money. Even if you don't get any skills
| from your PhD which I'm sure you will (data analytics, writing,
| etc...) you'll certainly gain a boost in self confidence and
| first hand experience in managing a research project.
| shoyer wrote:
| A PhD is certainly not for everyone (or even most), but it's
| rather unfair to say that it does not teach any employable
| skills. Even PhDs who go on to work in completely unrelated
| fields learn how to make progress on poorly defined problems
| and to advance the frontier of human knowledge. And a PhD is
| also of course a hard prerequisite for career in academia or
| research.
|
| As for that survey of PhD students, I suspect you would get
| similarly dismal reviews of parenthood from parents of 0-5 year
| old children -- but of course that doesn't mean that nobody
| should have children! A better survey would ask PhD students
| how they feel about the experience well after they are done
| with it.
| randomdata wrote:
| _> but of course that doesn 't mean that nobody should have
| children!_
|
| Of course. For some short-term pain, the child's labour
| capability provides a clear economic benefit.
|
| What are you going to get out of your short-term PhD pain? At
| best a job, where you are still limited by your individual
| labour output. Not exactly a scalable model.
| endymi0n wrote:
| Depends on your definition of ,,better". Since decisions are
| always emotionally made and rationalized after the fact, this
| approach will fall victim to significant amounts of
| survivorship and post-purchase bias.
|
| Life doesn't have an A/B Test and time tends to make things
| golden in retrospect -- so it's hard to compare with what you
| could have done instead with your only truly non-renewable
| resource.
|
| I would at least not recommend making a PhD if you don't love
| academia itself.
| ketzo wrote:
| I don't know. It seems quite different than parenthood.
|
| Are these people complaining about something that's hard-but-
| worth-it? Or are they regretful participants in a genuinely
| broken system? Many signs seem to point to the latter.
|
| Academia has a very small chance of, specifically, anything
| more than an extremely mediocre income. This, despite the
| fact that (generally speaking) some who would enter into, let
| alone complete, a Ph.D program would already tend towards the
| right said of the bell curve in that regard.
|
| These programs often make many, if not most, people who join
| them _miserable for years_ at the cost of a medium-to-large
| cut in lifetime earnings, all for a _quickly shrinking
| chance_ at stability.
|
| I know money isn't everything in this life; truly, I do. I
| know that the pursuit of academic knowledge is noble, and in
| some ways a separate and valid good in its own right. It's
| still a fucked-up system with serious and numerous flaws.
| barry-cotter wrote:
| > As for that survey of PhD students, I suspect you would get
| similarly dismal reviews of parenthood from parents of 0-5
| year old children
|
| No, you wouldn't. Parenthood of small children has many
| negatives but it doesn't lead to depression in approaching
| 50% of cases.
| foldr wrote:
| > it's rather unfair to say that it does not teach any
| employable skills. Even PhDs who go on to work in completely
| unrelated fields learn how to make progress on poorly defined
| problems and to advance the frontier of human knowledge.
|
| Depressingly, about 0.001% of employers care about these
| skills.
| andensande wrote:
| I went into a PhD programme in Australia straight out of my
| undergrad degree, and while it certainly wasn't great for my
| financial security, I'm glad I did it. Anecdotes don't make
| data, of course, but this is background to what follows.
|
| I had a really easy time getting admitted to the program, was
| fully funded and received a scholarship. I had a lot of freedom
| in terms of topic and got to travel every year of the PhD, so I
| think the actual experience was much better than it sounds like
| other people have it in the linked study.
|
| What I did see, however, was a university system that was
| pushing through students at what I would consider an
| irresponsible pace. This was especially the case with foreign
| students, who were fodder for the supervisors' career
| aspirations (the supervisors having to see through a number of
| students to completion per five-year period to advance). The
| quality of the resultant PhDs was shockingly low in some cases,
| but there is no incentive for _good_ theses, just complete
| theses. And for a university system like Australia 's, which is
| to a large degree reliant on exporting education, these
| incentives are probably far worse now than they were when I was
| in the midst of it in 2015-16.
|
| The other major problem is that a PhD is, essentially, an
| apprenticeship for academia. In Australia, we have a
| apprenticeships in trades (like electrical, plumbing, etc.) in
| which you learn 'on the job'; you're paid poorly, you do the
| menial jobs, but at the end you have a career. A PhD is like
| that: you do almost everything a lecturer or professor does,
| except -- and here's the catch -- there's no job prospects
| whatsoever at the end. And it seems like it'll get worse.
| Imagine working for four years on something that you love, that
| you're passionate about, and that you think will change the
| world intellectually, to only end up being some cheap labour to
| get publications for others more advanced in their careers --
| and then you're done, and shown the door.
|
| I was incredibly lucky in that I got a two-year postdoc, but I
| had to change fields (which I wanted to do), and I ended up
| paying for my own post-doc doing contracted research through
| the university. My heart wasn't in being an academic, and the
| applied side appealed to me a lot -- but I imagine this would
| be intolerable for many candidates.
|
| These are factors I tell anyone who is thinking of a PhD. It is
| a highly-specific apprenticeship for a single industry that is,
| in Australia, collapsing substantially as the result of its own
| mismanagement, poor education funding policy at the Federal
| level, and (of course) the pandemic. It's no wonder that PhD
| candidates are so discontent, in my view -- despite my having
| had a wonderful and very fulfilling time.
| [deleted]
| yangcheng wrote:
| it's really depending on people. Dr Steiner already holds a phD
| and MD at early age. older life is a continuation of earlier
| life
| patrec wrote:
| Can anyone with a background in the area comment on how legit
| this is?
|
| I have no trouble believing that a spry research professor in a
| quantitative field could get a PhD in another quantitative field
| at a fairly advanced age, especially if they can bring existing
| skills that are underused in their new domain, but it would be
| genuinely amazing if someone in his 80ies were to successfully
|
| > set to work on a very difficult problem [...] the theory that
| he was doing involves techniques that are incredibly advanced and
| challenging to master
|
| in physics, a field were people are often considered over the
| hill past their 20ies, and an elite uni at that. The only
| reference to his work a quick google scholar search turned up is
| from 2012:
|
| https://meetings.aps.org/Meeting/MAR12/Session/Z26.1
| almokhtar wrote:
| Absolutely gonna take it to the grave with him :D
| selimthegrim wrote:
| The topic is legitimate but Marston hasn't done much CMT in 20
| years, Witten is considered to have made most of the advances in
| bosonization in the 80s although there was a paper out of
| Riverside a few years ago I remember that looked interesting with
| Mike Mulligan
| eric4smith wrote:
| Very inspiring story indeed. But the first question resonating in
| my mind is...
|
| Why??
|
| While what the student did is good. It serves as bad inspiration
| for too many people going to college these days just because they
| want to. And not because of a reason.
|
| If the cost of education was low, then I would not be opposed to
| it. But we all know stories of people who say they are "going
| back to school" for very minimal benefits later.
|
| So... at that age, we can see it as just an aspirational thing.
| But for younger people, it mostly (not all the time) sends the
| wrong message.
| captainredbeard wrote:
| > It serves as bad inspiration for too many people going to
| college these days just because they want to. And not because
| of a reason
|
| Self-fulfillment is a reason.
| IneficientPgons wrote:
| STEM PhDs in the US pay no tuition and receive a stipend of
| typically $30K+ as well as health insurance and sometimes
| housing benefits.
|
| Honestly, "fuck it, do another Ph.D. in an adjacent field like
| math" is definitely in my "shit ran out of funds for ski trips
| because I retired too early and need some health insurance
| ASAP" quiver.
|
| _> So... at that age, we can see it as just an aspirational
| thing. But for younger people, it mostly (not all the time)
| sends the wrong message._
|
| Like 20-somethings doing startup shit, PhDs can be terrible
| life choices or wonderful life choices. Outcomes are anything
| but uniform. If I had gone industry out of undergrad I might be
| making $150K by now. Instead I'm making close to 10x that doing
| exactly what I would be doing if I were an unemployed bum
| following my passion, all thanks to my phd. Lucky, sure. So are
| startup folks.
| aijeq wrote:
| > 30k
|
| This is the pay at top tier universities with extremely
| exclusive entry criteria.
|
| I was a former PhD student in CS. Washed out due to costs
| because I was self-funding. It was a local university and an
| R1 so not "bad" but also not ivy. I had absolutely no problem
| keeping up with class + research work while also working in
| industry as I have a lot of time on my hands and no family.
| I'm still a little sour about the whole thing because I had
| an incredible and flexible advisor. But costs are costs.
|
| The average STEM PhD student at my university made 13k, up to
| 20k if you took on summer teaching duties. You did get
| classes covered, but health insurance came out of your
| stipend and you still had to cover ancillary fees (gym,
| technology, etc). So you walked, after taxes, with anywhere
| between 10 and 12k. They offered me an RA position with my
| PhD admission that paid approximately 20k. Obviously I could
| not take it and afford rent. Perhaps if they offered a free
| dorm and healthcare I could consider choking down 12-15k for
| 3-4 years to get the pay off in the end.
|
| American PhD programs generally pay below poverty wages.
| Several PhD student colleagues of mine were on food stamps
| and lived with 1-3 other PhD students in the run down
| apartments adjacent to the university. It's abject suffering
| for the most part and direct-to-phd students often leave in
| their mid 30s burned out and 10 years behind other students
| in the workplace. I inquired with several universities about
| associate professor positions and even those have pretty
| insane post-doc requirements before being considered. You'll
| be 15+ years behind your cohort if you, god forbid, decide to
| go another 3 or so years in a slighty-above-poverty post doc
| position. At my university these paid around 40-45k, up to
| 60k for fairly exclusive positions. For what it's worth I
| make as much as the average industry CS PhD in a software
| engineering capacity after 10 years of service. I was
| pursuing it for pleasure and credentialing.
|
| It is not practical, unfortunately, to pursue a PhD as an
| American unless you are incredibly wealthy or on a visa
| program. It is not surprising many PhD students are foreign
| born. No one intends to get rich with a PhD, but it seems
| even comfort is a far flung dream.
| Supermancho wrote:
| The purpose of PHDs and the ultimate purpose of college is tied
| together. A PHD requires conducting a novel and heavily
| reviewed study to further human knowledge.
|
| The esteem and accolades peppered throughout this discussion
| are incidental and transitory.
| kristian_io wrote:
| Audio version of this story is available here (10min):
| https://readtoo.me/article/88495a054f8e8f7b5098fad4b04a3fbf1...
| parhamn wrote:
| This made me wonder (not that it matters, just curious): what are
| the biggest scientific discoveries made by older folks?
| Bobylonian wrote:
| In modern days - most of them. It takes years and years to get
| to scientific breakthrough discoveries.
| kevmo wrote:
| I've been planning to become a mathematician in my 70s for some
| time.
| 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
| The title should really be "Earns Second PhD at 89"
|
| This is not one of those stories about someone who "always
| dreamed of earning a PhD". This is an MD who already had a PhD in
| Biochemistry from MIT.
| [deleted]
| vipa123 wrote:
| More like "Retired Ivy League Biochemistry Professor earns
| second PhD at 89"
| anaganisk wrote:
| I guess the goal of titles is make us click, not to give us a
| TLDR.
| hikerclimber1 wrote:
| False news.
| np1810 wrote:
| Such a motivating life he has created... Please read the complete
| article and you'll find a very important advice in the end from
| this extraordinary human... ;)
|
| And "knowledge hunger" is real... :)
| bambax wrote:
| My father earned a PhD in Political science (in France) when he
| was 70; his thesis was 500+ pages long. He retired early and
| spent all his time on it. It made him pretty happy.
|
| He's now 89 and while he hasn't done any new research, he's still
| intellectually and physically very active.
|
| Retirement is not the time to do nothing, it's the time to do
| what you really like. I can't wait.
| philzook wrote:
| Congratulations Manfred!
| carrolldunham wrote:
| A PhD is research training. Is he doing to do research now, or is
| this just, like everyone seems to be treating it - a big trophy?
| Does anyone ever stop to question their credentialist mindset? I
| heard a character in a video game say indignantly "Excuse me, I
| have a PhD", and I thought, well, that's not realistic dialog
| because a PhDs is something you have done, not something that you
| 'have'. But then people here are treating it like attainment of
| literally a 'qualification' is an end goal in itself.
| iflp wrote:
| > Steiner is not prepared to rest on his laurels. He is
| currently reworking part of his dissertation for publication
| and plans to continue his theoretical physics work.
|
| It definitely helps that he has a lifetime of research
| experience (in another field).
| eyeundersand wrote:
| I don't see what's wrong with saying "I have a PhD". It's
| equivalent to what (I think) you're saying: "I have a few
| qualifications (pertaining to research)".
| yuuu wrote:
| Well, it's annoying and usually arrogant. Just like people
| who put Ph.D. in their LinkedIn or Twitter names. I don't
| care that you have a Ph.D., and if you flaunt it, I'll think
| you're dumber than someone with a bachelor's degree.
| jzer0cool wrote:
| What is PhD research training? Are there any good indicators
| you might be a good researcher, without yet a full background
| in the discipline? What what be some of those qualities needed
| and sought for takin in my a professor. For example, say you
| just have an undergraduate degree in CS, what might be some
| ways to show you would be a good candidate without yet having
| written any publications.
| wheelinsupial wrote:
| The title is more accurately described as "Former Brown
| Professor of Medicine Returns to Brown to earn his Third
| Doctorate"
|
| He had an MD, received a PhD from MIT, then went on to have a
| career as a researcher at Brown before taking up physics
| undergrad classes, and then continuing on to grad school.
|
| He is quoted in the article as saying he will continue to work
| on physics research.
| carrolldunham wrote:
| I was commenting on the responses though, of "I'm so
| inspired". People are treating it as if the person has pulled
| off deathbed salvation, thankfully earning access to the
| eternal _status_ of "PhD haver" in time.
| wheelinsupial wrote:
| Sorry, I missed that. Your response came across as one made
| in response to the title of the article as opposed to the
| other comments here.
|
| It took me a really long time to finish my bachelor's
| degree. I always had a sort of romantic notion that going
| through it and really studying hard would help me to become
| a better thinker. I'm not really satisfied with my
| progress, so I definitely understand where those who want
| to pursue more formal education are coming from.
| agustif wrote:
| 'My students never knew': the lecturer who lived in a tent
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/oct/30/my-student...
|
| I say fuck to those big name universities that pay peanuts to
| their most overexploited workers.
|
| ===
|
| Edited: no absolutisms is better
|
| Do only a PhD if you're sure you can afford it.
| jinto36 wrote:
| A PhD is pretty much the minimum to be able to get much of
| anywhere in biology. In that context it's "don't do a postdoc,
| you'll never get a tenured position anymore".
| threatofrain wrote:
| For many places, at least a masters or phd is the credibility
| doorway to do interesting work. By choosing not to get these
| credentials, you are also choosing to greatly narrow your
| opportunity in those lines of work.
|
| Being able to do the work is figuratively 30% of the battle,
| whereas having the opportunity to do it is the real challenge.
| CalRobert wrote:
| College is expensive enough, and professors (but hey we call
| them "lecturers" so we can treat them horribly) earn nothing,
| but what is often forgotten is that a few years out of work can
| cost half a million bucks (or, for some people, far more) in
| opportunity cost.
| gspr wrote:
| Ugh. I agree that the exploitative behavior of some big name
| universities is horrible, but I don't at all understand how you
| from this conclude that "academia is over", and in turn from
| that that people should avoid doing PhD.
|
| Your comment is 10/10 HN.
| agustif wrote:
| Thanks. I do spend a lot of time here so...
|
| And you're right, I made three totally disconnected points
| albeit on the same area at least! Have done much worst in the
| past. I am sorry if I offended you or didn't explain myself
| much further.
|
| Why is academia over in my opinion you ask?
|
| Well, for one it's an overly saturated space, most of the
| folks doing a PhD go on to have very good career prospect's
| (of course thanks to the PhD in part).
|
| But which percentage do stay in academia? Why not everyone
| with good ideas? It seems to me, it's a system like any other
| rigged for the rich and connected, who can afford a
| degree+master+phd, I guess if your parents are supporting you
| through it...
|
| About avoiding doing a PhD, you can just read from all the
| people who was paid poorly, but since they needed the
| credentials, they went with it anyway's... As it stands right
| now, and much like everything that capitalism touches,
| Academia has gone to shit in standards in a few centuries
| from being the way of sharing knowledge, to being another way
| to manipulate and disinform the public.
|
| I guess I would change my prior absolute statement to a more
| specific one, do a PhD only if you can afford the opportunity
| cost of not doing it and doing else more productive (for
| yourself or bank account at least)
|
| And maybe academia is not over, but it's certainly in need of
| a shake up, and sadly as someone much more smarter than me
| once said:
|
| "Science advances one funeral at a time"
|
| https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principio_de_Planck
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publish_or_perish
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cost_of_Knowledge
| gspr wrote:
| > But which percentage do stay in academia? Why not
| everyone with good ideas? It seems to me, it's a system
| like any other rigged for the rich and connected, who can
| afford a degree+master+phd, I guess if your parents are
| supporting you through it...
|
| There are several places where you can get a bachelor's and
| a master's for no tuition and with government support.
| Source: I did.
|
| And there are several places where you can get paid
| decently to do a PhD. Less than an industry job, for sure,
| but definitely enough to get by just fine. Source: I did.
|
| > About avoiding doing a PhD, you can just read from all
| the people who was paid poorly,
|
| A PhD is not a set of courses to read. It's research
| training. It's _doing research_.
|
| > but since they needed the credentials, they went with it
| anyway's
|
| Where I live, nobody in their right minds would do a PhD
| for the credentials.
|
| > I guess I would change my prior absolute statement to a
| more specific one, do a PhD only if you can afford the
| opportunity cost of not doing it and doing else more
| productive (for yourself or bank account at least)
|
| Sure. I'd very much agree that a PhD often represents a
| lost opportunity cost, but that's something very different
| from the bleak picture that you paint (wherein only the
| rich and connected can do one without ending up in debt).
|
| > And maybe academia is not over, but it's certainly in
| need of a shake up
|
| OK, so, in summary: Academia isn't over, and PhDs aren't
| pointless. Literally nothing remains from your first
| comment.
| wesleywt wrote:
| It depends. In America yes. Elsewhere. Get one.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| I started a PhD in computational molecular biology. Dropped out
| after year and focused on software. Some years later, I applied
| to grad school for a CS PhD but was not accepted. The following
| year, I got a job in the CS department I had been rejected from,
| spent 4+ years there before leaving to help start a certain
| e-commerce company, then left that after a year to raise my
| daughter. Eventually back to software, and feel proud and happy
| about the libre software I've given to the world over the last 21
| years of that part of my life.
|
| You might think after all that that a PhD would be an
| irrelevance. But actually, I do still sometimes dream of being
| able to follow that process, of drilling down and into a problem
| much more deeply than any other context would allow, of having my
| ideas constantly challenged by smart people, and of eventually
| (one hopes) coming to some sort of conclusion.
|
| I have many friends with CS PhD's, and to be honest, I don't
| think my life has been impaired in any way by the absence of the
| PhD, and maybe even enhanced. Still, it would be nice. And
| apparently, I've still got 30 years (at least) to get it done!
| coldcode wrote:
| A college friend of mine intends to pursue a PhD in Chemistry
| once he retires (soon). I was accepted back in the early 80's
| but instead spent 4 decades doing programming. I decided to do
| art instead of going back to school. Sometimes I wish I had
| actually gotten the doctorate, but not enough to start over
| again.
| jzer0cool wrote:
| "in (1+1) dimensions"
|
| Why is the dimensions written in this way emphasizing +1
| gspr wrote:
| Likely one of the dimensions behaves differently.
| panzerklein wrote:
| One dimension of space and one dimension of time, probably
| FpUser wrote:
| What a sharp mind. Even though he was already recognized
| scientist the capacity to continue at this so advanced age is
| nothing but very respectable.
| timwaagh wrote:
| I don't see the point of this. He's not going to have a long
| career as a researcher so why dedicate resources trying to train
| him to become one? In my country typically being one year behind
| already counts strongly against you.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| He has to be an absolute inspiration to everyone.
|
| What's more he's now 13 years older than the age at which
| Einstein died, so he's shown us that pursuing one's desires and
| goals at any age is a worthwhile venture.
|
| I wish him well and hope he continues to get enjoyment from his
| new expertise in physics.
| zadwang wrote:
| This is so inspiring. I am a professor and an engineer. But still
| I think about physics and still hope to be a physicist.
| BlasDeLezo wrote:
| now go up for tenure
| krosaen wrote:
| Wow and I thought I was taking a risk spending a few years
| transitioning into robotics in my late 30s :) Awesome to see
| this, would like to think we all could undertake huge learning
| challenges at any point in life, and we'll probably need to if we
| care to keep contributing at a high level.
| tombert wrote:
| This is really cool. I'm 30 right now, and only just recently
| finished my bachelors and have been looking to get a PhD, but
| it's really hard to find a program that will let you work full
| time while doing it. It doesn't help that a part of me does sort
| of feel "too old" to do this sometimes. The PhD system in the US
| is really tailored around the assumption that you haven't entered
| the corporate world yet.
|
| Anyway, it's really inspiring that someone almost three times my
| age pushed himself through the program. I guess it's important to
| remember that you really shouldn't give up on your dreams.
| qwerty456127 wrote:
| AFAIK at least on some European countries, especially in the
| east this is not so and used to be almost the opposite in the
| past. People are expected to upgrade from an engineer (~master)
| to a doctor (or a candidate of sciences first in some post-
| soviet countries) in parallel with their work as they gain
| real-life expertise and age. And in general I think it always
| is a great idea to study abroad (needless to say European
| universities are generally cheaper and easier to get in). So I
| think I would probably consider an European university if I
| were you.
| fortran77 wrote:
| He already had an MD and a Ph.D. in biochemestry....
| bumby wrote:
| I know there are people pooh-pooh'ing the idea of pursuing a
| PhD while still working, but I think that's because they're
| just working from inflexible mental models. It can definitely
| be done, but you may have to think a bit outside traditional
| routes (which is seems like you're already doing). I started my
| program at an older age than you, so it can be done.
|
| One option is to look for a full-time job that does research
| but is also affiliated with a university. Think national
| laboratories or government positions. If you're smart about it,
| you may be able to make your full-time work count towards your
| thesis. Many of these affiliations also offer free/reduced
| tuition and you'll almost certainly be paid more than if you
| were a PhD student working for a university. Some will even pay
| your normal salary and allow you to take a year or more off to
| focus on school. The real difficulty is working a schedule that
| let's you take courses, but I suspect this is easier now with
| the amount of remote learning available. I'd also say to stay
| away from advisors who think there's only one way to skin this
| cat :-). It was my experience that they don't work as well with
| non-traditional students.
|
| To echo what was said elsewhere, advisors/programs that mandate
| a certain time commitment may be looking to burden you with
| ancillary duties that don't fit well with a non-traditional
| approach. Some programs would not admit me unless I was willing
| teach a certain number of classes, even though I was self
| funded through my employer. Some tried to force me into a
| resident status for the same reasons; there was an expectation
| of working on campus as a means of paying for my keep. I
| attribute most of these attitude's as a lazy way of thinking
| where they apply the same template to every student, but I
| think you can find an alternate path if you're willing to be a
| bit creative/resilient/persistent.
|
| Best of luck to you.
| pge wrote:
| When I worked at a DoD lab in the 90s, there were PhD
| students that were essentially employees. Their thesis work
| was directly tied to the lab's work, and they were at the lab
| every day. I do not known the compensation arrangement, but
| it certainly appeared that they were paid as full-time
| employees (and may have been employed there before entering
| the PhD program). May be worth looking into something like
| that
| nextos wrote:
| Same is quite usual in some Cambridge University
| departments.
|
| Also worth mentioning Scandinavian and Swiss universities
| treat PhDs like a regular industry job (job contract, paid
| at an acceptable discount wrt industry, pension
| contribution & other perks). This is how it should be
| everywhere.
| riedel wrote:
| Germany typically pays PhD students as research or
| teaching assistant (there are Grad schools in CS but this
| is the minority at least in my lab) When I started in
| 2005 the salary was even better than in many industry CS
| jobs (today the situation changed a bit). The problem I
| faced was that afterwards the PhD was not actually really
| valued by industry and I could not get myself to do a
| boring industry job without being paid 'adequately' to
| compensate for the loss of freedom. So I stayed at
| university again. I still have my freedoms but am kind of
| stuck in the academic system. If I would have gone to
| industry straight away my salary would probably be much
| higher by now.
| fouc wrote:
| To me, 18-30 or even 18-35 is practically "young adult" these
| days.
| chmod775 wrote:
| > I'm 30 right now, and only just recently finished my
| bachelors and have been looking to get a PhD, but it's really
| hard to find a program that will let you work full time while
| doing it.
|
| I did a similar thing during my bachelor: working close to full
| time. I was essentially busy 14 hours a day, seven days a week.
| I was burned out within a year and switched to 20 hour weeks.
| Looking back I suspect that I suffered from somewhat severe
| lasting consequences for at least another two years and I don't
| think I've been quite the same person since.
|
| Be mindful of what you're doing. Your brain and body need
| downtime at some point.
| [deleted]
| baby wrote:
| Try France, it's very common to do a PhD inside of a company.
| skeeter2020 wrote:
| As stated above European PhD are not typically the same as
| North American PhDs. I've never seen a respected program here
| that allows for part-time let alone while holding down a
| full-time job.
| arpa wrote:
| PhD is still a PhD in any continent. How academics organize
| their work is another question.
| [deleted]
| sytelus wrote:
| It is actually not. Many 3 year PhD or part time ones are
| not recognized for immigration or jobs in USA.
| arpa wrote:
| It's immigration policy, not qualitative PhD difference.
| JustFinishedBSG wrote:
| 1. PhD in the USAs are 3 years too if you count like
| europeans do (we don't include the masters) 2. Industrial
| PhDs are not part time PhDs, it's a different thing.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| American PhD students spend half of their time doing
| irrelevant things like taught classes and teaching work.
| They only do three years of actual research like everyone
| else.
| JustFinishedBSG wrote:
| Industrial PhDs are NOT part-time. They are full time,
| except instead of having to teach to get money you trade it
| for small industrial tasks.
| liveoneggs wrote:
| this is because PhD students are expected to be indentured
| servants to the tenured professors for, at least, five years
| eatYourFood wrote:
| York University (UK) will let you do a part time distance PhD
| in computer science:
| https://www.cs.york.ac.uk/postgraduate/research-degrees/phd/...
| snake42 wrote:
| Where I work allows full-time employees to get their PHD and
| also gives some paid time to write your thesis. You can also
| propose research projects that align with your thesis topic.
|
| Edit: Also tuition is free.
|
| https://careers.gtri.gatech.edu/en-us/listing/
| jrumbut wrote:
| Wow I thought my employer (Massachusetts) had been generous
| just allowing it and paying for it, but time to write your
| thesis?
|
| That's a great opportunity and I hope someone goes for it.
| snake42 wrote:
| Yeah it is a pretty nice place to work. Downside is that we
| are state employees, so salaries are lower than in industry
| (sometimes).
|
| I know several people I work with going this route right
| now, so some people do it!
| throwaway6734 wrote:
| It's going to be incredibly difficult to do real research while
| working full time. Have you considered pursuing a research
| based master's first?
| qxfys wrote:
| A fellow PhD student here.
|
| Come to Sweden (or, rather, Nordic countries in general). There
| are a lot of opportunities as an industrial PhD student. There
| are at least 3 out of 10 PhD students in my group doing
| research while still working in the industry. Usually, the deal
| is 80% PhD and 20% industry, but I know someone doing 50:50.
| boublepop wrote:
| You don't even need an industrial PhD. In Denmark at least, a
| PhD study is a paid position, essentially just a job that
| runs 3 years and results in handing in a PhD dissertation. It
| pays less than what you get in the industry, but very
| decently, so no need to balance multiple jobs, just focus on
| your research.
|
| The Industrial PhD pays the same here, so that's mostly a
| position you would take if you specifically want to
| collaborate with a company on some research project, not
| something you do because of income considerations.
| qxfys wrote:
| Yup, that's correct.
|
| Maybe it depends on the field and the country, but I know
| some industrial PhD position pays a better salary than the
| one employed full time by the university. Not sure if it is
| considered to be "much", but at least around 20% more.
| zmb_ wrote:
| I would add a word of warning here. In the multiple research
| groups that I've worked in, the completion rate for
| industrial PhD students has been way less than 50%.
|
| The industry part (whether 20% or 50%) easily ends up being
| close to 100% in practice. And many industrial PhD positions
| only last a few years, after which you get a normal full-time
| position and are expected to finish the PhD on your free
| time. Realistically, this makes it practically impossible to
| conduct the kind of research that you need to get a PhD from
| top programs.
| jrumbut wrote:
| I'm (counts on fingers) 33 now and am a few years into doing
| exactly what you're thinking of. I'm working full time and am
| probably going to finish within the next year and a half.
|
| My advice is to look at advisors who have a record of doing
| what you want to do or placing people where you want to go at
| schools that are a little bit down the rankings from the best
| possible place you could get into.
|
| My email is in my bio if you want to talk about it.
| jay3ss wrote:
| I know of one person who worked part time in industry while
| obtaining a PhD (also part time) from a major university in the
| southern California region and another who is currently doing
| the same at a different major university in the same region.
| Both people were working for a very large, Fortune 200 company.
| At the time they were in their mid 20s but I was offered a
| similar path (I'm in my 30s), but I've since left the company
| azhenley wrote:
| Professor here.
|
| You definitely aren't too old, but I would never take on a PhD
| student that wants to continue working elsewhere. A PhD is a
| full-time job. It took me 6.5 years and was hard enough with
| very little outside distractions.
| barrkel wrote:
| This is a similar attitude that you sometimes still see in
| employers with pregnant employees.
|
| Your total justification seems to be that because it was hard
| for you, it will be hard for others too.
|
| Fwiw my partner got her PhD part-time while working for the
| university as a researcher and consultant, actively authoring
| and publishing papers. It took her many years, but mostly it
| was finishing that was tough.
| [deleted]
| dagw wrote:
| _I would never take on a PhD student that wants to continue
| working elsewhere_
|
| We have several people at the company I work (in Sweden)
| doing their PhD part time. The company gets 'free' research
| in an area relevant to them and the university gets
| connections to industry and their research field tested on
| real world projects. Both se it as a win-win. This sort of
| arrangement seems quite common in Sweden I know several
| people who got their PhD this way.
| onion2k wrote:
| _A PhD is a full-time job._
|
| That _should_ mean it 's a 40 hour a week commitment, not
| that it's the only thing you do for half a decade or more.
| tomsmeding wrote:
| Indeed. And while I get your point that it's often more
| than 40 hours, the reality is also that an 80 hour work
| week (PhD + job) doesn't work for the vast majority of
| people. There are people for which it works, but chances
| are -- statistically -- that you, the reader, are not one
| of those. So a PhD being a full-time job, even if that
| means "just" 40 hours, is indeed a reason why full-time job
| + PhD does not work in practice for most people.
| azalemeth wrote:
| The main problem in academia is that worldwide those who
| work a 40 hour week seem to be far less common than those
| who work, or claim loudly to work, more than 100
| (particularly at the earlier career points). I'm lucky
| enough to have gone beyond the point where I sleep in the
| lab, but I definitely have done so.
|
| The OP should be able to do a doctorate part time, and in
| Europe that is definitely doable. The funding and the
| practicalities are very much subject specific, but it
| does take a long time -- and is very much a labour of
| love.
| CalRobert wrote:
| Why should someone give up several years of income for a PhD?
| bumby wrote:
| I think this is a false dichotomy even though it fits in
| with the traditional American template.
|
| "Go work in industry after undergrad/masters" or "forgo
| making money to pursue a PhD".
|
| Maybe it's borne from the bubble of academia, but as I got
| more experience in industry it became apparent there were
| many, many more pathways to a PhD than were discussed while
| in university.
| rlewkov wrote:
| Because they think the tradeoff is worth it. You may not,
| but some do.
| vaylian wrote:
| Because money isn't everything. Indulging in an
| intellectual pursuit in an environment that fosters
| investigative minds can be a wonderful thing.
| tombert wrote:
| > Because money isn't everything.
|
| I agree, and neither is a PhD, but I don't think that's a
| great reason.
|
| "Why don't we pay teachers a decent wage? Because money
| isn't everything and helping students grow to the next
| generation is something that is inspiring in itself."
|
| It's easy to say "money isn't everything" when you don't
| have to worry about money. A single parent is unlikely to
| be able to quit a decent-paying job to work with the low
| wages of a PhD program; are we just going to say "single
| parents need not apply" or "your kid should learn that
| money isn't everything while you live on subsistence
| wages for the next six years"?
|
| Obviously there are single parents who manage to their
| PhDs, and that's really cool, but I don't think it's
| realistic for a lot of (otherwise qualified) people.
| purebullshit wrote:
| > Why don't we pay teachers a decent wage?
|
| Perhaps you meant why teachers are not getting paid more
| than NBA players. The answer is those people are rare
| thus in high demand.
|
| Teachers are not rare and are not in high demand.
| bumby wrote:
| Indeed, the GP admitted it's an "indulgence", i.e., a
| luxury to be able to pursue a PhD for the love of the
| process. I don't think it's realistic for many people,
| particularly a single parent, nor necessary to have a
| fulfilling career that makes significant academic
| contributions.
| soheil wrote:
| Even if the work is related to the research?
| kortilla wrote:
| Yes. A phd has very little overlap with learning broad
| topics about a field (unlike masters and
| bachelors/associates). Unless your job is literally to do
| research on the subject of your dissertation, it will not
| help.
| soheil wrote:
| What about working harder than your peers? If you're 2x
| harder working than the avg phd student shouldn't you be
| able to dedicate half or a third of that time to work and
| still finish the phd in 5 years?
| skeeter2020 wrote:
| I'm not sure what your ideal of a good PhD student is;
| there's no measurable level of "good enough" that once
| met allows you to do a bunch of other things. It's
| supposed to be an all-consuming, single-focus period of
| intense research and knowledge generation.
| BeetleB wrote:
| > It's supposed to be an all-consuming, single-focus
| period of intense research and knowledge generation.
|
| This is mostly a recent phenomenon. Definitely not true
| for many I knew, nor of their professors when they were
| students.
|
| Lots of people got a PhD by just being disciplined and
| working 8-5 on it in the usual time frames. I wager many
| still do.
| grayclhn wrote:
| IME (US) the typical successful phd student works 60-80
| hours a week, so... good luck working twice that hard for
| 5 years.
| p1esk wrote:
| "Hard work" in the context of phd studies is not measured
| in a number of hours one works per week. It's measured in
| a number of first author publications in top
| journals/conferences.
| grayclhn wrote:
| Which is really really correlated with the number of
| hours you put in. Hard work means working hard, whatever
| context you're imagining.
| laichzeit0 wrote:
| Let's assume this is a CS PhD (so no "lab" work). Is this
| person doing 60 hours of actual research a week? If I did
| a PhD while working full time, I would expect to do
| purely research. I'm not interested in teaching or
| grading papers or anything non-dissertation related.
|
| Btw, this is how most people do their PhDs here. It's a
| quick in and out 3 year seal-team like operation. Caveat:
| We see Ph.D as a degree you do after a 2 year Masters
| degree. So in total 5 years after undergrad.
| grayclhn wrote:
| When I was in grad school (Econ, not CS) teaching, etc.,
| was less than 10h a week. The rest of the time was
| research. So yeah, 60+ hours of actual research a week.
| laichzeit0 wrote:
| That seems... excessive? 60 hours a week / 5 days a week
| is 12 hours a day. Even working Saturdays, that would
| give you 10 hours a day 6 days a week. I personally have
| never met any single PhD student who did that amount of
| pure research each week for 5 or 6 years. Again, I'm not
| talking about "lab" type research.
| soheil wrote:
| Where is this?
| tomrod wrote:
| Often more than that. During the dissertation phase 16
| hour days almost every day can be common.
|
| It is brutal. It can be worth it, but it is brutal.
| pawelmurias wrote:
| What productive thing could you do 16 hours day? Study
| paint drying in a lab?
| tomrod wrote:
| Typically not one specific activity, but a slew of
| different activities all pointed towards the goal.
|
| An example:
|
| 8AM - wake, prepare for day, take bus to campus
|
| 9AM - teach class
|
| 10:30 AM - office hours, grade, read relevant papers
|
| 12:00 PM - short lunch window
|
| 12:15 PM - research, write code, notes. Short
| intermittent breaks. Library visits. Seminar attendance /
| prep, seminar/journal reading, prep, etc. Consult with
| advisor, others
|
| 7:00 PM - break for dinner, bus home
|
| 8:00 PM - research, write code, notes. Short intermittent
| breaks. Seminary reading, journal reading, etc. Class
| prep.
|
| 3:00 AM - sleep
|
| Weekends were similar to weekdays without class or
| bussing.
| umanwizard wrote:
| How many PhD students have you known? The successful ones
| at least work extremely hard already; there is no such
| thing as working twice as hard as them.
| soheil wrote:
| Take the top 1% of successful phd students. Does your
| statement apply equally to them? What about the 0.01%?
| umanwizard wrote:
| If anything those denote even more time to their academic
| work than the average.
| soheil wrote:
| That's my point, can someone in that group instead of
| devoting more time than the average to their academic
| work take that extra time and devote it to their job?
| skeeter2020 wrote:
| So if you had the capability to be one of the greatest
| PhD students in the world your strategy would be "do a
| bunch of stuff average instead"? How would you achieve
| such a high level of performance in the first place?
| Being a good grad student is as much learned and
| practiced as any other skill.
| nitrogen wrote:
| Being quite good at two things can sometimes be much more
| advantageous than being top notch at just one thing.
| skmurphy wrote:
| Scott Adams offered this as "Career Advice" (http://dilbe
| rtblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2007/07/care...) in
| July of 2007:
|
| "But if you want something extraordinary, you have two
| paths:
|
| 1. Become the best at one specific thing.
|
| 2. Become very good (top 25%) at two or more things.
|
| The first strategy is difficult to the point of near
| impossibility. Few people will ever play in the NBA or
| make a platinum album. I don't recommend anyone even try.
|
| The second strategy is fairly easy. Everyone has at least
| a few areas in which they could be in the top 25% with
| some effort."
|
| See also https://www.skmurphy.com/blog/2010/04/18/jack-
| of-all-trades/ for an exploration of how deep knowledge
| of multiple domains enables opportunities for knowledge
| brokerage.
| tomrod wrote:
| No. If you plan to be successful, there is little to no
| time outside of being a PhD student. If you want to be in
| the top 1%, and especially the top 0.01%, you should plan
| to spend your free time researching to become an expert
| in your field. But such numerical distinctions are
| typically meaningless since, by virtue of working towards
| a dissertation, you should be pushing the boundaries of
| your field of knowledge and thus have few exact
| comparables as peers.
|
| Source: me (several years now complete w/ PhD), my cohort
| in my program, and my PhD-earning friends outside my
| field.
| soheil wrote:
| Take olympic athletes. There are differences not only in
| the level of work but also physiologically between those
| who win gold medals and those who can't be olympic
| athletes. If you're a would-be gold medalist why isn't it
| possible to settle for getting into the olympics and have
| a job on the side?
| nopinsight wrote:
| That's an interesting analogy. If you can find recorded
| examples of part-time Olympic athletes from a competitive
| country that would help your point. By a competitive
| country, I mean one with non-negligible chance of getting
| a medal in that sport.
|
| I wonder if they exist and if so, how rare.
|
| I suspect it's extremely rare or non-existent for an
| athlete who holds another full-time job up to the
| selection time to get selected into a US Olympic swimming
| team, for example.
| volta83 wrote:
| So you take the 0.01% of all university students, that
| are accepted into a PhD program, and then take the 0.01%
| of that ?
|
| So 0.0001% of all university students, and then... work
| three times as hard as them ?
|
| Working harder gets exponentially harder the harder you
| work. So... 0.0000000000001% of all students then ?
|
| And now, in your application form for a PhD program, you
| want to convince an employer that they should hire you
| because you think in you are in that bracket, without any
| proof that backs it up, even though if for some reason
| you are not, things catastrophically fail for your
| employer ?
|
| Yeah good luck with that.
| eyeundersand wrote:
| If you don't mind anecdata: I'm in the third year of my
| PhD and would classify myself as an average hard worker
| compared to my peers. It is highly improbable for someone
| to work three times as hard as an average PhD in any
| half-decent program. A lot depends on your adviser but
| anyone serious about their work will demand a certain
| level of output from their grad student (like any other
| manager situation) which necessitates a certain level of
| work. PhDs and post-docs are notoriously underpaid for
| the amount of work they do.
| rackjack wrote:
| If you were somehow twice as productive as the average
| PhD student you wouldn't worry about finding a
| professor...
| imutemyteam wrote:
| what kind of field?
|
| I have helped make "theses" for people in
| "banking"/"management" and those require no work.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| My dad did his PhD while working full-time. He had previously
| been working 70 hour weeks at a startup and switched to a 9-5
| job with an NGO and used the extra 30 hours a week of time to
| work on his PhD, so it is doable.
| tombert wrote:
| > You definitely aren't too old
|
| By "old" I didn't mean actual biological age exactly. I guess
| the more appropriate word would be something more like
| "settled". As it stands, I have a mortgage and whatnot to
| take care of, it's not really realistic for me to quit my job
| and focus full-time on a PhD for the next 5-6 years.
|
| > but I would never take on a PhD student that wants to
| continue working elsewhere
|
| That seems to be the consensus in the US for the most part.
| Ironically, it's actually easier for a working American to
| get a distance-learning PhD from a British university than it
| is to get a local PhD in person in the states.
|
| Right now I'm in the process of trying to get into University
| of York's distance part-time PhD, while remaining in NY. It's
| a long shot but it's basically my only option.
| geebee wrote:
| One factor - I was under the impression that European PhD
| programs are much more dissertation focused, whereas US
| based ones are intensely coursework focused for the first
| few years. Is this the case?
|
| I was in a US based PhD program (at Berkeley, mastered
| out), and I would attest to the heavy coursework load, but
| I've only heard that European/British programs are largely
| or purely dissertation based. Would enjoy hearing more
| about this from someone knowledgeable.
| tombert wrote:
| Not in the program yet (and very likely won't be), but
| with the people I've been chatting with at University of
| York, this definitely seems to be the case. The
| professors I've been talking to indicated that I would be
| hopping directly into research towards an end goal
| instead of spending a bunch of time in coursework.
|
| They also seemed to assume a lot more knowledge about CS
| and math than most US grad schools do. Presumably you're
| just expected to enter with most of the knowledge
| required to research your dissertation. For my
| application, I had to write a 5-6 page proposal on what I
| wanted to research, and had to more-or-less defend the
| proposal during the admissions interview.
|
| I'm not as familiar with the American PhD process, but my
| dad said for him (about 38 years ago, PhD in Aerospace at
| Notre Dame) it was more or less akin to the undergrad
| admission process: he took the GRE, sent a few
| transcripts, interviewed a few people, was accepted, and
| after about a year he decided what he wanted to focus on.
| geebee wrote:
| Yes, that is very different from what I experienced at
| Berkeley as well. There were some notable differences
| between my PhD application and undergrad, in that PhD
| admissions committees weren't really interested in the
| undergraduate dog and pony show of "tell me how your
| volunteer work and experience playing the flute in your
| high school orchestra shaped you as a person..." My
| personal statement was about what I intended to get out
| of a PhD program and a vague direction of possible future
| research interest. Interestingly, med and law school
| applications in the US are much more similar to the
| undergrad essay than PhD programs.
|
| But still, even the PhD statement was nothing like the
| 5-6 page proposal with a clear research focus that you
| described. Sounds more like the kind of program I'd be
| interested in if I were to go back, as I'd be mainly
| interested in researching something deeply, not taking
| classes.
|
| Well, good luck, hope it works out for you.
| nbardy wrote:
| I've been looking into Graduate school for years and
| decided I won't go back in the US mostly likely and will
| head to Europe. Our system is designed to take advantage of
| PhD's as labor for the university system.
|
| It's too extractive for what it's giving back.
| unobatbayar wrote:
| > I'm 30 right now, > You definitely
| aren't too old > By "old" I didn't mean
| actual biological age exactly.
|
| In my opinion, the replier was referring to your
| chronological age.
| tombert wrote:
| Sure but this is a distinction without a difference in
| this case. My choice of the word "old" wasn't very good,
| as explained in the following sentence.
| ghego1 wrote:
| EU Professor here.
|
| You're right, expectations are very different in the "old
| continent". Things very quite significantly from country to
| country, but generally speaking in most EU you can do your
| PhD while working.
|
| Retrospectively, knowing what I know know, I should add
| that if I were to start a PhD now I wouldn't trust a
| university that asks for a full time commitment, no
| exceptions.
|
| I would be very suspicious that they will burden me with
| all kind of side activities (e.g. tutoring undergraduate
| students, handling bureaucracy, paper work, etc.) that are
| not really of any actual help towards the thesis.
|
| As a professor my view is that PhD students should have
| quite a lot of "free time" to explore, try different things
| and fail as many times as possible, with the highest degree
| of freedom allowed by the domain in which they work. I
| think that that's at the core of what academic research is
| all about.
|
| If you don't need lab equipment or anything that requires
| in person training, I'd say to go absolutely for a remote
| position as a PhD student. It doesn't really make a huge
| difference if you can do everything you need in front of a
| computer.
|
| If you can do your PhD fully remotely, the two most
| important things are how respected and wel known is the
| university in which you enrol, and the tutor that will be
| assigned to you (don't underestimate this!).
|
| Best of luck!
|
| PS you're definitely not too old, and not too settled, as
| long as you have "hunger" for understanding how things
| around you work!
| blip54321 wrote:
| New continent:
|
| - Full time commitment seems critical to the process. A
| Ph.D is a time of intellectual exploration, and you can't
| really do that fighting work and family deadlines.
|
| - On the other hand, time can be squished for older
| people by virtue of industry experience making them more
| efficient
|
| - I'd be hesitant about remote, since so much of a Ph.D
| is learning from others. Hallway conversations are
| critical. That's possible remotely, but not common.
|
| - Fully agreed about "side activities." Teaching is fine
| -- you learn A LOT from it -- but a lot of Ph.D programs
| give stupid administrative grunt work. The metaphorical
| cleaning of test tubes on a professor's project is a
| serious red flag.
|
| No such thing as too old, but having a mortgage and
| family myself now, I definitely get much out of a Ph.D
| program right now.
|
| I'll mention too: If I didn't have a Ph.D, I'm mature and
| disciplined enough now that I could learn the same
| without a formal program.
|
| I am skeptical of new world "accelerated" programs, which
| often have little substance, and are designed to milk
| working professionals. It's like getting the piece of
| paper in Wizard of Oz.
| garmaine wrote:
| > Full time commitment seems critical to the process. A
| Ph.D is a time of intellectual exploration, and you can't
| really do that fighting work and family deadlines.
|
| This is BS. In every other field great strides have been
| made by individuals who balance a multitude of life
| requirements. Being able to devote every waking hour to
| something only results in burnout. And, I suppose,
| graduate students slave labor, which is the real reason
| for wanting 100% available graduate students in the
| program.
| ryan93 wrote:
| In research 99+% of people did full time PHDs. It would
| be wrong to give someone advice assuming they are truly
| unique.
| SantalBlush wrote:
| Academia in the US has become a pyramid scheme where
| faculty lures bright, young, hard working students into
| doing their chores for poverty wages. It's not the
| faculty's fault, either; they're often overworked as
| well.
|
| I don't know how anyone produces meaningful research in
| that environment anymore. It's untenable.
| agustif wrote:
| Yep, I agree 100%. Its just about full-time slave-
| ownership on disguise, you don't want to share your
| little slaves with any time sucker like family, hobbies,
| or whatever outside work they might enjoy... Better to
| have them full time working for nothin'. While our real
| professors just do nothin'
| cromka wrote:
| Agreed, this is just the stereotypical, American "hustle
| porn" boot-strapping mentality, mixed-up with a dash of
| Stockholm syndrome.
|
| Source: European, have lived in the US since 6 years now.
| dunefox wrote:
| > I would be very suspicious that they will burden me
| with all kind of side activities (e.g. tutoring
| undergraduate students, handling bureaucracy, paper work,
| etc.) that are not really of any actual help towards the
| thesis.
|
| So, every PhD position? I have looked at dozens and
| almost none don't require teaching, paper work,
| bureaucracy, organisational work, etc. done. I was even
| warned by one person that this weekend will be the first
| free weekend in months. Because of teaching, etc. I don't
| know how meaningful work can be done like this.
| [deleted]
| ghego1 wrote:
| I'm sorry the hear that, and I think it's mostly worng.
|
| I should add though that some activities are indeed
| useful, one of those is certainly teaching. If PhD
| students have full responsibility over the course, or
| part of the course, of which they're entrusted, it can be
| a very productive activity.
|
| It is particularly formative if PhD students are
| entrusted with teaching activities covering subjects
| closely related to their thesis. In this way they can
| practice speaking over the things they are studying,
| which brings a ton of experience and positive growth.
|
| On the contrary, if it's just teaching to cover hours
| that the professor to which the course is appointment is
| not willing to do, than it's much less attractive.
|
| As a general rule, I'd suggest to a PhD student to be as
| selfish as possible. Although apparently
| counterintuitive, in their position it is a good rule of
| thumb to only engage in things that bring some tangible
| (but not necessarily immediate) utility. There are way
| too many professors willing to take advantage of younger
| positions for their own agenda. And that is also why it's
| very important who your thesis supervisor is.
|
| Finally: never underestimate the "contractual power" that
| a PhD student has over a professor. Apart of few
| exceptions, professors need PhD students more than PhD
| students need professors. And in the case of those
| exceptions in which the professor is so well known and
| respected that there is a waiting list to be a PhD
| student, then I'd bet that it will also be so because
| such professor knows how to properly supervise PhD
| students.
| zmb_ wrote:
| > I'm sorry the hear that, and I think it's mostly worng.
|
| I think there is just a large variance between countries
| and/or fields. I've worked in CS/EE in three top EU
| universities, and in every case I've seen, PhD students
| working in a research group had a heavy load of both
| teaching and project work on top of their PhD research.
| bumby wrote:
| > _Apart of few exceptions, professors need PhD students
| more than PhD students need professors._
|
| Can you elaborate on this? I'm not disagreeing, but
| colleges/professors certainly like to project the
| opposite in many cases
| lasfter wrote:
| Professors depend on grant money and they need to push
| out papers to be competitive in grant applications. The
| vast, vast majority of work in research is done by grad
| students. Without students, professors would have to do
| everything themselves or compete with industry for talent
| they can't afford.
|
| Students by contrast need professors for training and
| advice. Whether they receive these from their advisor
| depends on the lab. In bigger labs junior students learn
| more from senior students and post-docs than professors.
| [deleted]
| geebee wrote:
| Just as an anecdote. I was in a doctoral program in
| engineering, and I mastered out into a 90k/yr job (this
| was in the early 2000s) writing cplex code to optimize
| supply chains. A buddy in the PhD program was doing
| nearly identical work for a 15k/yr stipend.
| maxnoe wrote:
| > Things very quite significantly from country to
| country, but generally speaking in most EU you can do
| your PhD while working.
|
| In physics? I don't think so. I did my PHD in Germany but
| we work in large international collaborations, so I meet
| s lot of phd students from other countries as well.
|
| Doing a phd in physics is everywhere I know at least a
| full time job. Often, depending on topic, group,
| supervisor and yourself even more than a 40 hour week.
|
| The complexity, depth and specialization required don't
| really allow for anything else.
| conjectures wrote:
| > in most EU you can do your PhD while working.
|
| You really can't at good universities in the UK. At
| Cambridge we had to get special permission to live more
| than 10 miles from Great St Mary's. My advisor's advice
| was that it was near impossible to finish up while
| working.
|
| Had enough of Americans telling me about their
| excruciatingly long PhD programmes when half of that time
| is spent teaching and doing exams which we'd probably
| call an MSc. Or half of a post-doc position.
|
| 3-4 years is a great length of time for a contract where
| you're subject to such a power imbalance.
| oytis wrote:
| Well, UK is not EU anymore.
| conjectures wrote:
| Ba-dum tish!
| dm319 wrote:
| Yes, I have recently completed a PhD at a UK university
| (aged late 30s). I was able to get full funding for my
| salary and lab resources for 3 years. I worked so hard
| and submitted after 4 years. Can't imagine how I could
| have done those three years while working - it was a very
| much full-time occupation, if not more.
| geebee wrote:
| Fascinating. Was there a lot of coursework, or was this
| dissertation-based?
|
| The reason I say fascinating is that people do part-time
| law degrees (25-30 hours a week estimated commitment)
| while working at times demanding jobs. However, I am very
| willing to belive that law school is a lot more
| straightforward than a PhD (attrition rates in elite law
| schools are below 1%, as opposed to 35%-50% for elite PhD
| programs).
| tombert wrote:
| A few decent universities in the UK appear to be somewhat
| amenable to the idea of part-time distance learning for a
| PhD. I don't think University of York is considered a bad
| school by any measure, and it has a program for such
| things.
|
| https://www.york.ac.uk/distance-
| learning/courses/#computer-s...
| nickd2001 wrote:
| I wonder if anyone knows the answer to this Q. Back in
| the day, UK universities, and in particular Open
| University, often let you take as long as you liked to
| finish a Phd. I knew someone who in the 1980s got a
| lecturer job at Cambridge Uni with only a Masters, and
| over a period of 16 yrs got a Phd part-time. But it seems
| this got clamped down, and now unis don't like to see
| anyone take longer than 6 yrs to complete a Phd, thus
| restricting opportunities for those working full-time /
| raising families at the same time. Does anyone know of
| some exception to this? I quite fancy doing a Phd myself
| one day, but I assume I'd have to do it in "stealth mode"
| unofficially for a few yrs without a supervisor first,
| getting quite far down the line then approaching a
| supervisor when it seemed like could complete it within 6
| yrs, and that whole approach seems potentially to have
| pit-falls
| geebee wrote:
| Interesting story about the lecturer. The RAND institute
| proposed an alternative approach to PhDs modeled more on
| professional degrees. Law professors, for instance,
| typical complete law degrees in a very predicable 3 years
| and build their publications on the job as well paid
| professors.
|
| This suggestion in the RAND paper was part of an article
| concluding that there is no shortage of interest in STEM
| PhDs, and that the aversion US citizens have to these PhD
| programs is rational and market based when compared to
| outcomes from professional degrees with (comparably)
| short, predictable completion times and vastly lower
| attrition rates.
|
| In other words, if there really were a shortage of PhD
| STEM students, the career path you described would be
| plentiful and typical (well, not the 16 year part, but
| the model of getting good, stable, paid employment after
| a shorter and more easily completed degree, followed by a
| process of building publications in that role).
|
| For now, unfortunately, the main lesson is to just say no
| to PhDs, unless you have a very very strong personal
| interest in completing one.
| sungam wrote:
| Brian May started a PhD in astrophysics at Imperial
| college in the 70s and dropped out when Queen took off.
| He then re-registered in 2006 and completed so it was
| clearly possible at that time.
| wumpus wrote:
| I'm a long-haired musician PhD-dropout, and his story is
| a great inspiration.
|
| Even though he has nicer hair and is a much better
| musician.
| bachmeier wrote:
| > I would be very suspicious that they will burden me
| with all kind of side activities (e.g. tutoring
| undergraduate students, handling bureaucracy, paper work,
| etc.) that are not really of any actual help towards the
| thesis.
|
| What you're calling a "burden" is the stuff that (a) pays
| for the funding that covers tuition and living expenses
| and (b) provides experience that helps you to get a job
| when you're done. You don't need to burden yourself with
| those things if you pay everything yourself.
| pm90 wrote:
| Both of your examples are duties that an academic may
| have in the future. What about someone like the OP that
| just wants the PhD and continue their path in the
| industry?
|
| Speaking anecdotally: the US research universities seem
| like research mills driven by low wage labor from
| international students. American students I met in my
| graduate program had to be both really smart or
| passionate and willing to put up with the demands of the
| PhD. It's pretty bleak, and it's good to hear that it's
| different on the old continent.
| bumby wrote:
| In my experience, some universities/programs still expect
| these ancillary duties even if you're self-funded. If I
| was a cynic, it would lead me to believe they are just
| trying to get cheap labor out of grad students.
| anon946 wrote:
| The biggest issue is the remote part, not the part-time
| part. I'm a professor, and myself and others in the dept.
| have remote, part-time PhD students. However, they have
| finished their coursework, which must be done in person for
| the most part. The coursework could be done part-time,
| though.
| bumby wrote:
| > _which must be done in person for the most part._
|
| I think COVID may have changed some of this paradigm for
| many schools
| [deleted]
| melvinmt wrote:
| Yes, part-time PhD's are pretty common in Europe. They also
| commonly take 3-4 years instead of 6...
| evanb wrote:
| ... if you already have a master's degree, which takes 2
| years. In the US many 5-6 year PhD programs do not
| require--and in fact include--a master's degree.
| [deleted]
| Zababa wrote:
| Oh, that explains a lot. In France it's usually 3 years
| (180 ECTS) for a license (which is usually equivalent to
| a bachelor), 2 years (120 ECTS) for a master's degree and
| then usually 3 years for a PhD. At least in software,
| most people have a master's degree.
| bombadilo wrote:
| A masters is typically one year full time, two years part
| time.
| trenchgun wrote:
| Incorrect. In Europe a bachelors is either 3 or 4 years,
| and a masters is either 1 or 2 years. Full time. Source:
| https://ec.europa.eu/education/resources-and-
| tools/european-...
| trenchgun wrote:
| Of course, it is possible to do a 90 ECTS masters (1 year
| full time) for two years part time.
|
| And it's possible to do a 180 ECTS masters (2 year full
| time) for four years part time.
| Flashtoo wrote:
| A full year is 60 ECTS. 180 would be three years full
| time.
| jstx1 wrote:
| This isn't the case in England. Most master's degrees are
| 1 year and a master's isn't a requirement for many PhD
| programmes. So it's possible to do your entire higher
| education, including a PhD, in 6 years (3 years of
| undergrad + 3 years full-time PhD).
| chuckleMuscle wrote:
| This is true in principle, but in practice my experience
| is you have to have an extraordinarily good CV to get
| funding without a masters degree. Natural science bias in
| my friendship group though.
|
| That said, a masters degree in the UK is much less of an
| undertaking than many other countries. Level of
| independent research in my "combined" masters (4 yr
| course, usually taken as 1st degree), pales in comparison
| to what colleagues in mainland Europe had to do.
| tombert wrote:
| Which I find weird; are European/British PhDs generally
| considered less valuable than American? I didn't think
| they were but there's a lot I don't know about this.
| thatguymike wrote:
| One major difference between UK and US undegraduate
| courses is that when you study undergraduate at a UK
| university, you _only_ do courses in your chosen course
| of study. No faffing about for a year or two picking a
| major, no time spent filling language requirements or
| taking interesting-sounding courses to scratch an itch.
| As a result, UK graduating undergraduates tend to have
| spent more time in their chosen field of study than US
| undergraduates have. It has plusses and minuses: I (UK
| grad) would have loved to have followed my diverse
| interests more; but on the flipside I do know more about
| my subject than my US equivalents. I have no proof but
| it's reasonable to think that would transfer to shorter
| PHD programs.
| wheels wrote:
| Germany's basically the same. I've lived here 20 years. I
| went to a liberal arts college in the US. Shortening the
| time to getting a PhD is the only argument I could make
| for the European system vs. a liberal arts system. German
| even has a word for people who are knowledgeable in their
| field and nothing else: "fachidiot" (literally field-
| idiot). Even aside from being a well-rounded individual,
| the number of times it's helped in my career that I had
| to take university-level general education classes is
| huge.
|
| Even with my liberal arts background, and having worked
| in pretty mathy areas of industry, it's rare that I, say,
| have to use much from my last two years of CS education.
| (What they did prepare me for is getting to the point
| that I can read research papers in areas I've since
| worked in.)
|
| To be clear: virtually everywhere in the US a CS
| curriculum takes 4 years. There's no deciding in year
| three and graduating on time. You could potentially
| switch to CS from engineering, math or physics and get
| close.
|
| In Germany at least, in contrast to the US, there's no
| coursework in a PhD, which I believe is the main thing
| that makes a PhD shorter than, say, a US PhD directly
| after a bachelors degree (which is typical in the
| sciences).
| robertlagrant wrote:
| > German even has a word for people who are knowledgeable
| in their field and nothing else: "fachidiot" (literally
| field-idiot).
|
| While I don't disagree with the sentiment, English has
| the word "dragon" - doesn't mean dragons exist!
| Zababa wrote:
| It's the same in France as in the UK. I'd say 90% of my
| time in college was spent on things directly related to
| maths, computer science or software engineering. Sports
| was mandatory for the first 2 years and half too.
| dangerbird2 wrote:
| If I recall correctly, the exception is in Scotland,
| where the undergraduate programs tend to be more like
| America's: 4 years of study with emphasis on broad
| liberal arts education in secondary and higher education.
| I remember when applying for colleges in the U.S., our
| councilors noted that while it's virtually impossible for
| an American to apply as a full-time undergrad at English
| schools, particularly Oxbridge, due to incompatibilities
| in our educational systems, it's perfectly feasible to go
| from an American high school to a Scottish undergrad
| program (aside from the obvious travel and visa hurdles).
| arvindamirtaa wrote:
| This is actually one of the most honest takes on the
| UK/Europe vs US undergrad formats.
| sabjut wrote:
| Not exactly sure about the UK specifically, but elsewhere
| in Europe you can absolutely take any course that the
| university offers - it just wont be accredited and you
| will gain 0 ECTS Points, which you need to collect in a
| timely manner to complete your degree.
| OJFord wrote:
| Yes you generally can in the UK too, just ask the
| lecturer as a courtesy at least, if there's capacity
| they'll probably be pleased someone's keen, but might ask
| you don't submit any problem sheets or whatever for
| grading.
|
| That's not what GP means though: in the first year in the
| US, generally speaking, undergraduates aren't enrolled on
| a particular programme; they take a range of courses from
| different faculties for credit, and decide which area to
| 'major in' (and perhaps additionally 'a minor') later.
| OJFord wrote:
| > I have no proof but it's reasonable to think that would
| transfer to shorter PHD programs.
|
| I didn't enter one (regretfully) anywhere - but from what
| I recall when looking, US/Can typically have more of a
| taught element in preparation, included in the first year
| or two of the PhD programme.
|
| Sort of like doing an MPhil or something followed by PhD
| I suppose, but built-in and I assume designed to counter
| the effect you describe.
| barry-cotter wrote:
| Only in the US/Canada. The stereotype is that they may be
| fine researchers but they don't have the breadth that
| comes of spending two years doing graduate level classes.
| analog31 wrote:
| They may start out already more specialized as
| undergrads, or the programs are just managed better.
| tooltower wrote:
| They make a sharper distinction of PhD being a post-
| Masters degree. In USA, I started the PhD program without
| a Masters, others started with me who had a Masters. We
| all took roughly the same amount of time to complete the
| PhD
| throaway1990 wrote:
| European PhDs have better structure and rigid filters to
| weed out the unworthy dweebs. And the students take far
| less courses and generally work harder.
|
| US PhD system is slow and often leads to counter-
| intuitive, interesting or just weird results, which may
| or mayn't pan out in the long run.
|
| US PhD system has to be longer because
|
| i) US undergraduate system is absolute trash (like worse
| than 3rd world 12th grader at their worst), specially in
| STEM, so the extra 2-3 years are essential.
|
| ii) US students don't work that hard
|
| iii) Quite a few STEM grad students are foreign students,
| sometimes from different undergard backgrounds than PhD
| topic, so they benefit from 1-2 years of background
| training and acclimitising to foreign land.
| jwilber wrote:
| Sorry you got rejected from all the US programs you
| applied for? Lol
| tombert wrote:
| I'm reasonably certain that American PhD students work
| very hard. Do you have any evidence for the claim that
| they don't?
| bg4 wrote:
| There is no evidence, only bitterness.
| sipior wrote:
| Generally speaking, American PhD programs expect that
| you'll be spending at least a year (and generally two) on
| graduate-level courses before engaging in full-time
| research. European-style undergraduate degrees are much
| more focussed, with far fewer "gen-ed" requirements, and
| you're expected to pick up any extra background material
| en passant, alongside your thesis work.
|
| It's a philosophical difference that doesn't mean a great
| deal practically. Often, European undergraduate programs
| are five years in length, although that's been changing
| as many European institutions now seem to be moving
| towards four-year programs. I'm not really sure what's
| driving that shift, but I think it's done partly in an
| effort to standardise what it means to have a "bachelor's
| degree" in terms of what employers can expect between
| Europe and North America, &cet.
| bitwize wrote:
| The difference comes from the fact that smart Europeans
| graduate secondary school with the equivalent of an
| American university grad's education. U.S. universities
| must therefore offer more coursework in order to bring
| their postgrads up to snuff with what's expected of a
| fresh university grad in the rest of the developed world.
| sipior wrote:
| Having lived in Europe for almost twenty years, with a
| spouse teaching in a European secondary school, and with
| the utmost respect to my European colleagues, please
| allow me to assure you that this is not even remotely the
| case.
| Scarblac wrote:
| In Europe the Bachelor is already fully focused on a
| subject, and you have to get a Master degree before you
| can enter PhD programs.
|
| In the US the Bachelor is much wider in scope and you can
| get the Master during the PhD program.
| [deleted]
| skissane wrote:
| It is the same with undergraduate study. In countries
| such as the UK or Australia, the majority of Bachelor's
| degrees take only 3 years, versus a standard 4 year
| minimum for the US. I get the impression that a lot of
| US-based hiring managers don't know about this, but even
| if they do, nobody really seems to care much anyway.
| Unless it is your very first job after university, what
| you did as an undergraduate rarely has much significance.
| ratww wrote:
| Anecdotal, but I never saw a hiring manager complaining
| about degrees from elsewhere. Even in cases where
| documentation was asked (a FAANG... and Immigration too)
| a diploma equivalence is enough.
| barrkel wrote:
| Hiring managers, agree. Sourcing recruiters, not so sure.
| For the conveyor belt directly from college into FAANG
| internship and onwards, I expect you'll have an easier
| time at a big name.
| Zababa wrote:
| > A PhD is a full-time job. It took me 6.5 years and was hard
| enough with very little outside distractions.
|
| Interesting, in France in computer science, PhDs are often
| made while working part time on something related to the PhD.
| programLyrique wrote:
| Are you referring to CIFRE-funded PhD thesis?
| Zababa wrote:
| I don't remember the specifics, I had a presentation on
| PhDs during my license that mention this system, and
| CIFRE-funded PhD thesis seem to fit it, but I don't know
| if it's the only mechanism that exists.
| fsloth wrote:
| That sounds really weird to a european. A manager at my job
| in his 50's I know is doing is PhD studies along side his
| quite demanding workload. To my knowledge as he described the
| process it was no problem to the department to work on his
| courses and thesis "only part time". This is CS so domains
| may differ.
| tobmlt wrote:
| Experiences vary. I was just at the point of qualifying exams
| when a full time job op came up in a tightly related field.
| They (profs and managers all) understood, my new co-workers
| mostly being phds themselves, and I hired on at 32 hrs a week
| for full time - health insurance etc, and dropped my dicey
| gov research funding. I loved every second of working mon-
| thurs, phd by,... every other spare second. But I could live
| on chewing gum, beers, and ideas at that age, I guess. I also
| took about 6 years all up. God it was fun when it was fun.
| lixtra wrote:
| In many places of the world PhD candidates officially work
| 50% and more as teaching assistants, system admins or other
| vaguely related jobs. I see little scientific downside to
| work part time in a well paid related job instead.
| JofArnold wrote:
| My partner took 10 years doing her PhD thesis part time. It
| was very hard for us both - especially close to the end. I'm
| 100% with you on this.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Interesting. My dad is an MD PhD and he got the PhD while
| being a full time trauma surgeon in his forties. I think
| perhaps this is like all the other things people have told me
| are impossible: if I (or all the people like me) want to,
| we'd find it easy.
| scyzoryk_xyz wrote:
| I work with surgical MD PhD's in my work and I'm pretty
| sure it's different in medicine. You must constantly stay
| in practice to stay relevant and your research area
| overlaps with your practice.
| thomasfl wrote:
| The love Steiner shows for science is heartwarming. Research in
| physics, or even astro physics, is perhaps the ultimate adventure
| these days.
| locallost wrote:
| Heh, my second attempt at a Bachelor's degree was at 27, and when
| I was done, a professor asked if I will also continue with the
| Master's degree at the same University. To that I said, no, I'm
| over 30 and too old :-).
|
| State of mind is a very important thing.
| hellbannedguy wrote:
| A wealthy retired doctor who was interested in Physics his entire
| life as a hobby decided to go back to school.
|
| I bet he loved every minute of it.
|
| Does he need the PhD to make money--no.
|
| Does a wealthy man need something to stimulate his curiosities--
| yes.
|
| Most of us, even physics fanatics, would never get this
| opportunity.
|
| (I have noticed a lot of wealthy doctors whom turn a hobby into
| something more, but after they made their wad.)
| yread wrote:
| I half expected it to say he started it at 23
| SNosTrAnDbLe wrote:
| I am so jealous. I always wanted to do a PhD and was even
| accepted to a good program. Ended up not going as I could not
| gather up the courage to leave my job behind. I sincerely hope
| the experience getting the physics doctorate was all that he had
| imagined!
| HeavyStorm wrote:
| Sometimes I get scared that I'm too old and will not accomplish
| my goald It's nice to see that I probably have much more time
| than I think.
| et2o wrote:
| This is such a cool story. What a man. I wonder what his patients
| remember of him.
| the_only_law wrote:
| I don't even have a bachelors. I've been thinking about going
| back to school and pursing higher levels of education (research
| masters or PhD) twitch a mostly utilitarian fields and do
| industrial R&D work in a domain I've become interested in and my
| biggest worry is being "old" by the time I complete any graduate
| education (even though old in my case, would likely be mid-30s by
| the end if I start in the coming years).
|
| I might get crucified for being so jaded and cynical, but
| completed a PhD as part of some lifelong dream seems a bit empty
| to me. I think it's fair to call him a physicist, but I just
| personally wouldn't feel the dream was realized. Now, at the end
| of his life, he's achieved the bare minimum and I doubt he will
| be able to do much more in the field or see the field develop.
| Loughla wrote:
| How is completing a super advanced degree in a very specific
| field 'the bare minimum'?
|
| I feel like taking high school physics would be the bare
| minimum. Or maybe even getting a bachelor's. But a PhD? That's
| not the pinnacle of a career, by any means, but it's 100% the
| pinnacle of an educational experience.
|
| >my biggest worry is being "old" by the time I complete any
| graduate education
|
| There are 'old' students everywhere in college and graduate
| school. If you interact with any graduate students from not
| your home country, 99% of the time, they are much (read: a
| decade or two) older than the 'regular' student.
| ryan93 wrote:
| Wrong. Most foreign PHDs are in their early to mid twenties
| when they start
| Loughla wrote:
| Wrong.
|
| The average age of international PhD students _at entry_ to
| a program in the US is 31.7. [iie.org Graduate Learning
| Overseas Data].
| ryan93 wrote:
| Those people are just trying to gain admission to
| american jobs. The numbers are way different for the
| people with real research potential at top american
| schools.
| Loughla wrote:
| That's just moving the goalposts. Not really adding
| anything to the argument here.
|
| The argument is just graduate students, not _subset of
| graduate students that is impossible to measure with any
| accuracy based on available data due to your completely
| arbitrary and nebulous definitions_. Also, even if we
| take your new arbitrary and meaningless 'definition', we
| can no longer use the key word from the original
| discussion: ----most----.
|
| My point stands. Non-native graduate students skew older
| than native students by quite a bit.
| f6v wrote:
| In my field, doing a PhD at decent university means doing
| real-world scientific research. Despite widespread forced
| publication of mediocre results, I still see a PhD as a
| recognition of having "done science".
| javchz wrote:
| I had the same worries as someone who with some luck will
| graduate in his 30s.
|
| I went back to college after dropping out when I was in my
| early 20s. Someone told me "You're going to be X+4 years in 4
| years anyway, why not try achieving that thing you want. Time
| will pass either way"
|
| Surprise: Right now I enjoy college VS before when it felt like
| a chore I had to go because was the "right thing to do".
|
| It's great to share a space with people who share the same
| interest in a topic of science/humanities as you do.
|
| Being an old dude in college, allows you to be less worried
| about late-teenage problems like drama in relationships, in my
| case being hot-headed, dealing with parents' expectations, or
| the chronic stress from failing tests thinking it's the end of
| the world, etc.
|
| Plus, being the "old dude" from the class, hasn't been a
| problem at all, people are respectful most of the time, and if
| you're friendly, they will even seek you for mentorship.
|
| As long as you're not behaving like Chevy Chase from
| "Community", nobody will give much importance to your age.
|
| Yeah, there is a lot of things that are just bureaucracy to
| create false gatekeeping that I don't like even now.
|
| But from time to time, I find lectures about topics I didn't
| know existed... and I have that feeling of being a kid again,
| and finding something new from 0. And that's 100% worth it. So
| I get why the dude, would keep searching for a PhD even in his
| eldery years.
|
| I am fortunate enough to live in a country where college it's
| free. But if it's too expensive, you could get a lot of the
| value from distance Coursera, and online courses/communities.
| MetaWhirledPeas wrote:
| > Now, at the end of his life, he's achieved the bare minimum
| and I doubt he will be able to do much more in the field or see
| the field develop.
|
| I'm sure the fact that it would inspire others was not lost on
| him. Or perhaps he did it just so it would be done? There's
| enjoyment in the journey and the accomplishment.
| option wrote:
| I have phd in comp science and I plan on getting phd and doing
| research in astrophysics in my retirement
| soheil wrote:
| Computational physics might be a nice intersection.
| sriram_malhar wrote:
| What an incredible story. He is my pole star.
| billfruit wrote:
| I sometimes wonder, why there isn't a well defined pathway to get
| a PhD for work done through independent research.
| sungam wrote:
| This is possible at Cambridge and certain other universities
| for graduates of those universities:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Philosophy_by_public...
| billfruit wrote:
| Interesting. I wish more Universities will start to offer
| this method.
| akomtu wrote:
| Imagine being referred to like that: "a blonde chemist", "a short
| philosopher", "a small-nosed mathematician" or "a brown
| physicist".
|
| Edit. Unless the title really meant "a student of the brown
| physics department has earned PhD at the age of 89".
| silisili wrote:
| Brown is a respected US university. I don't believe anyone of
| count would mistake this title to think of his skin color.
| You'll probably have better luck with a tweet.
| caddybox wrote:
| Brown (university) physicist. No reference to his race.
| genocidicbunny wrote:
| I can't help but wonder if this headline was A/B tested and
| was found to be more 'engaging' specifically because of the
| same sort of reaction GP demonstrated.
|
| Edit: Interesting that the headline was changed from the
| original to no longer refer to Brown university at all. I
| genuinely wonder what prompted that.
| silisili wrote:
| Absolutely not. Americans don't call people 'brown.' We
| generally have white, black, and hispanic/latino. Anyone
| else we refer to by nationality, even incorrectly at times.
| If he were say, Indian, it would say Indian, not Brown.
| genocidicbunny wrote:
| If you are not familiar with Brown University, the first
| part of the headline is easily parsed differently. In
| English, adjectives tend to come in a certain order, with
| color generally being precedent to origin or qualifier.
| Therefore it would read as 'Brown' being an adjective
| describing Manfred Steiner, because the color 'Brown'
| generally comes before the qualifier 'Physics Student'.
|
| I am not suggesting that Brown University actually A/B
| tested this. As a university press site, they seem less
| likely to pursue that. But it would be naive to think
| that in the current media and political climate in the
| US, the mistaken interpretation of the headline would not
| be more surprising, and therefore more likely to grab
| attention. That's what A/B testing the headlines is for.
| ghaff wrote:
| Pretty much any university in the country would have
| written the headline in exactly the same manner
| substituting their institution's name. And, yes, anyone
| who interprets it differently is doing so in bad faith or
| just is pretty unaware of US university names generally.
| genocidicbunny wrote:
| What is your point? People interpret things in bad faith
| all the time, but that doesn't detract from my point
| about the A/B testing. The test wouldn't care why someone
| arrived at a given interpretation, its only measuring how
| many people arrived at which one as a proxy for
| engagement. The motivations people have are somewhat
| irrelevant.
|
| And we know this sort of thing happens all the time with
| less scrupulous media outlets. Media outlets surely test
| specific headlines with the intention of attracting a
| certain bias depending on the outlets own leanings.
| Zababa wrote:
| > And, yes, anyone who interprets it differently is doing
| so in bad faith or just is pretty unaware of US
| university names generally.
|
| I think most people outside of the US are unaware of US
| university names. I could name 5 to 10, and that's
| because I spend a lot of time reading american media and
| american-centric websites like HN.
| silisili wrote:
| All adjectives precede nouns in English. Brown the
| university is still an adjective in this sense.
|
| There's really nothing to A/B test here. We, especially
| the media, don't refer to people as Brown the color.
| perilunar wrote:
| 'Attorneys General' and 'Majors General' would indicate
| otherwise.
|
| Also: president elect, poet laureate, devil incarnate,
| court martial, etc.
| silisili wrote:
| Fair examples. Every rule does have exceptions. But none
| that would make Brown in the title make one think it was
| a skin color because of English rules.
| grumple wrote:
| Americans absolutely call people brown. It's all over
| social media, sociology papers, and common conversation.
| Just search twitter for "black and brown".
| silisili wrote:
| This gives me hope. I'm not even half his age, but already worry
| about my brain going. When I was 17 I could do basic calculus in
| my head. Today I struggle to carry numbers in long addition
| problems.
|
| It already has me thinking about my career and future - it
| certainly is downhill from here.
|
| Then something like this happens and just makes me feel like a
| big baby. Hats off Mr Steiner.
| selectodude wrote:
| I went back to school with the same fears. It comes back to
| you.
| silisili wrote:
| Genuinely, thanks for sharing. I always want to go back, but
| fear I'll embarrass myself. Or at least realize my age is
| catching up eith me.
|
| Out of curiosity, what did you go back for, and how did it
| go?
| selectodude wrote:
| Economics - I took some calculus classes at the local
| community college to sort of spool up and get back into it.
| I was the weird old guy asking questions that nobody cared
| about but it's been a great experience all around. And
| honestly the concepts are far more important than than the
| mental math, we all use calculators now :)
| bmer wrote:
| Also, I don't think you ought to consider "when I was 17, I
| could do basic calculus in my head" as a sign of more
| ability than you have today. The problems were likely not
| that hard, since you were 17.
|
| Do you practice doing long division every day, without pen
| and paper? If not, then I think you ought to try that
| before making the judgement "I can't do it". Practice is
| very important, especially when it comes to memory
| intensive tasks. The other key bit is coming up with
| efficient algorithms for doing division in your head that
| take into account the pros/cons of memory vs. pen and paper
| (why should we expect algorithms that run well on paper to
| be effective in our memory-only execution as well?). Over
| the years, people have developed a wide variety of "mental
| arithmetic" algorithms.
|
| Finally, doing long division in your head isn't important.
| No one will judge you by it, when you're applying for a
| PhD, and so you should not judge yourself by it. There are
| way bigger fish to fry, even in mathematics.
| ghaff wrote:
| I would probably have to figure out (or more likely look
| up) how to do long division these days. I probably
| haven't done it in decades.
| silisili wrote:
| Man, you guys are very motivational. Thanks for that.
|
| The point I was attempting to make was that I could store
| these carry numbers in bulk at one point, but now am
| lucky to remember a single one.
|
| I only know that as I try to teach my own kid math today.
| It's frustrating to realize you've 'lost your touch.'
|
| But, you're right, it's really not important day to day.
| odyssey7 wrote:
| Don't assume this is age. It could be a health condition
| beginning to manifest. Inflammation, vitamin deficiency leading
| to something bad, etc. Brain fog is a common symptom of many
| possible issues that may just be taking root. I would see a
| doctor and make sure I fixed any such issue I could.
| the_only_law wrote:
| My worry is that is a more permanent health change due to bad
| habits.
| silisili wrote:
| Thanks. Would love to have such a solution, but generally,
| doctor visits are normal.
|
| One giant difference I noticed is my speech. When I was
| younger I spoke very, very quickly, to the point it was off-
| putting to some folks. I've always thought people who speak
| quickly have a fast working brain, so to speak.
|
| Today I speak much more slowly and with more deliberation.
| Not good or bad, just different. Unfortunately I also find
| myself searching for a word much more often.
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| isn't this likely just a matter of practice? at 17 I spent
| hours a week studying calculus so it was easy... then I stopped
| using it for 20 years and it's very difficult.
|
| I feel like I'd get good at calculus or anything by dedicating
| similar amounts of dedicated study time
| [deleted]
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| As I assume you know how to do it, carrying numbers in long
| addition is a short term memory thing. I bet you were roughly
| as bad at it when you were 17 as you are now. Doing basic
| calculus in your head is way easier, it's simple
| multiplication.
| happy-go-lucky wrote:
| " ... I wanted to do something that keeps my mind active. But it
| is a matter of whatever you want to do. If you have a dream,
| follow it. Sometimes that dream may never have been verbalized,
| it may be buried in the subconscious. It is important not to
| waste your older days. There is a lot of brainpower in older
| people and I think it can be of enormous benefit to younger
| generations. Older people have experience and many times history
| repeats itself."
|
| I see this as a way to protect one's health and sanity as one
| ages. Aging gracefully should be possible.
| ericmcer wrote:
| It's always comforting to know that if you weren't good enough to
| achieve anything of note in your youth you can always earn
| accolades for being stubborn enough to do it in old age. I have
| some unreasonable rock climbing goals that seem less likely but
| more impressive as I age. Also a 42 year old man just became the
| light heavyweight UFC champ last weekend so I guess... Keep
| fighting.
| pelasaco wrote:
| I'm 40 now, since the pandemics started studying game development
| (BA), and talking with my colleagues via discord, I'm quite sure
| I'm the oldest one. On the bright side, I'm the one with the best
| notes, delivering always weeks before the deadline, despite the
| fact that I have a full time job and family. I think what the
| life taught me at best are time management and context switching.
| Love to learn and be productive. I'm looking forward to still be
| a student in the age of 90.
| id wrote:
| >despite the fact that I have a full time job and family
|
| In another comment you wrote:
|
| >I dropped to 24 hours/week and have a much better life quality
| now, working 3 days per week.
|
| Still remarkable, so congrats, but full time normally is
| considered to be 40 hours / week, 5 days per week.
| pelasaco wrote:
| yes, you are right. I dropped from $$ job, which allows me to
| work in something different (I do volunteer work with kids,
| afternoon). I wake up every day 6:30, and limit my studies to
| 1 hour early in the morning (coding, when I'm most
| productive) and 1 hour late in the night (reading through
| materials).
| cg30e wrote:
| This is very inspiring. I too am young and been in the work force
| for several years, but unlike the other comments in this thread I
| am not settled down as an older student returning to school.
|
| I am willing to give up a high paying salary to return back to
| school as a PhD student and I am not tied down with a mortgage or
| anything else.
|
| I find mathematics simply too interesting to not learn at the
| highest level. Working in industry will simply not teach me the
| material I want to learn. I'm considering going back for either a
| PhD in Math or a math heavy PhD in CS. I read math textbooks for
| fun and worked with tutors to ensure my proofs are done
| correctly. I can do this for hours on end without external
| motivation. I taught myself a lot of math and can see myself
| doing this as a career. I want to do research.
|
| Most people my age say the same things in the comment sections in
| this thread (tied down to a mortgage, make too much money to
| return). I'm glad generalizations like these don't apply to me
| and can't wait to get back to school
| axiom92 wrote:
| PhD or not is one of those questions where if you find yourself
| asking it repeatedly (especially to others around you), the
| answer is no.
|
| You are exactly the kind of person who should be doing it!
|
| Good luck!
| cg30e wrote:
| Thank you!
| zd123 wrote:
| Do you mind sharing the books you found helpful to self learn
| math with a tutor?
|
| I am looking to also go on a self study mathematical journey
| [deleted]
| cg30e wrote:
| For sure. I'll list some books for introduction to proofs,
| abstract algebra, real analysis, topology and category
| theory. These are not comprehensive, just listing books off
| the top of my head. I'll definitely be leaving off personal
| favorites other people have. You'll like some better than
| others. Some of these are beginner books and some are more
| advanced. A good tutor can help you get through the more
| advanced books. I tried to list the most beginner friendly
| book first in the list under each subject. Then the more
| advanced books later in the list.
|
| Introduction to Proofs:
|
| Just pick one of these that speaks to you the most. All three
| are good.
|
| Discrete Mathematics with Applications - Epp
|
| Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications - Rosen
|
| Mathematical Proofs: A Transition to Advanced Mathematics -
| Chartrand, et al.
|
| Abstract Algebra:
|
| How to Think about Abstract Algebra - Alcock
|
| Abstract Algebra - Pinter
|
| Abstract Algebra: A First Course - Saracino
|
| Algebra - Artin
|
| Abstract Algebra - Herstein
|
| Abstract Algebra - Dummit & Foote
|
| Linear Algebra:
|
| Maybe an engineering based book first if you haven't seen
| linear algebra in a while (e.g. Strang or Linear Algebra:
| Step by Step by Singh).
|
| Then:
|
| Linear Algebra - Friedberg, et al
|
| Linear Algebra Done Right - Axler
|
| Linear Algebra - Hoffman & Kunze
|
| Real Analysis:
|
| How to Think About Analysis - Alcock
|
| Understanding Analysis - Abbott
|
| Tao's Analysis text
|
| Principles of Mathematical Analysis - Rudin
|
| Topology:
|
| Topology - Munkres
|
| Topology A Categorical Approach - Tai-Danae Bradley, Tyler
| Bryson, and John Terilla
|
| Check out this list:
|
| http://pi.math.cornell.edu/~hatcher/Other/topologybooks.pdf
| for others.
|
| Category theory:
|
| Categories and Toposes: Visualized and Explained - Southwell
|
| Conceptual Mathematics: A First Introduction to Categories -
| Lawvere
|
| Category Theory for Programmers - Milewski (if you like
| functional programming)
|
| Programming with Categories - Fong, Milewski, Spivak (if you
| like functional programming)
|
| Category Theory in Context - Riehl
|
| There are a few others by Spivak which you may like.
|
| If you don't know category theory whatsoever then I like
| Southwell the best (pair them up with his youtube videos).
| Eugenia Cheng also has a nice set of lecture videos.
|
| If you already know math pretty well, then Riehl is a
| favorite.
|
| Hope that helps!
| laichzeit0 wrote:
| I see you did a lot of analysis, but no Calculus, why is
| that?
| BeetleB wrote:
| Some cautionary comments:
|
| Often your advisor in grad school will force you to focus on
| what _they_ want rather than what _you_ want to learn. This is
| less likely in a math department, but more likely in a CS one.
| As with everything, it all depends on your advisor.
|
| The PhD is replete with hoops you have to take that will be
| orthogonal to your goal of learning (e.g. spending a lot of
| your time doing HW on the professor's pet topic when taking a
| course). Someone I know who retired somewhat young (early 50's)
| enrolled in a PhD program because he loves to learn. He dropped
| out within two years because he found it fairly inefficient in
| learning the topics he wanted to learn about (he had a career
| on mathematical topics and can handle the math). Unlike younger
| folks, time is precious for him, and being efficient is more
| important to someone in their 50s than in their 20s.
|
| If all you care about is learning and not the actual piece of
| paper in the end, it may be more efficient to get a less
| demanding job and use your spare time studying what you want to
| study. Do it right and you'll make more money than you would as
| a student, _and_ potentially learn more than you would in grad
| school.
|
| Finally, PhD is about research. Yes, you will learn a lot, but
| learning is not the goal. A lot of people drop out because they
| realized they loved learning much more than doing research,
| which will involve large chunks of your time being
| unproductive. If you plan to do a PhD, you _will_ have to draw
| a line at some point and say "OK, those 10-100 things there
| that really interest me? I have to drop them forever so I can
| do research." If you opt not to do research, you can learn a
| lot more.
| sulam wrote:
| While everything else you say may be true, I take issue with
| efficiency being a function of age. Fundamentally you have no
| idea how many years you will get. Be efficient at all ages,
| and live like it might (and might not!) be your last year,
| regardless. Personally I've had close brushes with death a
| couple times in my life, and the dice roll could easily have
| gone the other way. I'm sure I'm far from alone in this.
| BeetleB wrote:
| I did not mean to imply one shouldn't be efficient at all
| ages - just that those doing their PhDs in their 20s do not
| value it as much as those in their 50s.
|
| Also, those in their 20s often haven't lived long enough to
| know how to gauge their efficiency. The person who has
| spent decades working 40 hour/week jobs knows better the
| value of less free time.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-02 23:02 UTC)