I’m currently a HS senior, and set on pursuing astrophysics/cosmology through college. I’ve visited most elite schools - my favorites being U Chicago and Columbia.
From my research, U Chicago is ranked better in undergrad physics than Columbia, as well as sends more kids to get PHDs (it initially seems the better choice). Yet, I’ve heard mixed reviews of U Chi (“where fun goes to die”), I want to get out of the Midwest, and Columbia’s name recognition + campus setting are very appealing.
My question is: would I get a world-class physics education at either Columbia or U Chicago, and ultimately, would either of these Universities put me in a position or limit me in becoming the next Hawking, Tyson, Sagan, etc.
If the world was somehow trying to create the next Einstein, what University would we send him to, and would either Columbia or U Chicago be considered. Thanks so much.
would I get a world-class physics education at either Columbia or U Chicago => yes.
You shouldn’t even be asking the question. Even if you’ve done research at an R1 university and got a paper published, you’d still get an extraordinary education at both.
The world will not “create the next Einstein”. The next Einstein already exists and is already on these universities’ radar, unless s/he lives in Namibia, in which case it’s a lot harder than if you live in the US where there are many opportunities to show your scientific abilities (Intel, Siemens, etc).
If you mean “the university that will give the next Einstein the opportunities s/he needs to show what s/he’s capable of”, then there are lots of possibilities.
It’s quite possible this student would get a full ride at ASU Barrett or UCSB’s CCS or would attend HarveyMudd or CalTech or Princeton.
Chicago’s core also is quite extensive. Universities without a core, such as Hamilton, Amherst, or Brown, aren’t as good for astrophysics.
ASU Barrett would be a good safety to have. If you live in CA, UCSB’s CCS would be perfect.
If you are interested in cosmology, that means you’re also looking at grad school. Be sure that the schools you consider offer physics research and publication opportunities for undergrads. This does not have to be in cosmology. And plenty of smaller-name schools offer these kinds of opportunities–it may be easier to find someone to work with at, say, Georgia Tech or Villanova or Wesleyan than at Princeton.
I have a different take on this question. The OP seems to be set on an academic career in Astrophysics. This means that ultimately your selection to a graduate program will be more important than your undergraduate selection. Because you are enrolled in an undergraduate program at a good program such as U Chicago, this does not mean you will automatically be accepted into their graduate program, as the competition for those spots is global.
Here is my advice for what its worth. National rankings of Astrophysics programs at the undergraduate level are misleading. First, what the rankings tell you is how accomplished the faculty is and often what the facilities are, yet as an undergraduate you will have next to zero opportunity to work with faculty or to touch any of the facilities. Trust, me. Been there, done that. The better option I think is to attend one of the leading LAC with a very good astronomy department where maybe some of the faculty is doing research in some area that you find interesting, such as exoplanet transits, stellar formation or AGN structure or similar… anyhow you get the drift. My point here is simple, at one of these schools your passion will be rewarded with research opportunity, often co-authorship and publication in a leading journal. Ultimately demonstrating undergraduate accomplishment such as peer-review journal is a huge advantage for grad-school admission.
I am not sure why Columbia is in your search. Maybe you really like NYC. Apart from that, I would not rank Columbia anywhere near the top 10 for graduate level Astrophysics programs in the country. Indeed, two obvious standout programs are Cambridge and Oxford, which are not even in the USA… A strong performance in a LAC astronomy program will I bet go much further in getting you to your ultimate goal than being yet another physics/ math wonk at a major research university as an undergrad… your teachers will be graduate students who don’t care about you, you will never touch a telescope or have access to any serious computational resources… Forget these ‘ranked’ schools for pursuing your academic goal as an undergraduate. Rather look to enroll in a Caltech, U Chicago, Princeton or Harvard for graduate school… don’t waste your undergrad years in those places for Astrophysics. You’ll regret it.
Thanks everyone for the responses. What colleges, specifics please, should I be looking at for a better undergrad experience + a better chance at elite graduate schools. (I’m a competive applicant)
If they’re your top choices and you truly don’t have a preference, consider applying early to both. (If admitted ED to Columbia, however, you are obligated to attend.) Needless to say, admission to both has become extremely difficult.
For other options, do a search for posts by @harvardandberkeley, a very knowledgeable poster who has posted a lot of helpful information about astronomy, physics, and astrophysics programs. Sample posts:
Ask depts specifically about UG research opportunities. Our ds DE at a small university and did UG research on that campus as a high school student. He attended SSP. When he was interviewing physics depts during his college application process, (he really did interview the depts bc UG research opportunities was near the top of his list of requirements) he asked very specific questions about what types of research he would be able to participate in and if he could join research as a freshman. At one top school he was told he had more direct research experience than their UGs bc their focus was on their grad students and that UGs work for the grad students. Ds was incredibly thankful for that dean’s frankness. He gave ds a lot of good info to consider.
Our ds is attending a lower ranked school bc of scholarship $$, but he chose the school specifically bc of the UG research opportunities. He has been interacting with profs on research since his 2nd semester freshman yr. He was hired for research over the summer between fresh/sophomore yr. This yr he has weekly project meetings with the prof he is doing research for. He loves every minute of it.
investigate what the dept will offer you as an UG beyond the classroom.
The prior post is spot on. If your interest is this specific, then you need to investigate what areas of research the various school Astro departments are doing. This can be easily done by visiting the college dept website. Next, investigate the facilities and look at recent bachelor thesis by the department majors. After you have done this, then plan to visit some of the schools because many have different settings and student bodies which you should consider.
Most of the older LACs have an observatory on campus, usually its close to or in the center of campus. Historically, the Astronomy department was the first or among the first science department at most schools in the 18th and early 19th century. This is a key differentiation with the larger research universities that operate large remote instruments usually in multi school affiliations. Consequently, scope time is heavily rationed and undergraduate use is non existent. The list of LACs given by a previous poster with good Astro departments is a good starting point. I have seen the facilities at Vassar, Wesleyan, Swarthmore, and Williams and they are all very good from an undergraduate perspective, in fact at each of these schools you would have hands on experience, workstudy and potential co-authorship opportunities. Good luck
The above poster mentions the LACs, he’s seen, with good facilities. Middlebury has a newer science center and has facilities that are easily amongst the best of any LAC. Additionally, their professors are regularly published for high level astrophysics research. Definitely worth checking out.
I visited Middlebury with D this past winter. Agree the science facilities are top notch and the new Observatory is also good. However, Middlebury does not offer a major in Astronomy, only Physics. Although there is a chaired professor who does Astrophysics, the department focus is not specific to that. There are many fine schools with strong Physics undergrad programs, often with Profs who also have Astrophysics interests However, the OP would be best served in an undergrad program that has both a standout Astronomy department, with dedicated profs for that field and a very strong physics department. Assuming they can get in of course…
Ah…the Physics Department at Columbia is where they first split the atom. That’s why that building is an officially designated U.S. landmark. And, have you ever heard of the 'Manhattan Project?" Of course you have.
Actually, the atom of any type was first split at the University of Manchester in 1917 by Ernest Rutherford.
The key Uranium experiments that let to nuclear energy and weapons happened in Rome and then Berlin, before the experiments were repeated and confirmed at Columbia.
Most of the Manhattan project experiments actually were at the University of Chicago, including the big one where a chain reaction was created and controlled (leading to the real possibility of a nuclear bomb or nuclear power).
UC Berkeley also played a huge part, especially in the creation of plutonium.
nerd out!
(not that any of this has anything to do with the OPs question…)
"…A riddle surrounds what is arguably the most important of the Manhattan Project’s New York City sites — the Pupin Physics Laboratories at Columbia University, where scientists split the atom and helped the Manhattan Project get started.
The building’s foyer has several plaques celebrating the site’s importance. A prominent one notes that Pupin Hall is a Registered National Historic Landmark that “possesses exceptional value.”
But none of the memorials refer to the atomic breakthroughs or Pupin’s role in the bomb project.
Starting in 1939, scientists there sought to split the nuclei of uranium atoms and, working in a basement laboratory, succeeded beyond their dreams.
In a report, the National Register of Historic Places said the breakthrough led to federal financing for nuclear research at Columbia, the Manhattan Project, and “the subsequent production of the atomic bomb.” In 1965, Pupin Hall was designated a National Historical Landmark."
I wasn’t questioning the role played by Columbia University in the Manhattan Project. But as I said, that was the first successful Uranium atom split done in the United States - not in the world. The first uranium splitting experiments done anywhere were by Enrico Fermi in Rome in the mid-1930s. Later, in Berlin in late 1938. Then in Copenhagen a couple of weeks later. Then at Columbia in early 1939. Then at Johns Hopkins and at Berkeley a few days later.
What they did at Columbia was to replicate the experiments that they had just heard about from Berlin - everyone who was anyone win Physics was talking about what had just happened in Berlin. Here’s a 1939 newspaper story about it.
There were several other places at other Universities in the US and around the world that were just as important to the Manhattan Project as Pupin Hall. The University of Chicago has at least two registered historic landmarks of the same type - the site of the world’s first working nuclear reactor and the site where plutonium was first isolated.
Again, not trying to criticize Columbia. Columbia, Chicago, Berkeley and Princeton were probably the most significant physics departments during that period. I just think it is silly to keep posting about Columbia site as though it was the ONE place where it all happened.
My daughter has switched careers and is currently taking classes at Columbia working towards graduate school in Astrophysics. Not only is it an outstanding, highly respected program but the professors are incredibly helpful with guidance for their students. She’s also currently working with a research project group in a field of interest to her that will involve her for a full year, including pay in the summer. Here’s the thing, there are many sub-areas in Astrophysics and depending on which you become interested in depends on which graduate school is the best. For an undergraduate degree, many of the schools mentioned will be absolutely fine and, depending on you, will allow you to pursue your advanced degrees at the university of your choice. Don’t try to jump ahead four years, look at what you want from a college now and the future will happen.
Williams has terrific physics, math and astronomy departments with a small but vibrant astrophysics major.Jay Pasachoff and the Hopkins Observatory are special draws.
But i agree with @amtc: don’t get too far ahead of yourself. Focus on the type of undergraduate experience that suits you. If you do well at an academically rigorous undergraduate school, develop mentor relationships with your professors, take advantage of research opportunities, seek out summer meaningful internships, graduate school will fall into place.