<p>Came across this site. Thought the stellar junkies might be interested.</p>
<p>Yup. That's a significant part of why I applied.</p>
<p>me tooo!!!!! if i get into berkeley, it's going to be really hard to choose b/t there and chicago......</p>
<p>Chicago all the way, you don't want to be on the west coast, go some place where there is snow.</p>
<p>well, i'm already on the west coast, and i really don't mind the warm weather......but then again chicago just sounds so good for me! thanks for the input though.</p>
<p>LOL, that's really funny considering that we don't even have an Astronomy/Astrophysics <em>major</em>...</p>
<p>Yeah, this is referring to graduate school. You'll get some nice research opportunities at Chicago but the undergrad astro program is nothing particularly special...</p>
<p>UC Berkeley is similarly tough to get into and will be much, much better as an undergrad interested in astro. And if you can get into the likes of Caltech/MIT/HYP, then go there for astro!</p>
<p>Astronomy at Chicago as an undergrad:</p>
<p>"Starting in 1999-2000, there will be a specialization in astronomy available as part of the physics major.</p>
<p>For students considering graduate work in astrophysics, the Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics recommends the program leading to a degree of Bachelor of Arts in Physics with Specialization in Astrophysics. In addition to all of the courses required for a B.A. in Physics, this degree requires that the student take the sequence Astron. 241-242 plus a third course (Astron. 280 or Astron. 305) in the third or fourth year. In place of the third course the student may elect to write a Bachelors Thesis in some area of astrophysics, with the topic approved in advance by the Physics Concentration Chair in consultation with the Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics. Under this thesis option, the student would take Physics 291-292-293 in the fourth year. A student who meets the requirements for honors as set by the Department of Physics could receive an honors degree under this option."</p>
<p>Also see: <a href="http://astro.uchicago.edu/research/undergrad.html%5B/url%5D">http://astro.uchicago.edu/research/undergrad.html</a>
<a href="http://astro.uchicago.edu/%5B/url%5D">http://astro.uchicago.edu/</a></p>
<p>Many astronomy grad students hold an undergraduate degree in physics. In some ways, a physics major is preferable - job prospects in astronomy are not all that generous, and physics provides an entre into many different areas.</p>
<p>Sure but if you know you want to be an astronomer, then it's usually better to get a real astrophysics degree (beware, though, not an astronomy degree without the physics requirements--that's just fluff!!) than just physics.</p>
<p>Guitar..., untrue. The U of C astro program is quite phenomenal, easily the match and likely the superior of the Berkeley program. It is not the best idea to specialize in Astrophys straight off; a physics major gives you the tools you need to analyze data in a broader context, aka make more fundamental (==> important?) discoveries. Specializing too early, you are unable to have as broad, holistic a view.</p>
<p>This is totally beyond the fact that Chicago specifically has an astrophysics program...</p>
<p>Sran, are you referring to U Chicago's astro program in particular, or to how well U Chicago's physics program prepares you for astro grad school? In terms of pure astro, Chicago is certainly very good but I can't see it being put anywhere near the likes of UCB, Caltech, Harvard, and Princeton.</p>
<p>By the way, didn't you get into Caltech EA? Listen, Chicago is a nice school and all but if you really want to be an astronomer, I can't fathom how you would ever even consider choosing it over Caltech. No matter how nice Chicago's astro may or may not be, it simply cannot be compared to Caltech's.</p>
<p>Ah, but CalTech is a Tech ... its atmosphere is quite different from Chicago or Harvard. Depending on your needs and interests, CalTech may provide the better environment - or Chicago may. This is why it is so important to visit - after all, the chances are pretty high that the major you graduate with is not what you had in mind when you started.</p>
<p>Absolutely. But if you're convinced that you want to be an astronomer, the difference between Caltech's astronomy and U Chicago's astronomy is vast enough to make the decision, I think, pretty easy.</p>
<p>Well, after my interview my interviewer (adcom) told me that Caltech was the most similar to Chicago in spirit (of the schools I had mentioned). So they are not that different.</p>
<p>In terms of pure astro, Chicago is phenomenal (esp. astrophys). I would certainly put it in the class of the schools you mentioned. Note: I think the quality of the programs at the schools discussed here is so high it's hard to distinguish between them, which is why I have such nebulous phrasing.</p>
<p>I'm unsure about Chicago's pure physics wrt astro, other than its generally reckoned to be very good. I know that it complements astro v. well; I know the two combined produce a product that is of truly amazing quality.</p>
<p>I did not apply EA to CIT.</p>
<p>Finally, I apologize for the tone of this post and my previous one. It is rude and brusque, which I did not intend.</p>
<p>sran,
they are similar in spirit - in joy of learning - in intensity. I also have a good deal of respect for Caltech as their admissions policies are quite honest. </p>
<p>Caltech's focus is, of course, more directed on the sciences. I am sure that they have some form of distribution requirement, but I don't believe it is as deep as Chicago's core (and the core is not for everyone). This has some ramifications for your own education as well as the people that make up your learning community. If you attend Chicago, you will be surrounded by historians, economists, anthropologists, classics majors - and of course various scientific and mathematical types. Since you will likely learn as much from your classmates as your professors -this is a consideration. When you are a graduate student, you will have to go where your program is. But for your undergraduate days - you have a little luxury - to learn for the fun of it. There really is more to an undergraduate education than one's major, and it is something to think about. Again, no right or wrong, but there are different favors of education.</p>