Columbia vs. Caltech (Physics)

Colleges and Universities A-Z Columbia University
1

<p>I recently committed to Columbia, only to be accepted from Caltech's wait list. I plan on majoring in physics with a strong emphasis on mathematics. Columbia hosts a strong physics department (albeit small), but Caltech has always seemed to be one of the few undisputed champions of physics (along with MIT, HYP, Stanford, and in some opinion Harvey Mudd). </p>

<p>TL;DR These schools are really different. Is the academic advantage at Caltech substantial/worth the loss of Columbia's social and cultural advantage? How well do each place at top physics graduate programs?</p>

<p>Graduate school preparation and placement as well as undergraduate research availability and quality are the primary factors in my decision making process. </p>

<p>My fears about Columbia can be surmised as the following: humanities and a reduced emphasis or priority for the sciences on a curricular and institution-wide level. Essentially, is the Core going to detract from my preparation for an academic career in a very strict discipline, and is/are the physics department/students an appendage to the much more humanity, economic, foreign relation etc.-centric Columbia at large? </p>

<p>My fears about Caltech are very different. Caltech satisfies the possible drawbacks at Columbia with firm, unquestionable inherency as a tech school. However, how socially paralyzed is Caltech? Not due to shyness etc., but due to workload and location? </p>

<p>(Quick note; I'm not anti-Core. I don't want to become culturally illiterate and I really enjoy literature and philosophy but only as a mental hobby. I just don't want to know the main ideological premise of the Iliad instead of an additional semester of math.)</p>

2

<p>Based purely on academic rep for physics alone, Caltech is superior to Columbia. But Caltech is known to be tough and competitive. It has a much higher drop out rate compared to Columbia. Personally, I’d go for Columbia for undergrad physics and Caltech (or MIT, Harvard, Stanford, Princeton, Berkeley, Yale) for postgrad physics. </p>

<p>BTW, Harvey Mudd’s physics dept is nowhere near as good as Berkeley’s. </p>

3

<p>It’s really hard to say because few people have gone to both schools especially in an undergraduate environment, but you seem hit the right points about both schools. If your primary criteria is grad school prep, placement, and research, then Caltech no question. It’d also be a lie to say the core does not detract from opportunity cost of other classes; if you really just want to take physics related coursework and have little interest in the core I think you are not a good fit for CC. I think it’s one thing to be not interested in the core and interested in Columbia for other reasons, but I think it’s a mistake to come to Columbia if you’re not interested in the core, but intensely interested in another subject you really want to heavily pursue. In this case the core becomes a burden.</p>

<p>In terms of the social aspect you should see it from a perspective of not which is better but which you would prefer:</p>

<p>Caltech’s class sizes are tiny, you probably get a lot of individual attention, you know everyone in your class, everyone’s math science and generally pursuing a relatively similar career path. Pasadena is a great town but a very small environment. You’ll probably meet many people with similar interests as you here (if not too similar). </p>

<p>Columbia is 20000 people including the grad school, not to mention Barnard across the street, and NYC to boot. Class sizes are a lot bigger, a lot less handholding and individual attention (I would say just about none). Everyone’s doing something different even though everyone starts out in the same classes. You can meet a lot of people with your interests but you’ll probably end up meeting tons of people who are very different from you. You’ll never meet everyone in your class but that means all 4 years you’ll be meeting tons of new people. </p>

<p>Both come with distinct advantage and disadvantages, and appeal to different personality types.</p>

4

<p>As a Columbia physics department alumnus from the late '70’s and early '80’s, I’d say without a doubt go to Caltech.</p>

<p>Firstly, Columbia physics is not in the same league with that of Caltech, Harvard or MIT, which are hands down tops in physics. The problems with Columbia’s undergraduate program are:</p>

<p>1) The first two years’ physics curriculum is not well suited for majors. In the old days (my time), 1401-1402 and 2401-2402 were freshman and sophomore physics, where there were 4-5 labs per semester coincident with a two year treatment of Halliday & Resnick (this is a freshman level book and not appropriate for sophomore physics majors!). Now, there are only 3 semesters of physics lectures w/o labs during the first two years and a separate one semester intro lab course to be taken after the first two semesters’ lecture courses. Caltech’s first and second year physics curriculum (especially the second) is way above the level of Columbia’s. NOTE: Columbia now offers “Accelerated Physics 2801-2” but it’s roughly the equivalent of Caltech “analytical track” first year course. Still, there’s no second year course like Caltech’s Physics 12 or true sophomore labs. <a href=“http://www.pma.caltech.edu/GSR/physicscourses.html”>http://www.pma.caltech.edu/GSR/physicscourses.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>2) Columbia is math methods averse. You would think with the theory bias of the department that Columbia would have a lot of strength in mathematical methods of physics. However, it’s the exact opposite. There is some weird (or maybe macho) departmental notion that math hides physics. If you’re into math, go elsewhere for physics.</p>

<p>3) Math department curriculum is overly pure math focused. This is true at many universities, except those with many engineering and science students. The math department wants to serve its own majors and not those of other departments. Physics majors take at minimum of one semester of multivariate calculus, linear algebra, ODE’s, partial differential equations, and complex analysis in the math department. This is burdensome and jibes with the physics department’s being math methods averse.</p>

<p>4) Columbia junior/senior level labs are not very good preparation for real lab research. Caltech teaches electronics to sophomores and has experiments using more advanced equipment for junior/seniors.</p>

<p>5) NYC campus lacks space. Pupin physics building is over 100 years old (exactly 110, I think). It’s also 14 floors tall. Moving equipment for experiments from floor to floor is burdensome. Many of the great experimental physicists at Columbia have been in nuclear and particle physics and have conducted their experiments elsewhere.</p>

<p>Secondly, the Core has been enlarged in the last two decades by a adding a two semester non-Western civilization requirement and the dilettantish Frontiers of Science course. This is on top of required core Writing, CC, Lit Hum, Art Hum, and Music Hum courses. In order to get through Columbia as a physics major, you’ll need good luck with core section assignments, good reading skills and especially good punting skills (i.e. knowing what NOT to read). Columbia’s core curriculum is good for producing lawyers. However, it can be a burden for science types (even pre-meds are now opting for SEAS at Columbia).</p>

<p>Caltech’s Feymann Professor of Physics Kip Thorne claims that 40% of his undergraduate studies at Caltech were dedicated to “liberal education.” If I were in OP’s position, I take a good hard look at what Caltech’s drawbacks are and whether they are real or illusory. The real reason for going to Columbia isn’t the Core, the education or the physics department but rather NYC. Of course, getting to Columbia for grad school will be no problem from Caltech, but don’t count on getting to Caltech from anywhere. Further, NYC is a better place to be a grad student anyway.</p>

<p>BTW, Caltech is absolute tops in Ph.D. productivity of its undergrads. <a href=“Doctoral Degree Productivity - Institutional Research - Reed College”>http://www.reed.edu/ir/phd.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

5

<p>Hehe, I see you posted on the Columbia 2018 page asking for advice!</p>