NoOneLikesAs

Honestly, it depends on multiple factors: 1) Your professor and how much time he wants you to work. This is the minimum. 2) Your desire to work. This is your maximum. Aside from the minimum, I personally did not see either organic or inorganic or physical groups "spend" more time than one of the other. While some people say you have to "synthesize" for 12 hours or something, it may sound more time consuming than it actually is. I've seen many organic and inorganic students set up reactions and just leave for a few hours to go to the gym/enjoy themselves outside. I personally have been in the lab synthesizing and working in a glove box for 24+ hours (Hitting about 40 hours one day) with only 4 hours of that time being outside of the lab and department. I also have a friend that never leaves his room, but does a ton of computational chemistry on his computer in his room.

Like everyone has said, there is not age limit to how old the PI is. It's up to what you're looking for. Although there may be exceptions, most older professors tend to be out of lab and expect you to do more of the work yourself. However, the benefit from an older professor is his prestige and possibly his huge amount of funding. It really depends what you want: an older professor with more connections and funding or a younger professor that is more hands on and needing you to be one of his first connections to the outside world. I personally can think of a professor in my field of interest that is 90+ years old and still running a big lab. He actually has most of the funding in my field of research, and a lot of other professors collaborate with him to get some of his funding.

Just an update. I got accepted to one of the schools that rejected me last year. So don't lose hope guys! You don't know what the pushing factor you have in the present year that you didn't have when compared to the previous year. It may be an improvement in your resume or even based on the desired PI having space in their lab. Don't lose hope! Also, weirdly, the school that flew me out to visit last year and eventually rejected me is probably not going to take me, as the PI I'm interested in already told me he's not taking any new students into his group.

Outside of completing my M.S., and an upcoming first author paper, I do not see myself "improving" much. I did, however, drew some interviews/paid visits from schools last year, but was unfortunately rejected from them. Most of the bigger schools just gave me a generic email, and ignored my mail when I asked if I can get reasons for the rejection. As for one of the schools that were interested in me enough to fly me out to visit them, they offered me a visit in early January and I was originally suppose to visit them in early-mid February. However, snow cancelled my flight and it took until late March for me to get through their school policies in rebooking flights and finally visit them. By that time, they were telling me they were shorter in funds this upcoming year due to accepting too many grad students a year or two back, and they have already extended "exceeding offers" by the time I visited. Based on this website, that school usually gives the official offer shortly after the visit. Unlucky me, I was extremely late for the visit.

You will need a recommendation from your current PhD advisor that shows he is fully aware and fully supportive of your actions. A lot of schools are very reluctant in accepting students currently in another graduate school and some schools even say in their FAQ they refuse to accept them.

Hey everyone, I applied to PhD programs last year, and was unluckily rejected to every one of them (two of them flew me out for visits, but rejected me due to their overacceptance of students last year). I am wondering what my chances are if I were to re-apply to these schools that rejected me last year? Will they consider me equally? Would I not likely be accepted? I'm interested in these schools not because of their name/rankings, but because they have professors/potential PI's that would allow me to continue my field of interest I began researching in while doing my Master's. I currently hold a M.S. in chemistry from a US institution (just recently defended my thesis in spring), have 4 years of research (2 years of undergrad, 2 years of grad), a first author paper coming out soon (whenever that will be, as the paper has been completed since July, and my M.S. PI is for some reason not submitting it), and multiple poster presentations in ACS meetings during my undergrad career. GPA is 3.7. Thanks for your insight!

Based on experience, a good PI: 1) Funding!!! The most important thing! 2) Communiative. Having someone talk too much and keep an eye on your work is better than once a month. 3) Willing to publish papers. Seriously. There are professors out there that will keep your papers hostage. 4) Not lazy.There are advisors out there that are lazy, and will do things as late as possible. 5) If possible, a big name professor helps. Bigger named professors have more funding than newer professors. I myself is currently applying for a second year in a row to PhD programs. I was screwed on every app last year because for every school, they had to send me an email asking for my graduate advisor's recommendation, and he continued to submit them past deadlines for every one of the schools. On top of that, he talked with me only once a month, is holding my first author paper hostage atm (it has been completed since July, and would greatly help my grad apps, as it is suppose to be sent to Chemistry of Materials), and it seems to me he will be late for sending recommendations again this year (others have already sent theirs). Good luck on your app process. I am hoping this year won't end up like last year.