GeoDUDE!

You will most likely have to do a masters first. The best thing you can do is make a VERY focused SOP. That means reading journals, knowing the type of problems you want to solve, and the methods in which they are currently solved, and their implications for your field. your quant GRE is super low, for chemistry or biophysics. I think 154 is barely above the 50%. I would retake the GRE.

The one thing im curious about is what types of papers are you reading? Shouldn't be the type of math needed be obvious from reading these papers? If you haven't started reading a few papers in the field you are interested weekly(beyond your interested POIs), now would be a good time to start. Not only will it reflect in your SOP, but your overall preparedness for the next step will be that much better. The best way to get into and be successful in graduate school is know the types of problems you want to solve and know how they are solved as best as possible.

That's even longer then I send, I send about 6 sentences and stick a 1-page version of my CV with the message. Its something along the likes of. Hello I am X, going to X, and my current work is X. I am interested in pursuing PhD at your program, because i found the "specific result" from "specific" paper (they wrote) interesting, because it means "some slightly meaningful insight". Are you taking on graduate students that work on X? Thank you for your time, Name. I've gotten very good responses from that email. You don't need to be long, you just need to show them that A)your worth it it isn't spam and C) you think about problems that are being solved in his lab/your field. You would be surprised at the number of PhD applicants that haven't done a literature review on their POIs.

whenever you want ?

That Q score is abysmal, disregarding any major considering the math required for the GRE is at hardest secondary school. While structural engineering, in class and in practice is one of the least quantitative engineering, that score would probably get your application automatically rejected by software unless you have an IMMACULATE supplementary package. Seeing as you are international, your application must be much better than that of a domestic student; There are plenty of domestic students with less than desirable test scores that they would rather take than an international student whom did not perform well on the GRE. This is just the case; international admissions is tougher. You realistically need to get a 162+ on the quant for a top 10 program... but I would shoot for even higher.

What is your physics gre score? That is infinitely more important.

oh man..... I don't think you can ask him for a LOR period.... I guess you should mention it in SoP and tell your POI. I dont know..

the real answer is take as much math as possible.

Is cambridge really that much more prestigious than ETH Zurich ? There was a time where ETH was the greatest institution in the world, think 1900-1920. Isn't that were Albert Einstein got his PhD ? I think I would choose where I would be happiest. There is no wrong decision. If the money makes you happier, ie leading to a higher quality of life, then do that. The world is yours, take it.

Credentials, like the ones you have, only go so far. You are obviously a very smart person, because you have excellent grades and have a Very strong subject GRE. I assume that you want to go for a PhD, which is great, with the exception that your credentials only give you a stage in which you can speak from and not an acceptance. Your SOP and the supporting LOR are infinitely more important than the rest of your application. Generally, people with strong Statement of Purposes(SOP) have strong grades, there is a correlation, but you must make an argument to the admissions committee that your vision of the future, in terms of addressing problems that need to be solved in your field is one that will benefit the department and the field symbiotically. If you can do that, and the research fit is great, then I have no doubt that you will be accepted into almost every university you apply to. Someone who has less research experience, worse GPA, and a lower GRE score can EASILY surpass a student like yourself if their Statement is controlled, precise vision that goes in line with the department and their LOR are connected and strong. Doing this is the hardest thing about graduate applications, because getting an A a class is hardwork, but its mechanical. A statement of purpose lets the department know how creative you are.

Recommended means you should probably take it if you are going to kill it. It also means that they look VERY favorably on people who have done well. I wouldn't go so far as to say a 85% + scoring on a subject test automatically gets you into a department, but it would be hard pressed to deny someone with a score like that AND has a decent supplementary package of SOP LOR and GPA. Most top departments, depending on the field, take between 1-5 and 1-10 students who apply. Most of the people who apply have above a 3.3 GPA, but a high GRE like I just explained shows that you are better than 1-5 or 1-10 students that apply to programs in your field. The right question is not if people get into the program who have not taken the exam, but What % of the people do get in that have taken the exam.

Its important to note, that schools that don't list minimum GREs often do have "moving minimums" IE, they would only admit the top 30-40% of their applicants on the GRE. This is a way of weeding out the masses as well as making sure that all the students are somewhat competent.

Perhaps you should try a masters with a thesis option first, especially if you don't have good research experience. I would apply to as many depts as I could. You have to ask yourself this: If you were an admissions comm would you take yourself ? Try to be as objective as possible. Getting a funded masters (where you TA) is much easier than getting into a PhD program.

Do you have a question? It sucks when you don't get the results you wanted.

Your Statement of purpose is the most important factor in an application, along with letters of recommendation. If you can layout your vision of research and show the school how you will make them look good in a statement of purpose, and the recommendations support that, you can get in anywhere. Your GPA is high enough to where you wont be automatically eliminated from any program you apply to. Your GRE scores are fairly low, in both Q and V but those can be overcome. Here is the dirty secret with most PhD applicants, almost none of them really know what types of problems are currently being researched and how they want to solve it. You show that, and it shows an infinite amount of more research potential because it means you have done a somewhat strong of a general lit review. You don't know how many fellow masters students have done a lit review. A lot of people like to focus on research experience, but, in general, undergrad research experiences are not true research experiences and come from the following 2 categories : Unorganized problems where the student learns some rudimentary skill sets that the graduate student might learn in a month (inconsequential in a PhD program) or a very cleverly crafted problem in which the advisor sets the student up for success so that he/she might publish or present at a national conference. Neither of the two are how real research at the graduate level is conducted, unless you have a very nice advisor. Generally, the advisor says i want you to study X, so do a lit review and tell me some of the problems that you might want to answer that can address X. Then you constrain it into a thesis, which may be the product of the thesis proposal. Generally, a dissertation is 3-5 published papers during your PhD that revolve around the same subject, but answer different problems. Today, they are almost never 1 giant problem but rather a few smaller important problems that might be address by some innovative technique or a totally new result to begin with. If you could even show a semblance of that sort of though processes in your SOP, it would be amazing, amazing enough to get into graduate school. What the other stuff, grades, gre, and honors do is qualify your voice. I think you have a barley strong enough application to at least have your voice heard. Make it count, it could get you into a great PhD program.

This question might be better answered on academia.stackexchange.com, where professors from Adcomms regularly frequent and answer questions. I suggest repeating it there.

Take the derivative of x(t)i + y(t)j + z(t)k with respect to time. You'll notice that i, j, and k are unit vectors, in their respective dimensions. Since i, j, and k are not time dependent, they can be pulled out of the derivative. So according to the the addition rule you get: d/dt(x(t)) * i + d/dt(y(t)) * j + d/dt(z(t)) *k, this is the velocity of the previous equation. As you can see, it has both a magnitude, which can be obtained from the scalar values in the equation and a direction, which can be obtained by the summation of the three terms itself, as vectors. What perhaps many intro physics classes do, is, when first teaching the kinematic equations they take out the directional unit vector because things are only examined in one or two directions. The method you suggest for finding a magnitudes direction is entirely false: There is no way to find direction from magnitude, or magnitude from direction. A vector, as hopefully you know consists of coordinates in how ever many dimensions the space you are operating in: 1 Dimension: i = [1] 2 dimension: i = [1,0] 3 dimension: i = [1,0,0] As you can see, all three vectors describe the same direction, but they are not all living in the same space (1 space , 2 space, 3 space). When working in 1 space, its sort of arbitrary to specify the vector, as the direction will be in either + or - 1 space. But once moving into 2 space, or planes as they are more commonly referred to, you have 360 degrees of rotation and thus it is important to specify the unit vectors and their corresponding magnitudes. Let me know if you have any other questions.

It depends. It will cost you at the top ~50 or so universities.... but not disqualfiy you.

Another note, while this is in the same vein as my last post I think this is worth mentioning: 75% of your SoP should be about what you will do in their PhD program, what problems you want to solve, and why their PhD program will help you achieve those goals. You currently devote one paragraph to that, with the exception that it doesn't lay out why you need to obtain a PhD in the first place. It seems that you have gotten what you wanted from an MS. Also, mention, specifically, whom you want to work with, or at least the lab, and why that lab will help you with the research problems that YOU want to solve. Remember, a PhD is the chance for YOU to develop a research program. If this essay were written by someone with just a BA/BSc, it would be fine. Its not great, but its OK. But you have done a great deal of research, you need to show them that you actually thinking instead of just doing what some advisor says. You need to layout a vision. They expect more from you. They expect something closer to a research proposal.

Honestly, this better be for a MS and not a PhD. I didn't read this very deeply, but my general feeling is that you are spending too much time on what inspired you and what you did in the past... that can all be done in 5 sentences. What you really need to do is show the graduate committee is your vision for the future. The questions they ask are, Why should we invest 2-5 years on you ? What do we get when your done? How will you make us look good? What problems are being researched currently in your field, and similar ones, and how do you plan on solving them? Also, don't mention in your SoP anything thats on your CV. Remember, limited amount of space. They will see your publications. No need to tell them about it if its on your CV.

I'm going to go against the curve on this one; I think, as long as your other two letters of recommendation are from professors and are also strong, the graduate student's recommendation is a good idea. For those of you who do not work in labs, this may come as a surprise, but I actually read over the applications that my current advisor is considering accepting, and he takes my opinion on them very seriously (as well as the other people in my lab). Graduate students know what it takes to succeed in graduate school. By this time, she probably has a few publications on her belt as generally PhD programs have a publishing requirement before you defend your thesis. This is especially a good idea if you think this particular research lab is known to others in your field- Remember, a lot of students brown nose to professors, but not many students have the opportunity to get another, senior graduate student to vouch for them. This graduate student is closer to someone you would work under, and can vouch for your ability to work in a larger lab as well as how much you have done. Graduate students, may have less authority, and may have less experience, but they still are great judges of research potential and thats the most important thing.

Your quant score is very low for someone who has a science degree, even if it is biology. While the GRE might not kill you, a strong GRE from someone else they like just as much as you might put that person over the edge. You probably want a 156 + on the quant. just IMO.

My research experience, I had 2 conference posters at Earth Sciences biggest meeting and an REU at a top 5 lab/grad program. My gpa was the weakest part of my application.