Please review my SOP for a PhD applicant switching to Physics. Any help would be appreciated.

[neathstage]

Switching from Electrical Engineering to Physics, applying to Grad School for Fall 2016. 

Please bear in mind this is the rough skeleton, and for each application I will add a final paragraph explaining my particular interests in that department and my intent. 

<SOP>

 

My first dalliance with physics was through The Universe In A Nutshell by Dr. Stephen Hawking, which
showed me the depth and importance of the questions that plagued cosmology. Coupled with a near-religious awe
of nature akin to Einstein’s belief, this began my quest to pursue learning and research in fundamental physics.
I performed well at senior level physics courses, scoring 99.4 percentile in the IIT-JEE. Post that, however, my
dreams lay in tatters, having taken an Electronics degree at the Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani
under parental pressure for a more ”secure” path.

Disaffected with the existing system and coursework and determined to keep on track towards learning, I
began covering Dr. Leonard Susskind’s online lectures and lecture notes. In my fourth semester, I found help in
Dr. Tapomoy Guha Sarkar, with whom I had discussed my idea of Einstein’s energy relation being equivalent to
the representation of mass as a split-complex number.

I started a study project on special relativity under him, covering material from Introduction to Electrodynamics
by D.J. Griffiths. In the break that followed, I self-taught general relativity from Dr. Susskind’s online lectures and
A First Course In General Relativity by Bernard Schutz. Learning how curvature was mathematically represented
and connected to the presence of mass-energy has been the most gratifying moment of learning in my life. I had
already covered vector calculus, linear algebra and differential equations as part of undergraduate coursework.

In my fifth semester, I continued with another study project with Dr. Tapomoy Guha Sarkar, covering
Introduction To Cosmology by Barbara Ryden, including background cosmology and the basics of structure
formation. A school on cosmology was organized at my university, with graduate level lecture series on inflation,
dark energy and structure formation. Dr. Tirthankar Roy Choudhury’s lectures taught me how dark matter formed
gravitational potential wells, sort of canvases for baryonic matter to form galaxies, and I knew I wanted to work
on large-scale structure.

I opted for a study project in Quantum Mechanics under Dr. R.R. Mishra, covering Advanced Quantum
Mechanics by J.J. Sakurai in parts. Although it was terse for a novice as I was, it gave me a base to visualise
quantum mechanics mathematically. Alongside, I also worked on a project to plot the Hu-Eisenstein fit of the
matter power spectrum under Dr. Guha Sarkar, which involved understanding the power spectrum in its functional
form, and writing C code to plot it.

In the summer of 2014, I worked as an intern under Dr. Archana Sharma and Dr. Stefano Colafranceschi
of the CMS Muon Labs at CERN, on testing and analysing resistive plate chambers for the muon-detector RE4
layer of the CMS. I attended Standard Model lectures by Dr. Yuval Grossman, participating actively. I also did a
side-project on circular accelerators and particle mechanics in the LHC. I also did a study project on the basics of
differential geometry under Dr. R.R. Mishra, covering Bernard Schutz’s Geometrical Methods of Mathematical
Physics.

In 2015, I began my undergraduate thesis with Dr. Tirthankar Roy Choudhury at NCRA-TIFR. I studied halo
mass functions and the spherical collapse model, generating plots for cosmologies with different neutrino masses.
I then modified the initial conditions code NGen-IC to include small-scale suppression of structure due to massive
neutrinos and ran sets of simulations on the N-body simulation code GADGET-2 [1]. I then studied the halo
model and the non-linear power spectrum from Cooray and Sheth’s review [2]. I also attended graduate school
lectures on cosmology by Dr. Tarun Souradeep at IUCAA.

As an extension of this work, I used the prescription of Bagla et. al. [3] to fill up dark matter halos with
HI, and thus compute the non-linear HI power spectrum in the post-reionization epoch by suitably modifying the
1-halo and 2-halo terms, using a modified NFW profile. I thus computed the bias of HI in Fourier space, as given
in [4], with varying neutrino masses. Work is in progress to fill up halos to compute the power spectrum from
N-body simulation snapshots.

I did electrodynamics as a part of my major courses, and studied classical mechanics functionally. Through
my study projects, I also studied quantum mechanics, relativity and cosmology. In my thesis, I learnt N-body
simulations, the halo model, and spherical collapse. I have ignored the grades of my major in my quest to
self-study physics, but I have a firm understanding of control systems and signal theory, having used them in a 
project to model the gun control for the T-72 Main Battle Tanks of the Indian Army. I am also well-versed with
C programming and the MATLAB environment.

Not being from a physics background and without much guidance, orthodox avenues were closed for me,
and I have striven hard to continue learning the subject through projects and self-pedagogy.Through facing the
frustrations and ardour of research, as well as my experiences with study projects and at CERN, my belief that I
want to pursue a career as a researcher was firmed up. The undergraduate thesis was my first proper foray into
research, and I enjoyed being at a problem that was new and unlike classroom challenges, where my work was to
uncover previously unknown science, and a solution was not guaranteed.

The allure of astrophysics is its combination of various branches of physics with simulations and engineering
to answer the deepest questions. With it entering an exciting phase with the success of the 21cm signal as a novel
probe, simulations becoming an important part of cosmology, and astrophysics becoming an often used laboratory
for fundamental physics research, I believe my assortment of knowledge in electrical engineering, physics theory
and simulations gives me a unique skill-set and perspective as a prospective researcher.

Moreover, I believe I have the self-motivation, grit, perseverance and desire to learn to be a successful re-
searcher, for these are the same qualities that have brought me to this point from a seemingly hopeless situation
in 2011, coupled with my endless romance for the subject and the ineffable want to contribute to the sum of
human knowledge.

 

</SOP>

 

[TakeruK]

I think you have good content here. You have some useful experience working in physics-related labs and I think it is good that you highlight those experiences in this SOP. 

My first question to you is: Is your spoken English the same as your written English here? I ask because the choice of vocabulary is a little unconventional and I know that when some people are not strong writers, they tend to overcompensate by using more complicated words than necessary. I don't want to judge you because I don't know you at all. But I just want to point out that if you do not use words like "dalliance" or phrases like "my dreams lay in tatters" when you do speak English orally, then I would not suggest you write it this way at all. To me, it sounds like you are forcing these words and it sounds really awkward. However, if this is how you do regularly speak, then I think you should keep it because you should stay true to yourself! 

Second, I think despite the above, even if you normally speak that way, you should remove the "dreams lay in tatters" phrase and other similar phrases. I think phrases like this are good at evoking imagery (although a little cliche) but you don't want to draw extra attention to the negative things! Usually metaphors and other literary devices are good at directing a reader's attention to a particular detail. And, maybe in other forms of writing, drawing attention to this detail is a good thing because it makes you more relatable and helps the reader be more sympathetic to you. However, in a SOP, this is not what you want to happen! You don't want the reader to feel "sorry" for you. The point of the SOP is to demonstrate your strengths and impress the reader with your capabilities, not to generate sympathy through your failures or mistakes.

These two items are kind of related even though I wrote them as separate paragraphs. Overall, the general message is that when you write, you need to write with the right audience and purpose in mind. I think the style of writing you are using would be very good for narrative or a biography, but it is not the right way to write a SOP in physics, in my opinion. 

Next, in a SOP, you want to balance two things: your life story/experiences and why you are applying (to grad school in general as well as specific school X). Here, you have a lot of your life story and your note says that you plan to only add one paragraph about the school you're applying to. I think this is a bad balance! You want to write a lot more about why you want to be in grad school (most of this will be the same of each school). When I read your SOP, I still do not know why you want to study Physics. Sure, you wrote a bit about how elegant and romantic the field of study is and how you want to contribute to human knowledge etc. But this alone isn't going to get you through grad school. There are also lots of other elegant fields and lots of other ways you can contribute to human knowledge. So, tell me: Why Physics? What did you do in the past that you liked? What about each of these past projects really excited you? What parts of grad school excites you? What do you want to do in grad school? What do you want to do after grad school? Why do you need to go to grad school for this? So far, your life story part just reads like a paragraph-form version of your CV. You're just saying what you did, when you did it, who you worked for. This is a statement of purpose so each example you bring up should help answer the question: What is the purpose of your goal of graduate school? Right now, it just sounds like "I did well in my physics courses and I had some good physics experiences so I want to go to a PhD in Physics". I don't think that's a good reason to go to grad school. Tell me more!

Then, beyond that (the above is something you should add for every school), you should write 1-2 paragraphs about this particular program and what parts of it excites you. What you need from this particular program? What resources do they have? Facilities? Professors? Collaborations? Why did you pick this school? Not everything here has to be unique to the school only of course since more than one school might have similar resources. 

Finally, just an overall view: Your SOP draft is already at 1000 words. This is quite long. What I'm suggesting you write above would take another 300-400 words. Therefore, I think you should really consider cutting a lot of what you have already written (this is okay! and normal for a first draft). The easiest thing to do would be to just cut out the first and last paragraphs. They don't really add anything. Then, it seems you have listed every single thing you did. You don't have to do this, because you will often submit a CV as well. Pick out the 2 or 3 most meaningful items and write more about those. Maybe aim to reduce what you currently have to about 300-400 words. I think a good overall SOP length would be around 750 words, plus or minus 100 words.

[neathstage]

Thank you TakeruK for that honest and detailed review. Now that you have highlighted it, I notice too, that the "purpose" part is woefully short compared to the narration of my story to continue studying physics in the face of disaffection with my rather arduous major. 

I do need to condense more to accommodate those points, and I should be more selective in the elaboration of my experience. Got it! Thanks!

[fuzzylogician]

Listen, the language you use is exceptionally flowery. Even if you talk like that in your daily life (which I doubt), I would highly recommend toning it down here. This is supposed to read like a professional document that talks about your research plans and career goals, it's not a romance novel. For what it's worth, this reads to me like you're insecure about your formal training and you're trying to cover that up with language that you think makes you sound more sophisticated, but it's not working. I'd say you are indeed distracting your reader, but not in a good way. It's hard to follow your ideas and understand what actually matters out of all those many many details. Instead, you want to be clear and concise. Only spend time on the parts that really matter. 

Second, as TakeruK remarks, there is too much past and not enough future here. I feel like you're giving me too much information and at the same time not enough. You name drop a lot, you mention particular lectures by title and you cite some works that aren't clearly important enough to take up all this space. It's unnecessary and it's distracting. I counted 12 paragraphs of past/background info. You need to have no more than 3. Get it down to 300-400 words, so that you have another half of the essay to devote to your future goals. Not every course you've ever taken deserves a paragraph. Devote one paragraph to self-training, books, lectures, whatnot, and choose wisely -- do not cram everything into there. The goal is just to get the point across that you're driven and find ways to get the training you need in lots of different places. Other things can go in your CV and I'm sure they will be in your letters. The last four paragraphs are basically without helpful content, and so is the first paragraph. Condense and/or cut those. Whole paragraphs that discuss studying one particular topic/course you've studied must go. Devote one or maybe two paragraphs to internships and research you have done, so maybe one paragraph for your thesis, and one for one other experience of your choice. Spend less time telling us the names of the people you work with and citing the work you read, and more time telling us what you did, what you learned from it, and how it connects to your current research interests and why you want to go to grad school. That is it, stop there. Otherwise it's too much information.

Now, once you have that, spend some time talking about why specifically you want to go to grad school. If you're going into physics, I assume you're applying for a PhD. What specifically interests you, and excites you enough that you want to study it for 5 years? Why does it matter? What kinds of questions do you want to study? These questions should naturally evolve from your past experience. You should be able to tie what you've done to what you hope to do. This should be at least one paragraph, maybe two. Be detailed and specific. This is one place to be very professional and not flowery. 

Finally, you need to explain why you chose school X. Who do you want to work with? What other features attract you to that school? Also, what are your longer term career goals? Give us at least a glimpse. Aim for less than two pages of written text overall, or around 750 words give or take. So, this second part of the essay should be about the same length as your now-condensed background part. Make sure you have a good balance. 

[neathstage]

Thank you for that critique, fuzzylogician. I guess I must switch from a chronological to a thematic way of putting forth my ideas, focusing more on my motivations, and less on details. 

[neathstage]

Ok. Please do look at this revised version, if you do notice this:

Again, this is without the 1-2 paragraphs pertinent to each school.

<SOP>

It was reading Dr. Stephen Hawking’s The Universe in A Nutshell as a middle schooler that got me enamoured
of physics first. That time flowed differently for different observers was a miraculous discovery for me, and I decided
I wanted to learn more. I took to high-school physics, scoring a 99.4 percentile in the IIT-JEE in 2011, but under
parental pressure took an Electronics degree at the Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani.

Determined to pursue physics despite my major, I started studying relativity under Dr. Tapomoy Guha Sarkar.
The mathematical structure of hyperbolic rotations as Lorentz transformations fascinated me, and I began learning
general relativity on my own over the summer, enjoying consulting multiple sources. Seeing how curvature related
to mass-energy physically and mathematically was one of the most cherishable moments of my learning life.

I neglected my major courses in my quest to study physics, but I enjoyed learning control systems and signal
theory, giving lectures on the latter as a teaching assistant. With usual avenues closed to me, I self-studied
functional mechanics and electrodynamics, and decided to undertake study projects to rectify my lack of a formal
degree, covering basic quantum mechanics and beginning differential geometry under Dr. R.R. Mishra. I also
took up a reading course in cosmology, covering Barbara Ryden’s Introduction To Cosmology. I interned at the
CMS Muon Labs at CERN, testing resistive plate chambers, where I attended lectures on the Standard Model by
Dr. Yuval Grossman, which deepened my resolve to take up physics as a career.

I attended the Autumn School on Cosmology held at my university in 2013, with graduate level lectures on
inflation, dark energy and structure formation, all fields that had the deepest outstanding questions. Learning how
dark matter formed gravitational potential wells which were canvases for baryonic matter to form galaxies made
me want to study large-scale structure, so I took up a project on understanding and plotting the Hu-Eisenstein
power spectrum.

I continued this with my undergraduate thesis under Dr. Tirthankar Roy Choudhury at NCRA-TIFR, running
N-body simulations on GADGET-2 to assess the impact of massive neutrinos on the power spectrum and mass
function by modifying the initial conditions to include small-scale suppression. Later, the scale dependent HI bias
in the post-reionization epoch was also modeled by modifying the halo power spectrum. I am working on running
simulations to assess the impact of massive neutrinos on the same.

Throughout my undergraduate studies, I faced self-doubt with regard to building a career in physics, but I
progressively enjoyed learning, and became sure that a career in physics, to further learn and contribute, is the
thing I would like to do. I took pleasure in self-pedagogy and research, and genuinely grew to love the subject
after my earlier innocent fascination.

I had discussions with Dr. Tirthankar Roy Choudhury on dark energy as a tachyonic field, and through
my introduction to quantum fields at CERN and inflation at the IUCAA-NCRA graduate school, I also became
interested in the early universe and the nature of dark matter and dark energy, in which I would want to pursue
work, apart from structure formation. I am also interested in using simulations to better understand large-scale
structure and test cosmological models.

With cosmology entering an exciting phase with the success of the 21cm signal as a novel probe, simulations
becoming an important part of cosmology, and astrophysics becoming an often used laboratory for fundamental
physics research, I believe my assortment of knowledge in electrical engineering, physics theory and simulations gives me a unique skill-set and perspective as a prospective researcher.

</SOP>

[TakeruK]

Overall, I think the reduced length and flowery writing makes this stronger! I still feel that some of the middle paragraphs continue to read like a long list of things you've done and would not provide much more information than what is already in your CV. I think there are a few things you can do next to improve your SOP:

1. "Sell" your EE background more. In your last sentence, you say that your EE knowledge will give you a unique skillset and perspective and I think this is a really good point. Instead of treating your EE background as an "oops" or a regret, emphasize it more. Write more about how your EE background connects to your specific research interests in physics. I think this is really important and your chance to make yourself stand out. Not that many applicants will be coming from an EE background--it's what makes you special and you should emphasize why this will make you both interesting and useful!

2. There are a few phrases that are "red flags" that would concern me if I read your SOP. I would consider removing or rewording these phrases:

"under parental pressure"---In North America, reading this would make you sound like you are not an independent adult (even if this was years ago). I would not mention this.

"Determined to pursue physics despite my major"---Again, the North American reader will wonder why you didn't just major in Physics. I would reword this without the "despite" and instead of putting a negative emphasis on your major, write it as you have two simultaneous interests---in EE and in Physics so you worked hard to continue learning Physics while in EE.

"I neglected my major courses...."---This sounds bad! You don't want to give the impression that you won't work on things that you are not interested in. Again, like I said above, you don't have to make your EE major a negative in order to emphasize how much you like Physics. It's not a competition, you can have passion and like both. Physics isn't going to reject you because you also did EE.

"I also became interested in the early universe and the nature of dark matter and dark energy, in which I would want to pursue work, apart from structure formation."---same comment: don't say negative things about any field! No need to say what you aren't interested in, just keep it focussed on what you do want to do.

3. Although you did good work condensing your past summary, you still don't have that much in the "what do you want to do" and "why do you want to be in physics grad school". It's more than before, so that's good. But I would recommend further reduction/condensing of your history in order to fit this and the point #1 above in. Paragraphs 3-5 still read like a long form of your CV. I'd follow fuzzy's advice in condensing/removing details from these.