Timeline for going from one subject in PhD to another in Postdoc. [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 3, 2012 at 12:01 | comment | added | Vladimir Dotsenko | @Neeraj: finding an area of maths beautiful and deciding to do research in that area makes lots of sense and does not need justification. If such a switch preoccupies one completely and they leave their original field, so be it. | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 11:14 | comment | added | Zoran Skoda | Neeraj, justification of any path in intellectual pursuit is inner, and the typical requirements of some sponsor institution who get hysteric about something they do not understand about are not invalidating the inner turns. I do not understand "does not make sense". If somebody gets interested in something new, the interest itself generates large momentum. Instead I think that a restriction to what someone will live for does not make sense, and needs why ? | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 11:09 | comment | added | Zoran Skoda | The question is very unclear. "Acceptable" presupposes some sort of value system of authorities who accept or not. Is it about your parents, your ex-advisor, your ex-sponsor, your beer pals, colleagues in your thesis area, or a prospective committee for a tenure track hiring in USA or China ? | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 11:07 | history | closed |
user9072 Deane Yang Willie Wong Federico Poloni Chris Godsil |
not a real question | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 10:28 | history | edited | Willie Wong |
edited tags
|
|
| Jul 3, 2012 at 10:27 | comment | added | user9072 | Vote to close as too vague/not a real question as elaborated on by Deane Yang. In addition some general aspects were already discussed in the question linked to by Jonny Evans, so it also almost a duplicate. | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 10:23 | comment | added | Deane Yang | The question is too vague for me. There are no restrictions, and you are allowed at any time in your academic career to work on any subject you choose. You don't even have to work on math. You don't even have to do any work at all. You should just understand as well as you can the impact and risks of your actions and choices on your career as a mathematician, assuming that you want to pursue such a career. | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 10:18 | comment | added | Federico Poloni | Why all these answers as comments? (see also on meta: tea.mathoverflow.net/discussion/1392/…) | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 10:07 | comment | added | Neeraj | One may change, but the main thing is "There should be motivation" for this. It is quite common that one area in maths is related to other, so having done some work in one area( which is perfectly fine in PhD) than shifting to other area, where you see the connection from previous work, then I would say, change is good and useful. Just changing area does not make sense, you need to justify, why? | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 9:50 | comment | added | Jonny Evans | @Johan Öinert: Absolutely. | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 9:44 | comment | added | Johan Öinert | @Jonny: You are right, and the answer to Alan's question "Is it acceptable...?" is of course "Yes!". The purpose of my comment was to demonstrate that change is usually considered to be a healthy and good thing. | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 9:32 | comment | added | Jonny Evans | @Johan Öinert: There's a difference between changing direction and changing subject completely. | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 9:31 | comment | added | Jonny Evans | Wasn't this already asked here? mathoverflow.net/questions/69937/… | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 9:30 | comment | added | Johan Öinert | Not only is it desirable to broaden your research after completing your PhD studies. By some national funding agencies, such as the Swedish Research Council for example, this is actually a requirement to be elegible for their postdoctoral scholarships. You need to present a research plan that shows that you are are not "getting stuck" in old tracks. | |
| Jul 3, 2012 at 9:22 | history | asked | Alan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |