Making Choices

Stupid question, really: how does one go about deciding which field to work in? (insert joke about the changes in behaviour of a vector space when changing the field here.)

Obvious answer: pick a field that one is interested in.
Second obvious answer: pick a lucrative field. But since an interesting field and a financially rewarding one are often opposites of each other, let's not go there.

Some tend to have, well, epiphanies. More often than not in the form of a fortuitously interesting class, or summer research term. Others just fell into their field partially by chance. A third category had a lifelong interest in a subject and stuck to that. Different people will naturally have different stories about how they ended up where they are.

My story, in and of itself, sounds pretty much like most others: absolutely wonderful - and all too rare - high school teachers. Add awesome upper-year professors to that as well (because, frankly, first year is a waste of time). Cloistered much?

Because this blog is all about me (mememe!) I guess the question is, how would I go about making such a choice?

Math, more specifically, pure math, is out. I've seen what people at that level of talent are like - they are positively scary. I am simply not good enough to survive in that elevated stratum. So it all comes down to chemistry.

First, biochemistry is right out also. For very obvious reasons.

Organic chemistry, I would have initially rejected out of hand: the memorizing of multitudinous reaction conditions, the oft-handwavy explanations as to why a reaction occurs or not... *sigh*. Also, somehow, I can always manage to get a yield of strictly less than 50%, even with reactions that ought to give well-nigh quantitative yield. On the other hand, the lectures are quite interesting this term, and I suppose one can't help but secretly enjoy the somewhat cavalier attitude organic chemists have towards reagents and techniques. It's not that organic chemists are careless, it's just that they are careful in a different way.

Which brings me naturally to analytical chemistry. All that gagdetry, interesting techniques, and incredibly clever ways to deal with nasty samples - what's not to love? Yes, there's some memorization involved (draw a block diagram for a GC-MS. Now.) but, unlike the semi-magical nature of organic chemistry, there are patterns in the madness. Unfortunately, there exists statistics in analytical chemistry. Please get that Gaussian response model out of my face.

I can't say much definitive things about inorganic chemistry, since first-term inorganic involves only general chemical concepts of structure and bonding. However, group theory (though not rigorous) was fun. MO's as well, surprisingly. A tidbit of quantum mechanics. And there'll be colourful compounds and ligand field theory and other shiny things. Ooh. (Reminder to self: grow copper acetate crystals. Very pretty.)

There's also physical chemistry, which apparently involves all manners of lasers and spectroscopy and other cool and shiny things. However, I don't think I'll ever get much research experience in this field in undergrad because I happen to um, strongly dislike the professor who manages the major toys at my school.

Theoretical chemistry is one of my favourites, despite it being similar to physics, because of all that lovely, lovely math. The only problem I have with that - and it's a major one - is that programming and I don't get along. At all.

I suppose there's also "nanotechnology". But since most people are putting the prefix "nano-" in front of their research in one form or another anyway...

There's also interdisciplinary fields: bioanalytical, physical organic, bioinorganic, etc. Since there are about O(n²) of them, where n is the number of "traditional" fields (however you'd like to count them), let's not delve into that, either.

Oh, right, with regards to mentors: my official advisor is a math professor. Other people that I can ask definitely have their own biases.

So I guess this is more of a reflective post than anything else. Helps clear up my cluttered mind. Also helps me procrastinate because I don't want to study for my final biochemistry midterm. Curse biochemistry.

A somewhat related question: how much do professors mind if their undergrad student works with another professor in a completely unrelated field, if the said student can manage the load? To be mercenary about it, I haven't worked long enough for the first professor to have a reference worth mentioning yet. The real reason is that the project is at a stage where (understandably) the professor probably doesn't want a undergrad to handle it, and therefore the professor isn't really providing any guidance...but the stage happens to be a "ooh, shiny new math" one... (also a professor in um, organic, offered to let me work in his lab if I can get a grant. Which I am pretty sure I can because grant requirements are much less stringent for undergrads. Darn it, but I feel like a traitor for even thinking about this. On the other hand, I will have to skip a work term to receive the grant, and work terms definitely fall under the "lucrative" side of things compared to research in academia...)