>tfw there's still no refutation of this

its true

>>8715427
That'a because it's an unfalsifiable claim based on no evidence and bit even anecdotes. The poster applies a facade of overlying knowledge but really has probably never met a mathematics or physics PhD.

What qualifies as a second rate uni? Low grade acceptance?

>>8715651
>What qualifies as a second rate uni? Low grade acceptance?
anything under ivy league

File: 7e4649f68eb3a7d135f39b536bcb757bf36fbdea882e2073c254dcd56531c2c9.jpg (91KB, 600x612px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 600x612px

>>8715427
this post triggers me
what if i'm smart but lazy?

>>8715427
Hey, PhD Physics at top ten university here. I went to a second-rate university for undergraduate, didn't participate in an olympiad, and didn't apply to engineering.

>>8715663
Then maybe you might actually have a somewhat better understanding of whatever you're studying, but nevertheless you'll still end up a failure at life.

>>8715651
Which uni?

File: 3D9B410600000578-0-image-a-65_1487936222981.jpg (85KB, 634x788px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 634x788px

>>8715427
He's right and you know it.
One my way to prove the Riemann hypothesis.

>>8715716
What about anything that isn't top 50?

>>8715427
In the US I found that people looked upon physics as something you do if you're not smart enough for engineering. In Europe physicists are given more respect and the engineering comparison is rarely made at all, probably because people are less obsessed with commercialism than in the US. Essentially americans look down on physics because it doesn't fit in with capitalism as well as engineering

>>8715702

No one succeeds at life, though.

Remember that. You seem to have lost sight of it.

>>8715427
DELETE THIS RIGHT NOW