First some context. After majoring in astrophysics, I did an MA in philosophy of science before coming back to physics, where I'm currently working on my MSc thesis project. I intend to stay in physics and pursue my PhD in the field, but I want to contribute actively to the philosophy of physics throughout my career.
Recently my supervisor, who is very supportive, referred me to a funded PhD position in the overall ballpark of my current thesis project: gravitational wave astronomy. I have nothing to lose by applying, so I intend to do so. As is customary, the application asks for "a brief description of research interests."
I have some doubts about what to include because my research interests are too broad. I enjoy my current topic tremendously and I see myself capable of investing years refining my knowledge of it. But I am still very passionate about other theoretical and foundational issues in physics. Some of the latter led me to consider radically speculative ideas which have been derided by some physicists as havjng no real scientific basis, at worst, or at best being too esoteric to warrant "serious" scientific attention. I agree to the extent that I wrote my MA thesis on one of these topics as a philosopher of science, not as a physicist, and that community has different standards for what it considers of legitimate interest.
So my question is the following:
- should I include the full list of topics that interest me, including those I am passionate about and have researched academically, in my application? Or
- should I play it more conservatively and list the topics that I know are "safe" and have a direct bearing on the nature of the project I'd be working on in the PhD position?