Grad School or Industry: Trying to Secure My Financial Future

In summary, the conversation is about a student who is double majoring in Physics and Mathematics with a minor in Philosophy and is on track to graduate with honors. The student is considering their options for after graduation and is worried about the financial risk and job prospects of getting a PhD in Physics. They are also considering other options such as getting a Master's in Engineering or Computer Science. The conversation also touches on the financial investment and value of getting a PhD. The student is also concerned about their earning potential with just a BS in Physics and the difficulty in finding jobs in their field. They mention their experience and GPA and seek advice for a financially secure future.
  • #1
chickenwing71
42
0
I'm double majoring in Physics and Mathematics at a small liberal arts college, with a minor in Philosophy. I'm on track to graduate with honors next Spring. (Currently a junior)

I'm starting to seriously consider what I should do when I graduate in a little over a year. I was initially planning on going for a Physics PhD in Optics or something heavily computational. But the financial risk of a Physics PhD is seriously scaring me, as are the job prospects of just a BS in Physics and Math. If all goes according to plan, I will likely be married soon after graduation, and take on my girlfriend's heavy student loans and her a low paying job.

Googling jobs, reading posts here on PF, etc has gotten me very pessimistic about my earning potential. My resume will be fine, but it seems that jobs with a BS in Physics are either insanely difficult to get, or are menial coding jobs with a very low ceiling with limited career potential. Graduate school would put me further in debt, without necessarily opening up too many more options.

Do I look for a job immediately when I graduate? Do potentially high-paying jobs even exist for Physics/Mathematics majors at the BS level?

Should I go on for a Masters or PhD in physics? Will the six or seven years of working for little pay result in a higher paying job later on? I would absolutely love teaching physics, and I really enjoy the academic environment, but I'm a bit put off by the politics, grant-writing, and huge saturation in the market.

What about a masters in EE? Is an MSEE employable if I don't have a BSEE? Could I even get into the program?

Experience:

Two REU positions at Top 5 Physics schools, and hopefully another this year.
Two years of TA experience (teaching labs, grading, etc)
Brief design work with a professor for a defense contractor
Lots of programming experience
~3.8/3.9 gpa

I'm just lost and I want as financially secure a future as possible... any advice?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2


chickenwing71 said:
My resume will be fine, but it seems that jobs with a BS in Physics are either insanely difficult to get, or are menial coding jobs with a very low ceiling with limited career potential.

Try finance or insurance. Take an actuarial test or two, etc. Apply for entry level engineering positions you seem qualified for. Basically, apply to as much as you can, and see what comes back. Find alumni from your department and contact them- its much easier to get a job if you have that sort of in.

Will the six or seven years of working for little pay result in a higher paying job later on?

Probably not. 6 years of deferred income is a fair amount of money, and you aren't likely to start much higher than someone who didn't get a phd but instead got 6 years of experience on-the-job.

I would absolutely love teaching physics, and I really enjoy the academic environment, but I'm a bit put off by the politics, grant-writing, and huge saturation in the market.

Most phds don't get academic jobs, and most people who teach physics don't make that much money. Thats just the nature of the world.
 
  • #3


A master's degree in engineering seems to be a decent strategy for someone with a physics bachelor's. There seem to be a decent number of engineering jobs out there. Another thing to consider might be getting a master's degree in computer science.

A PhD in physics (or most any field, I'd wager) is an investment that is unlikely to pay off financially when you consider what other options exist for how to spend that six years of your life.
 
  • #4


chickenwing71 said:
But the financial risk of a Physics PhD is seriously scaring me, as are the job prospects of just a BS in Physics and Math. If all goes according to plan, I will likely be married soon after graduation, and take on my girlfriend's heavy student loans and her a low paying job.

There are two separate questions here.

If you worry that you are going to be poor after getting your Ph.D., then you shouldn't worry too much here. Everyone that I've know that has gotten a Ph.D. has managed to get some decent job after they've graduated. Some of them have nothing to do with physics, but I don't know anyone with a physics Ph.D. that has been in huge financial difficulty afterwards. One good thing about Ph.D.'s is that you leave the program with no debt, and a lot of student loans end up deferred, so that you can take whatever job pays the bills.

If you are wondering whether a Ph.D. is a good financial investment. It's not. You'll end up making money more quickly if you get a job with a bachelors or get a masters. The cost of losing six years of work doesn't make up for the loss *if you don't care about getting the Ph.D.*.

So the basic question, is the Ph.D. worth it to you for the sake of getting the Ph.D.? It's not going to kill you financially to get one, but if the Ph.D. has no intrinsic value to you, then there is also no point in favor of getting one.

Googling jobs, reading posts here on PF, etc has gotten me very pessimistic about my earning potential. My resume will be fine, but it seems that jobs with a BS in Physics are either insanely difficult to get, or are menial coding jobs with a very low ceiling with limited career potential. Graduate school would put me further in debt, without necessarily opening up too many more options.

Ph.D. programs tend to let you end up with less debt than going in. In my situation all my student loans were deferred while I was in the program, and I didn't incur any new debt. The "bad news" is that once you get out, you'll be looking at more or less the same set of jobs that you are looking at with a bachelors. Menial coding jobs end up paying the bills.

Should I go on for a Masters or PhD in physics? Will the six or seven years of working for little pay result in a higher paying job later on?

With the Ph.D., probably not. Masters might open some doors. Again, getting the Ph.D. is worth doing if you want the Ph.D. It's sort of likely deciding whether or not you want to have kids or getting married. Financial considerations will enter into the decision, but it's a bad idea to make the decision solely or even mainly on financial issues.

I'm just lost and I want as financially secure a future as possible... any advice?

Open a separate mutual fund account. Set up an auto-debit so that at the start of the month, money gets moved into the account automatically, and don't look at the account or touch the money. One thing that's been my experience is that there is surprisingly little correlation between financial security and general income. If you don't have good saving habits then if you make 2x income, your expenses will go up 2.1x.

The other piece of advice is vote.
 
  • #5


daveyrocket said:
A master's degree in engineering seems to be a decent strategy for someone with a physics bachelor's. There seem to be a decent number of engineering jobs out there. Another thing to consider might be getting a master's degree in computer science.

A PhD in physics (or most any field, I'd wager) is an investment that is unlikely to pay off financially when you consider what other options exist for how to spend that six years of your life.

I concur...get a part time job...and go for the masters in EE. There is a high demand for quality EE's and making $70,000 a year in USA wouldn't be too far fetched 5 years down the road after you graduate.

Electrical is fairly simple. V=IR and P=IV

Good luck!
 
  • #6


daveyrocket said:
A master's degree in engineering seems to be a decent strategy for someone with a physics bachelor's. There seem to be a decent number of engineering jobs out there. Another thing to consider might be getting a master's degree in computer science.

I'd recommend this path also. If you have a good background in physics, an MSEE is fairly straightforward, and you should be able to complete it in 1-2 years. This is what I did, and had no trouble finding high paying jobs in industry (although that was a few years ago...)
 
  • #7


psparky said:
I concur...get a part time job...and go for the masters in EE. There is a high demand for quality EE's and making $70,000 a year in USA wouldn't be too far fetched 5 years down the road after you graduate.

Electrical is fairly simple. V=IR and P=IV

Good luck!

A masters isn't a waste of time, but the utility depends upon where you go in industry. Right now, HUGE opportunities are opening up for electric utilities with the smart grid. I would strike while the iron is hot.

Oh, and another thing: any decent undergrad knows that your "simple" assessment of electrical engineering is nonsense. You be sure and tell yourself that while sweating through circuits and signals classes.
 
  • #8


JakeBrodskyPE said:
A masters isn't a waste of time, but the utility depends upon where you go in industry. Right now, HUGE opportunities are opening up for electric utilities with the smart grid. I would strike while the iron is hot.

But as with other huge opportunities, there are reasons why they are huge. One reason power grid lacks people is that you can take a fresh out of school person with no formal certification and have them debug code or build cell phones, but you do *not* want someone that you are 100% sure is competent anywhere near the power grid.

Also timing is everything. One reason I think you should research getting into power grids is that this is absolutely the first time that I heard someone mention it, so that if you spend two years, there you might still get in at the right time. If *everyone* is telling you to get into power grids, then you've missed the boat, and should look for something else.
 
  • #9


JakeBrodskyPE said:
A masters isn't a waste of time, but the utility depends upon where you go in industry. Right now, HUGE opportunities are opening up for electric utilities with the smart grid. I would strike while the iron is hot.

Oh, and another thing: any decent undergrad knows that your "simple" assessment of electrical engineering is nonsense.
You be sure and tell yourself that while sweating through circuits and signals classes.

No, I stand by my statement. I have bachelors and PE just like you. V=IR and P=IV. Don't over complicate things. Shoot...50% of the PE test is even V=IR. You can get through 75% of your college classes with that info alone...lol. Sure there are a few more things..but not really. Take op-amps for example. You can solve any school problem with ohms law. You can solve any circuit with ohms law. Then you are going to say...what about AC...good point. V(w)=I(w)*R(w). w=omega...whoopy. And yes it takes a bit of knowledge and experience to set up the problems...but in the end...V=IR. Next.
 
  • #10


I can only speak from my own experience but having just a BS in Math or Physics can seriously limit your marketability, so I would definitely recommend that you pursue either further graduate studies, additional study in a professional program (such as actuarial science) or other forms of post-graduate training.

In which field you should pursue your graduate studies in will depend very much on what your interests and aptitude. Since you are already set to complete a BS in Math/Physics with honours, you are not in any way bound to pursue graduate studies in the same field. Some fields to consider graduate studies include Computer Science, Statistics, Electrical Engineering, Applied Mathematics, or Operations Research (all of which, from my understanding, have good job prospects for those with MS or PhDs), as well as Physics.
 
Last edited:
  • #11


StatGuy2000 said:
I can only speak from my own experience but having just a BS in Math or Physics can seriously limit your marketability, so I would definitely recommend that you pursue either further graduate studies, additional study in a professional program (such as actuarial science) or other forms of post-graduate training.

To add to this (or maybe clarify, depending on what the author intended), taking a couple of actuarial exams is an easy way to open up a few new opportunities. It is a bit tough getting an entry level actuarial job right now. Furthermore, actuarial work is often different than people expect (it is a business job, not a mathematical one). I'll also mention that actuarial studies and exams aren't well known outside insurance and so don't mean much to most HR departments.

However, the cost of materials and tests for the first two exams is significantly less than even a single college course and passing them can be done while working full time. It's a small cost that opens up new doors, even if they're tough to walk through.

I would advise against university graduate studies in actuarial science unless unemployment is the only alternative.
 
  • #12


Locrian said:
To add to this (or maybe clarify, depending on what the author intended), taking a couple of actuarial exams is an easy way to open up a few new opportunities. It is a bit tough getting an entry level actuarial job right now. Furthermore, actuarial work is often different than people expect (it is a business job, not a mathematical one).

There are also similar certification programs in project management (CAPM) and certification programs in risk management (PRM), financial planner (CFP), financial analyst (CFA), or risk manager (PRM). It's also pretty straightforward to become a licensed broker (Series 7) or real estate salesman.

None of these will magically change your career, but they have the advantage of being cheap and for the people on this group, easy. Since people reading these groups generally have few problems with math or school work, spending a few hundred dollars for books and taking tests is pretty easy.

Curiously you have to be careful with certifications in CS. The only certification in computers that's really career helping involves being a network engineer. Oddly if you put that you are a Microsoft-certified software engineer or software developer or Oracle certified Java developer, that is a *negative* sign, and will hurt your resume.

The reason for that is that certification tests are often "read books, memorize these rules, take tests." That works well for licensing real estate brokers were you have to just learn what the laws are on real estate, but it works badly with programming since if you could summarize everything into a set of rules, you'd have the computer do the work.
 
  • #13


Also this gets to the one reason why I think career advising in universities are so awful. The best job advice for someone with a bachelors in physics may be "take the insurance licensing exam and sell insurance" or something like that, but if a university gives that sort of advice, people that are "career-oriented" are going to ask "so why did I major in physics."

The answer that I'd give is that you studied (or should have studied) physics because it was cool, but you have to avoid starvation, don't limit yourself to physics in looking for jobs. I have a lot of sympathy for people who are graduating now, because I'm scared and worried about my future career prospects because of the horrible economy, and if *I'm* worried about my future, I can't imagine the worry that people that are just graduating have.

If it's depressing to be looking for work, it's also not that much fun to be an employer. You end up going through tons of resumes with very, very good people that you'd love to hire, but just can't, and whenever you have an interview, you should know that the person on the other side of the table is also in fear of losing their job.

One thing that helps me a lot is to read about the Great Depression and even talk to people that lived through it to think about how people got through that. Also, I'm coming to the conclusion that we are all in a "no win" situation and that if you just muddle through and take whatever you can to keep from starving, you are doing pretty good.
 
Last edited:
  • #14


I'm really wishing I had done some type of Engineering or Computer Science right now rather than Physics. At least I see jobs requiring those degrees. I could pretend that jobs are out there for me and have some hope. I only see physics degrees required if they are masters or phds.

Right now, I'm day-dreaming about grad school for electrical or mechanical engineering or computational science.

I don't know.

:(
 
  • #15


PhilosophyofPhysics said:
Right now, I'm day-dreaming about grad school for electrical or mechanical engineering or computational science.

The grass is not always greener in engineering. Engineering does not offer much room for creativity. And even if we do get comfortable salaries, we often have to suffer the leadership of people with the intellect of a gnat.

If you can stand having the lifestyle of Dilbert, you too can be an engineer.
 
  • #16


One thing I cannot understand is why people find the situation for science grads to be so dire. Would one's situation be any better if they had majored in say, Anthropology or Russian Studies and Literature?

In my country, if one is an arts or science major, they can only teach. That or do some kind of professional program, like one for accounting. Business-type jobs are only for people with business/finance/management degrees, engineering jobs for people with the specific engineering degree and so forth. Everybody is stressed out to "get a career", meaning that everybody in the physics/maths classes are the people who couldn't get into engineering, medicine, finance or law and haven't gotten weeded out (yet).

My understanding is that in Europe and the States, anyone with a degree qualifies for so-called "graduate jobs". Could the OP not apply for such business-type roles? It shouldn't be too hard to pick up some basic accounting and learn the lingo. Maybe try get an internship in a bank or some place else?
 
  • #17


Mépris said:
One thing I cannot understand is why people find the situation for science grads to be so dire. Would one's situation be any better if they had majored in say, Anthropology or Russian Studies and Literature?
One thing that's different about those fields is that basically all the students there know that the job hunt will be tough for them, so they'll spend a lot of time as undergrads specifically searching for jobs. Science students tend to assume that they'll find a job easily- even if it's "just" an engineering job- and throw themselves 100% into their studies, then get a nasty shock when they graduate and realize how impractical all the stuff they've learned really is.
 
Last edited:
  • #18


Everybody is stressed out to "get a career", meaning that everybody in the physics/maths classes are the people who couldn't get into engineering, medicine, finance or law and haven't gotten weeded out

In the US, we do our best to hide the realities of the science/math market so that people who COULD have done engineering, medicine, finance or law INSTEAD chose science or math. Which is probably to their long-term detriment.

I've heard countless professors tell math/science students that "there is always a job in industry" and "you can always find work doing engineering." No one says "hey, what do you hope to do with this degree?" and "if you want to be a liberal arts college professor, getting a phd in CS or econ will be a much better approach than a phd in physics," "if you want to work in a technical field, you're much better off with an engineering degree",etc.
 
  • #19


pi-r8 said:
Science students tend to assume that they'll find a job easily- even if it's "just" an engineering job- and throw themselves 100% into their studies, then get a nasty shock when they graduate and realize how impractical all the stuff they've learned really is.

I suppose one reason I view things a bit differently is that I don't think that I was ever strongly misled about job prospects. Yes, you had the bogus NSF projections, but I think I got pretty good information from the people around me that they thought those projections were wishes more than anything else.

One other bit of good advice that I got was not to focus exclusively on physics.
 
  • #20


ParticleGrl said:
In the US, we do our best to hide the realities of the science/math market so that people who COULD have done engineering, medicine, finance or law INSTEAD chose science or math. Which is probably to their long-term detriment.

I don't think it's been to my detriment. Also, things can change very quickly. One thing that I remember was talking to someone in the class of 1957. In 1957, the US was in recession, and they were seriously worried about getting jobs. Then Sputnik got launched and the world changed. The big thing that impacted hiring in my college career was the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. In 1987, when I was a freshman, people assumed that the Cold War would continue indefinitely, and as the Soviet Union fell, it became increasingly obvious that all of the hiring projections that assumed Cold War were bogus. And then someone came up with this thing called the World Wide Web.

I remember the first time I ftp'ed the source packages from CERN, and thought to myself, this could be interesting. So I spent the next few weeks teaching myself web programming, and I had to teach it to myself, because there were no courses or books on the topic. Turned out to be useful.

"if you want to be a liberal arts college professor, getting a phd in CS or econ will be a much better approach than a phd in physics,"

I don't think it is. If you get a Ph.D. in economics your chances are getting a tenure track position is quite high, but it's extremely hard to get into an economics program, and there is a "tier structure" that's vastly worse than anything I've ever seen in physics. Also, with some rare exceptions, as far as this "finding out how the world works" thing, economics academia is a lot more broken than physics is.

The other thing is that all of this involves projecting ahead ten years ahead with all of the attendant risk and feedback mechanisms. If physics becomes a totally dead letter, then there *will* be a shortage in a decade and a half. Something like that happened with petroleum engineering.

"if you want to work in a technical field, you're much better off with an engineering degree",etc.

I'm not.
 
Last edited:
  • #21


twofish-quant said:
I suppose one reason I view things a bit differently is that I don't think that I was ever strongly misled about job prospects. Yes, you had the bogus NSF projections, but I think I got pretty good information from the people around me that they thought those projections were wishes more than anything else.

One other bit of good advice that I got was not to focus exclusively on physics.

Argh... look at the misleading advice that people on this forum are giving out right now!
Physics grads can generally do most jobs that engineers do (except for a few Civil jobs that need PE/CEng) plusmost jobs that maths grads can do and everything CSgrads can do.
Companies hire physicists either becaue they have an area that crosses several domains - you can hire an aerospace engineer to tell you how thick to make the landing gear strut, but you hire a physicist to design the wind tunnel + instrumentation + software.
Or they want someone whois perceived as more general and can manage groups of engineers.
No one is going to hire physics grad for an engineering position, and definitely not to be manager of an engineering group straight out of school. No one is going to hire you to "do math" because for the most part those jobs don't exist anymore thanks to computers. No one is going to hire you to program said computers unless you've specifically been learning programming on your own, and in that case why not just major in CS and make your life easier?

This idea that there's a huge wide range of technical careers available and that a physics major is qualified for any of them is incredibly misleading, and I can't believe it's still being taught. The fact is that there's basically 3 main career choices for physics majors. In order:

1) graduate student (not really a "career" but you'll get a stipend and health insurance at least)
2) computer programmer (only if you've learned programming)
3) high school math/science teacher (only with a further education degree)
 
  • #22


pi-r8 said:
Argh... look at the misleading advice that people on this forum are giving out right now!

I think "don't focus too much on physics" was pretty good advice for me. One thing that I did a lot in college was short story writing. Comes in handy when you are drafting a resume or a corporate memo. "Study history and politics" was also pretty useful.

No one is going to hire physics grad for an engineering position, and definitely not to be manager of an engineering group straight out of school.

My first job was in oil and gas. Also no one is going to hire you to be a manager since you don't have any management experience, but I was promoted to development lead with two years of experience.

No one is going to hire you to "do math" because for the most part those jobs don't exist anymore thanks to computers.

Someone has to program those computers.

No one is going to hire you to program said computers unless you've specifically been learning programming on your own, and in that case why not just major in CS and make your life easier?

1) because I like to do things the hard way.

2) because computational physics teaches you (or more accurately gives you the chance to teach yourself) numerical programming skills that they don't teach in CS class

3) because being a CS major doesn't mean that you can program. Programming is like writing, and a CS major is like an English major. There are lots of great writers that aren't English majors, and there are a ton of English majors that can't write. Just as there are professors of English literature that are incompetent writers, there are CS professors that can't program. If you just take the standard CS curriculum and do nothing else, then you are just not going to be a competent programmer.

This idea that there's a huge wide range of technical careers available and that a physics major is qualified for any of them is incredibly misleading, and I can't believe it's still being taught.

Depends on the state of the economy. If you have a good economy, then people will be looking for general skills. If you have a bad economy, then people won't hire you even if you have the necessary technical skills.

You are in a bad economy. It helps when you are in a bad economy to read about what other people have done in a bad economy (hence the "read about the great depression" part).

The fact is that there's basically 3 main career choices for physics majors.

I think there are more than that. Many of the physics bachelors that didn't go into graduate school, went into business consulting. Also, there are a ton of jobs that are available that have nothing obviously to do with physics.
 
  • #23


twofish-quant said:
You are in a bad economy. It helps when you are in a bad economy to read about what other people have done in a bad economy (hence the "read about the great depression" part).


uh... bootleg liquor? That was the most profitable industry during the depression. Don't think that will work so well anymore. Apparently growing marijuana is a fast-growing industry now thanks to the recession though.

More seriously, here are what seem to be the main careers that use physics now:

Programming liquid flow models for the oil/gas industry: Current projections are that we'll warm the Earth up 10 degree C this century, but I'm sure with enough physics nerds working on the problem we'll be able to get up to at least 15 degrees C!
Programming bomb models for the military: We need a way to kill as many Iranian children as possible for the minimum cost, and someone needs to program all those smart bombs. Better a pure nerd than someone who might have accidentally taken an ethics class.
Programming finance models: I guess that's your job now? There's still a few unions that have managed to protect their pension funds, and still a few middle-class families that own a home. I'm sure if enough nerds work on this problem you'll find a way to transfer their all their wealth into the hands of rich bankers.
 
  • #24


pi-r8 said:
This idea that there's a huge wide range of technical careers available and that a physics major is qualified for any of them is incredibly misleading, and I can't believe it's still being taught. The fact is that there's basically 3 main career choices for physics majors. In order:

1) graduate student (not really a "career" but you'll get a stipend and health insurance at least)
2) computer programmer (only if you've learned programming)
3) high school math/science teacher (only with a further education degree)

Since I like data (something I picked up during my graduate school years that were, according to certain embittered individuals on this site, otherwise wasted), I checked my undergrad alma mater's alumni directory for the years around my own graduation. I looked for people who majored only in physics (no CS or engineering double majors), who had reported on their employment, and who didn't have any other degrees reported (generally people who update their profile with jobs will also update their further education). I also did a quick Google search to try to make sure (generally via LinkedIn profiles) that they had no other degree; plus I knew most of these people and whether they went to grad school (immediately out of undergrad, at least).

I found 15 people, whose most recently reported jobs break down as:

Six programmers
Four engineers of other stripes
Two defense analysts
One consultant
One technician/facilities manager at a national lab
One active duty military


And, by the way, teaching high school generally requires an additional credential, but not another degree, and for high-demand subjects some states and private schools will let one pick up that creditional after being conditionally hired.
 
  • #25


So underlying this:

pi-r8 said:
The fact is that there's basically 3 main career choices for physics majors.

And this:

pi-r8 said:
More seriously, here are what seem to be the main careers that use physics now:

I take it you've got some data that you're hiding from us?

I mean, points for trying to be funny, or trying to be provocative, or whatever it is you're trying to be, but do you have something to add that will be helpful to the questioners?
 
  • #26


In my country education is free so I don't regret doing physics degree (especially when it's
not my only degree). But if I had to pay for my education, stick to 1 major and do it for career I would never study physics.

Still I don't get it. Are you guys idiots or sth? You have the best schools out there and still can't figure out that 2+2=4 ? How the hell (when you have internet access) can you not know that you won't get job in physics after physics degree? In my country even kindergarden kid knows that doing physics degree and PhD for career reasons gets you nowhere. So how come you didn't manage to figure this out?
 
  • #27


Rika said:
In my country education is free

I bet it isn't.

For instance, it could be paid for through taxation.
 
  • #28


pi-r8 said:
Programming liquid flow models for the oil/gas industry: Current projections are that we'll warm the Earth up 10 degree C this century, but I'm sure with enough physics nerds working on the problem we'll be able to get up to at least 15 degrees C!

I know people that are working in carbon sequestration and ethanol production.

Programming bomb models for the military: We need a way to kill as many Iranian children as possible for the minimum cost, and someone needs to program all those smart bombs. Better a pure nerd than someone who might have accidentally taken an ethics class.

Ethics becomes complicated once you realize that surrender is a bad policy. Would you rather than Iran have the ability to produce nuclear weapons while the US doesn't? I know lots of people in the military, and soldiers hate war more than most people. I happen to believe that you can't have peace unless you prepare for war. Some people disagree, but there is no need to get insulting about it.

Programming finance models: I guess that's your job now? There's still a few unions that have managed to protect their pension funds, and still a few middle-class families that own a home. I'm sure if enough nerds work on this problem you'll find a way to transfer their all their wealth into the hands of rich bankers.

Some of us were involved in keeping a bad situation from getting a lot worse. Also, I know a lot of people that are working on risk analysis and trying to figure out what happened and how to keep from having it happen again.

I'm trying not to get annoyed here, but some of us are trying to use our skills to make the world a better place and to improve our own lives.

What the heck have you done? What do you want?
 
  • #29


JDGates said:
I mean, points for trying to be funny, or trying to be provocative, or whatever it is you're trying to be, but do you have something to add that will be helpful to the questioners?

Also, if you bite into the apple and learn about the mysteries of the universe, you find out how tiny the planet is, and it's not surprising that you'll find yourself in "world destroying" careers. But what can destroy the world can also save it, and what can save the world can also destroy it.

The statement "there are no jobs for people that study physics" is different from the statement "the jobs in physics tend to have serious ethical consequences that you have to think deeply about." Once you realize that, then those courses in philosophy and literature no longer look quite "useless."

Furthermore, it helps if you think early about who is giving you the money and encouragement to study science, and why they are doing it. US physics is a product of the Cold War, and the reason money goes to physics departments is precisely to build better bombs and toasters.
 
Last edited:
  • #30


twofish-quant said:
Ethics becomes complicated once you realize that surrender is a bad policy. Would you rather than Iran have the ability to produce nuclear weapons while the US doesn't? I know lots of people in the military, and soldiers hate war more than most people. I happen to believe that you can't have peace unless you prepare for war. Some people disagree, but there is no need to get insulting about it.

I think most agree, so that's not the question. It's about whether the deployment is just. I suspect most soldiers would rather lose a just war than win an unjust one.
 
  • #31


JDGates said:
Six programmers
Four engineers of other stripes
Two defense analysts
One consultant
One technician/facilities manager at a national lab
One active duty military

Also a lot of the people that went into programming did so because of the internet boom of the 1990's. When I started university, I'd never heard of the internet, and neither had 99% of the people in the world. I *couldn't* take any classes on web programming, because the web hadn't been invented.

One exercise would be to put yourself in 1987, and try to give career advice for the next thirty years out to 2017. You'll realize what an impossible task this is. Think of every historical event that happened between 1987 and 2012 and all of them radically changed the job outlook.

And, by the way, teaching high school generally requires an additional credential, but not another degree, and for high-demand subjects some states and private schools will let one pick up that creditional after being conditionally hired.

One problem with being a high school teacher is that if you are bitter about science, then it's probably better for everyone involved if you don't take the job. Also, if you are mainly concerned about money (and there is nothing wrong with that), then it's also probably better if you don't take the job.
 
  • #32


Locrian said:
I bet it isn't.

For instance, it could be paid for through taxation.

Ofc it is but you need to pay taxes anyway. Ppl in Us also pay taxes and yet they are in massive debt because they need to pay like 100k $ extra for their higher education.

If you want to do hobby which cost you 100k you must be very rich, otherwise it's stupid to put yourself into massive debt only to do some hobby. Especially when you have internet full of physics knowledge - books, online lectures etc.

Most ppl aren't "life - smart" enough to put their physics degree into good use. They don't have any good plan for their life either. In this situation "trade school degree" such as cs, medicine, law, engineering or being plumber is much better for them because they will end up in mcjob or IT anyway.
 
  • #33


Rika said:
Ofc it is but you need to pay taxes anyway.

Yes, but not the same amount.

So, just to be clear, the education is not free.
 
  • #34


Locrian said:
Yes, but not the same amount.

So, just to be clear, the education is not free.

Ok it's not free but not as expensive as in US. For me it's better to pay taxes rather than being in debt.

Which makes me wonder - if you pay low taxes you should have huge amount of money to save. If that's the case why your parents don't save for your education? 17 years is enough to collect 100k (it's like 500$ monthly).

Sorry for OT.
 
  • #35


By the way, I know of one example where government services were actually free, or near it – in North Korea in the late 90’s a great deal of government services were truly free. A great read with examples is the book “Nothing to Envy”, which interviews North Koreans who fled to South Korea.

One of them is a doctor. For over a year, she was not paid for her services (no food rations, etc.), though she still worked. As with many other N Koreans, she learned to eat various grasses and herbs and to maintain her own clothes and apartment. She was near death when she managed to escape to China. During that time in NK the healthcare she provided was very near free. Not exactly free, I suppose - she was still provided with housing, of sorts - but very close.

So the distinction is important. Finland does not have a free university system. The US public schools are not free. Canada and the UK do not have free healthcare (raise your hand if you’ve actually calculated the per-household cost of England’s health care).

There’s actually an acronym for this. ;)
 
<h2>1. What are the main differences between pursuing a graduate degree and working in industry?</h2><p>Graduate school typically involves conducting research and completing coursework in a specific field, while working in industry involves applying skills and knowledge to real-world problems. Additionally, graduate school may offer more opportunities for networking and academic development, while industry jobs may provide more immediate financial stability and practical experience.</p><h2>2. How do I decide between pursuing a graduate degree or entering the workforce?</h2><p>Consider your long-term career goals and what type of education or experience will best support them. Research potential job opportunities in your field of interest and the qualifications required for those positions. Also, consider factors such as financial stability, personal interests, and work-life balance.</p><h2>3. What are the financial implications of pursuing a graduate degree?</h2><p>Graduate school can be costly, with tuition, fees, and living expenses to consider. However, many programs offer funding opportunities such as scholarships, grants, and teaching or research assistantships. It is important to carefully weigh the potential financial benefits of a graduate degree against the costs.</p><h2>4. How can I ensure financial stability while pursuing a graduate degree?</h2><p>There are several ways to secure financial stability while pursuing a graduate degree. One option is to work part-time or seek out internships or co-op positions related to your field of study. Another option is to apply for scholarships or grants, or to seek funding through research or teaching assistantships. It is also important to create a budget and stick to it, and to consider living arrangements that are affordable.</p><h2>5. Can I transition from graduate school to industry later in my career?</h2><p>Yes, it is possible to transition from graduate school to industry later in your career. Many graduate programs offer opportunities for industry internships or collaborations, which can help you gain experience and make connections in your field. Additionally, the skills and knowledge gained in graduate school can often be applied to various industries, making it easier to transition later on.</p>

1. What are the main differences between pursuing a graduate degree and working in industry?

Graduate school typically involves conducting research and completing coursework in a specific field, while working in industry involves applying skills and knowledge to real-world problems. Additionally, graduate school may offer more opportunities for networking and academic development, while industry jobs may provide more immediate financial stability and practical experience.

2. How do I decide between pursuing a graduate degree or entering the workforce?

Consider your long-term career goals and what type of education or experience will best support them. Research potential job opportunities in your field of interest and the qualifications required for those positions. Also, consider factors such as financial stability, personal interests, and work-life balance.

3. What are the financial implications of pursuing a graduate degree?

Graduate school can be costly, with tuition, fees, and living expenses to consider. However, many programs offer funding opportunities such as scholarships, grants, and teaching or research assistantships. It is important to carefully weigh the potential financial benefits of a graduate degree against the costs.

4. How can I ensure financial stability while pursuing a graduate degree?

There are several ways to secure financial stability while pursuing a graduate degree. One option is to work part-time or seek out internships or co-op positions related to your field of study. Another option is to apply for scholarships or grants, or to seek funding through research or teaching assistantships. It is also important to create a budget and stick to it, and to consider living arrangements that are affordable.

5. Can I transition from graduate school to industry later in my career?

Yes, it is possible to transition from graduate school to industry later in your career. Many graduate programs offer opportunities for industry internships or collaborations, which can help you gain experience and make connections in your field. Additionally, the skills and knowledge gained in graduate school can often be applied to various industries, making it easier to transition later on.

Similar threads

  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
5
Views
758
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • STEM Career Guidance
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • STEM Career Guidance
3
Replies
92
Views
17K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
11
Views
2K
Back
Top