How to change my career to one in physics?

[dinnan]

hi, I've been software engineer for the last 3 years. I graduated in industrial engineering with average scores in 2006. i was always passionate about physics, but it took me a while in knowing what my true calling is (i am 27 now!). but now that I've got myself into a mess, i am eager to change my career for what its worth for - study physics. I know that i have a lot of catching up to do, but i am looking forward to do BS or MS(if eligible) in theoritical physics. please advice me on possible career paths that can end in becoming a physicist. all my education has been in india. i checked out options in colleges in us and with friends of mine at MIT etc, they tell me its pretty competitive to get into good colleges. I am not sure if i'll be able to get into the average/poor ones either and cannot do without a scholarship.
i have at any rate started learning physics on my own, but a formal education will help me greatly in catching up and also gibe me more time for studies. please advice me of any options that you guys know of.

 

[collectedsoul]

hi, I've been software engineer for the last 3 years. I graduated in industrial engineering with average scores in 2006. i was always passionate about physics, but it took me a while in knowing what my true calling is (i am 27 now!). but now that I've got myself into a mess, i am eager to change my career for what its worth for - study physics. I know that i have a lot of catching up to do, but i am looking forward to do BS or MS(if eligible) in theoritical physics. please advice me on possible career paths that can end in becoming a physicist. all my education has been in india. i checked out options in colleges in us and with friends of mine at MIT etc, they tell me its pretty competitive to get into good colleges. I am not sure if i'll be able to get into the average/poor ones either and cannot do without a scholarship.
i have at any rate started learning physics on my own, but a formal education will help me greatly in catching up and also gibe me more time for studies. please advice me of any options that you guys know of.

Hi there,

I'm in a similar situation myself. I have an engineering degree in Comp Sc plus I did management after that. You will need some proof of your ability in physics so you should take the GRE subject. Apart from that you will need a couple of letters of recommendation and would need to tip the scale with a convincing SOP. Good luck!

 

[dinnan]

thanks collectedsoul, i had almost given up hope on any replies since i posted this some time ago and did not get a single response. you have made a very usefull suggession. u said that you were also in a similar situation. does that mean that you are also thinking about moving into physics?

 

[TMFKAN64]

You will need some proof of your ability in physics so you should take the GRE subject. Apart from that you will need a couple of letters of recommendation and would need to tip the scale with a convincing SOP.

Er... doing well on the physics GRE doesn't really let you test out of a 4-year undergrad degree. Without some actual track record in physics classes and research, I can't imagine you'll be admitted to any graduate program.

If you really want a career in physics, you should focus on getting a physics background then... either take individual courses and hope to build up enough background to be admittable to a graduate program, or just bite the bullet and go back for a bachelor's degree.

 

[dinnan]

TMFKAN64 , do universities have such criteria that they admit only people only if their bacheors is in physics? doing a full time degree is no option and "taking up courses" system is not available in our country...its a full degree or nothing. some other alternative?

 

[TMFKAN64]

You can get away with more at lesser-known schools. I know of some schools that offer a terminal MS and will admit people without a BS in physics, conditional on them passing a few upper division undergraduate courses first. However, then you run into the problem that such schools usually have fewer financial resources available.

 

[dinnan]

looks like a no way out situation. let me look into this. thanks for the response.

 

[collectedsoul]

Er... doing well on the physics GRE doesn't really let you test out of a 4-year undergrad degree. Without some actual track record in physics classes and research, I can't imagine you'll be admitted to any graduate program.

If you really want a career in physics, you should focus on getting a physics background then... either take individual courses and hope to build up enough background to be admittable to a graduate program, or just bite the bullet and go back for a bachelor's degree.

Well there are people who don't have a BSc in Physics and have been admitted to PhD programs. In fact there are some on this forum itself who could provide a better answer to the original qs. You're obviously at a disadvantage if you don't have direct background in Physics but Engineering bachelors can get admitted, and for them it is essential to do well on the subject test.

 

[TMFKAN64]

Well there are people who don't have a BSc in Physics and have been admitted to PhD programs. In fact there are some on this forum itself who could provide a better answer to the original qs. You're obviously at a disadvantage if you don't have direct background in Physics but Engineering bachelors can get admitted, and for them it is essential to do well on the subject test.

Why do I suspect that these were mostly electrical engineers or people who had already studied more than the usual amount of physics as an undergrad? (Or took classes to bulk up their physics background after graduation?)

I'd love to be proven wrong and hear about someone who was admitted to a Ph.D. program in physics without taking upper division physics courses, but learned the material through self-study.

I believe it's possible to change your career, and I don't want to discourage the OP there... but while I think self-study is valuable, I don't think it's a direct path to graduate school.

 

[dinnan]

I'd love to be proven wrong and hear about someone who was admitted to a Ph.D. program in physics without taking upper division physics courses, but learned the material through self-study.

I just want do get into a post graduation program. I do not want to get into a Ph.D program right away because I feel P.G will give me enough time to catch up. I know that many universities do not give a terminal MS, but at least an integrated MS-Ph.D program where MS is via coursework would be ideal for me. I don't mind self studies and I am not doing degrees for job. I don't mind joining any university that can give me a scholarship or a bare minimum to live. The problem is that I am unable to find enough time to study with a regular job. Its just that I may get more time if i get into a college and I don't mind cutting expenses or throwing away my job for that. I just need a lot more time for it, and companies don't give you much, that's all... The worst part is time is running and I have only one life!

 

[collectedsoul]

Why do I suspect that these were mostly electrical engineers or people who had already studied more than the usual amount of physics as an undergrad? (Or took classes to bulk up their physics background after graduation?)

I'd love to be proven wrong and hear about someone who was admitted to a Ph.D. program in physics without taking upper division physics courses, but learned the material through self-study.

I believe it's possible to change your career, and I don't want to discourage the OP there... but while I think self-study is valuable, I don't think it's a direct path to graduate school.

I'm in a similar situation as the OP, so I can tell you that it can only help to know the facts about the situation and you're not being discouraging at all. I know that the better schools require you to have taken some quantum mechanics, thermodynamics and statistical mechanics courses, and certain schools admit non-physics majors provisionally and make them undergo some classes in these fields before they can enter the actual masters/doctoral program. So if you learn anything further about the engineering to physics path shift please let us know.

 

[ZapperZ]

hi, I've been software engineer for the last 3 years. I graduated in industrial engineering with average scores in 2006. i was always passionate about physics, but it took me a while in knowing what my true calling is (i am 27 now!). but now that I've got myself into a mess, i am eager to change my career for what its worth for - study physics. I know that i have a lot of catching up to do, but i am looking forward to do BS or MS(if eligible) in theoritical physics. please advice me on possible career paths that can end in becoming a physicist. all my education has been in india. i checked out options in colleges in us and with friends of mine at MIT etc, they tell me its pretty competitive to get into good colleges. I am not sure if i'll be able to get into the average/poor ones either and cannot do without a scholarship.
i have at any rate started learning physics on my own, but a formal education will help me greatly in catching up and also gibe me more time for studies. please advice me of any options that you guys know of.

Against my better judgment, I'm going to add my 2-cent to this, because I've seen such repeated issues being brought up, and I'm just completely puzzled and aghast at such extremes.

You have a background as a software engineer. Typically, I associate an engineer as someone who can make practical and useful things. And then, you want to swing all the way to the other side and do "theoretical physics"? I've seen this quite often on here. You have, for example, someone with an engineering background, such as electrical or mechanical, and want to do physics, but not just any physics, but "theoretical physics" in particular, and sometime, even (ugh!) string theory!

Holy Cow! Is this one of those "theoretical physics or bust!" situation, where either you will do, and ONLY do, theoretical physics, or you won't do physics at all? Is there nothing in between? Is there not a "continuous band of subject matter" between "engineering" and "theoretical physics"? Do you have such a narrow view of what physics is? Does the fact that this year's Nobel Prize in physics actually went to the practical inventions of useful stuff is completely lost? What about doing experimental work? That is physics as well, and in fact, a LARGER part of physics deals with either dealing with running an experiment, or dealing with experimental results!

The other thing I cringe is that in cases like this, no one seems to realize that one can use one's existing background as a strength instead of a liability. I've seen engineers especially not realizing that their background in mechanical design, electronics, etc. can actually be quite useful when they want to go into physics. In experimental work, we ALWAYS need engineers, and a physicist with an engineering know-how is such a valuable resource! I've lost count how many times I've had to do a mechanical design of a vacuum chamber, or make a triax circuit to have a floating anode to collect all the photoelectrons. I would love to have an engineering background considering that almost 50% of my time is what I consider as engineering work! While that engineering degree may not make you a physicist yet, that expertise can be used to make you a better physicist when you get the necessary education. So USE that! But of course, if all you care about is to be an "theoretical physicist", that may not be as useful!

Software engineering? Look at how many areas of physics that actually require someone with an intimate knowledge of software and programming. In accelerator physics alone, there's a huge area of study that does nothing but numerical simulation to design everything from accelerator structures to particle beam dynamics. In fact, I'm currently involved with a detector physics project where we are trying to simulate the electron cascade through a multichannel pore plate to find the gain, all in an effort to build a faster and bigger photodetector. And yes, THAT is a part of physics as well!

Moral of the story: If you choose wisely, your background can be an ASSET, not a liability, when you want to study physics. Whether you make a career out of it is an entirely different matter, and maybe if you don't think of it as a career change, then maybe what I've mentioned here is irrelevant. But for many others who have posted similar questions (and I've seen more than enough), it's about time this particular aspect is brought up.

Zz.

 

[collectedsoul]

Against my better judgment, I'm going to add my 2-cent to this, because I've seen such repeated issues being brought up, and I'm just completely puzzled and aghast at such extremes.

You have a background as a software engineer. Typically, I associate an engineer as someone who can make practical and useful things. And then, you want to swing all the way to the other side and do "theoretical physics"? I've seen this quite often on here. You have, for example, someone with an engineering background, such as electrical or mechanical, and want to do physics, but not just any physics, but "theoretical physics" in particular, and sometime, even (ugh!) string theory!

Holy Cow! Is this one of those "theoretical physics or bust!" situation, where either you will do, and ONLY do, theoretical physics, or you won't do physics at all? Is there nothing in between? Is there not a "continuous band of subject matter" between "engineering" and "theoretical physics"? Do you have such a narrow view of what physics is? Does the fact that this year's Nobel Prize in physics actually went to the practical inventions of useful stuff is completely lost? What about doing experimental work? That is physics as well, and in fact, a LARGER part of physics deals with either dealing with running an experiment, or dealing with experimental results!

The other thing I cringe is that in cases like this, no one seems to realize that one can use one's existing background as a strength instead of a liability. I've seen engineers especially not realizing that their background in mechanical design, electronics, etc. can actually be quite useful when they want to go into physics. In experimental work, we ALWAYS need engineers, and a physicist with an engineering know-how is such a valuable resource! I've lost count how many times I've had to do a mechanical design of a vacuum chamber, or make a triax circuit to have a floating anode to collect all the photoelectrons. I would love to have an engineering background considering that almost 50% of my time is what I consider as engineering work! While that engineering degree may not make you a physicist yet, that expertise can be used to make you a better physicist when you get the necessary education. So USE that! But of course, if all you care about is to be an "theoretical physicist", that may not be as useful!

Software engineering? Look at how many areas of physics that actually require someone with an intimate knowledge of software and programming. In accelerator physics alone, there's a huge area of study that does nothing but numerical simulation to design everything from accelerator structures to particle beam dynamics. In fact, I'm currently involved with a detector physics project where we are trying to simulate the electron cascade through a multichannel pore plate to find the gain, all in an effort to build a faster and bigger photodetector. And yes, THAT is a part of physics as well!

Moral of the story: If you choose wisely, your background can be an ASSET, not a liability, when you want to study physics. Whether you make a career out of it is an entirely different matter, and maybe if you don't think of it as a career change, then maybe what I've mentioned here is irrelevant. But for many others who have posted similar questions (and I've seen more than enough), it's about time this particular aspect is brought up.

Zz.

Appreciate your perspective. Please share more. :)

The thing is, for me at least (and possibly others who want to switch from engineering), I didn't enjoy the engineering discipline I was involved in. In my case Computer engineering. And even if I thought of getting involved in parts of physics work where that came in handy, to get into a Ph.D. program I'd still have to show prowess in all the core physics parts. Will admission committees look at my grades in computer courses I took in college in lieu of a quantum mechanics course? If I was looking for that I'd probably be asked to try for an engineering masters.

The other thing you have to consider is why people want to take up academics after spending time working in some industry. I feel its because these people realize they like to think more than do (something mundane and repetitive). Which makes them want to engage in solving thought problems and therefore dealing with theory, a la theoretical physics.

 

[TMFKAN64]

If I can attempt to paraphrase ZapperZ's post, he was suggesting that instead of jumping straight into liontaming from chartered accountancy, perhaps we should make the transition through easy stages, such as insurance or banking instead?

In case it wasn't clear from previous posts in this thread, I am also a software engineer with physics aspirations. In my case, I'm a little further along (just received my MS in physics), but rather than theoretical physics, my goal is to get into a lab somewhere and try to apply what I know, both about physics and computers. Not that I don't feel the lure of theoretical physics... but it's a very difficult field, with very few realistic job prospects for people who aren't insanely talented.

 

[twofish-quant]

The other thing you have to consider is why people want to take up academics after spending time working in some industry. I feel its because these people realize they like to think more than do (something mundane and repetitive). Which makes them want to engage in solving thought problems and therefore dealing with theory, a la theoretical physics.

The problem here is that people outside of physics tend to have some wildly incorrect ideas about what theoretical physicists do. If you look at what a day in the life of a theoretical physicist looks like, most of it involves staring at a computer screen trying to figure out what is causing this #$@$#@ bug in the computer code. Other parts involve writing grant proposals, grading papers, editing papers, etc. etc. There is creative thought involved, but there is also a huge amount that is boring and repetitive.

The other issue is that most people with physics Ph.D.'s *don't* end up as theorists in academia. Most of the people I know with physics Ph.D.'s ended up as computer programmers.

 

[twofish-quant]

it's a very difficult field, with very few realistic job prospects for people who aren't insanely talented.

There are also few realistic job prospects for people who *are* insanely talented. A lot of whether you get a job in physics depends on funding, political connections, the topic of your dissertation, and about a dozen other things that people normally don't think of as "talent."

 

[collectedsoul]

Well, as far as job concerns go I know I won't make as much money as I was making. And if it comes down to desperate situations of needing a job I have the qualifications and the work experience to get a decent paying job (as do most others who quit to pursue physics).

And if I have to draw an analogy like the one TMFKAN64 did I'd probably say its the lion taming I've quit to get into accounting. Besides, that idea of step by step transformation is probably better suited to comedy skits than real life.

I'm not saying I'm committed to doing theoretical physics or nothing else, I just want to be immersed in a physical sciences learning environment.

 

[twofish-quant]

Well, as far as job concerns go I know I won't make as much money as I was making. And if it comes down to desperate situations of needing a job I have the qualifications and the work experience to get a decent paying job (as do most others who quit to pursue physics).

My main concern here is that I'm not quite sure what you are looking for, and since I'm not sure that the jobs that really do exist in physics and related fields are anything like what you are looking for.

Most astrophysics nowadays is very heavily computational, and a lot of physics is applied computer science. The good/bad thing about dealing with nasty computer code is that you end up with the same sorts of issues (both political and technical) you do in standard computer programming jobs.

Also, if you improve your math/physics skills so that you can do differential equations, this greatly *increases* your employability and expected salary. There are a lot of positions open in investment banks for this sort of thing. I do know people that have gotten really good at C++, gotten jobs in investment banks, and then moved into something more heavily mathematical.

But I think the bad news is that you'll find that jobs in physics are like jobs anywhere else. You work with a group of people under a supervisor, trying to ship some product which is necessary in order to get the funds to pay for your salary, and a lot of the "daily grind" involves similar political and technical things that you find in non-physics jobs.

I'm not saying I'm committed to doing theoretical physics or nothing else, I just want to be immersed in a physical sciences learning environment.

The easiest way of doing this is to get a job at a national lab, university, or large "learning corporation" (Google or IBM for example) as a system administrator or a software developer.

 

[twofish-quant]

The other thing that is useful is to think about learning math as something akin to learning a new language. If you can get yourself to the point where you can read/write partial differential equations and linear algebra, then that will qualify you for about 90% of the jobs in physics. If you can get to that level, then reading an academic paper or textbook in most physics related fields should be more or less like reading a newspaper in a foreign country.

 

[collectedsoul]

But I think the bad news is that you'll find that jobs in physics are like jobs anywhere else. You work with a group of people under a supervisor, trying to ship some product which is necessary in order to get the funds to pay for your salary, and a lot of the "daily grind" involves similar political and technical things that you find in non-physics jobs.



The easiest way of doing this is to get a job at a national lab, university, or large "learning corporation" (Google or IBM for example) as a system administrator or a software developer.

But that's a technical learning environment.

The daily grind and delivery of content is a format that exists in every case where remuneration is received. Its the content I'm interested in. If the content is engaging and satisfying then politics etc become non-issues really, or at worst small annoyances.

What I am looking for in the long term is to get into research in an area I like and/or teaching. But for that I first need to convince an admission committee to let me into a Ph.D. program.

 

[ZapperZ]

But that's a technical learning environment.

The daily grind and delivery of content is a format that exists in every case where remuneration is received. Its the content I'm interested in. If the content is engaging and satisfying then politics etc become non-issues really, or at worst small annoyances.

What I am looking for in the long term is to get into research in an area I like and/or teaching. But for that I first need to convince an admission committee to let me into a Ph.D. program.

As I've said already in another thread, due to the wide range of level of physics programs here in the US, getting an admission in a Ph.D program isn't that difficult, unless you have a really bad GPA. It is whether you can actually survive throughout it without having your investment in time (and money) be a waste.

Read this thread:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=64966

Zz.

 

[collectedsoul]

As I've said already in another thread, due to the wide range of level of physics programs here in the US, getting an admission in a Ph.D program isn't that difficult, unless you have a really bad GPA. It is whether you can actually survive throughout it without having your investment in time (and money) be a waste.

Read this thread:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=64966

Zz.

Thanks for that. You mentioned a qualifying exam that colleges have, is this the exam post 1 year into the Ph.D?

 

[TMFKAN64]

Yes, that's the one. (Apologies for putting words into someone else's mouth, but...)

 

[ZapperZ]

Thanks for that. You mentioned a qualifying exam that colleges have, is this the exam post 1 year into the Ph.D?

Read Chapter IX of my "http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=df5w5j9q_5gj6wmt" ".

Zz.

 

[dinnan]

Apologize for the late reply. I must thank you all for the abundant response that is received.

And then, you want to swing all the way to the other side and do "theoretical physics"?
Is there nothing in between? Is there not a "continuous band of subject matter" between "engineering" and "theoretical physics"? Do you have such a narrow view of what physics is? Does the fact that this year's Nobel Prize in physics actually went to the practical inventions of useful stuff is completely lost? What about doing experimental work? That is physics as well, and in fact, a LARGER part of physics deals with either dealing with running an experiment, or dealing with experimental results!
Zz.

I understand here that the term physics can include a world of things as it can be called the study of matter (which includes most of the stuffs) and energy (most other stuffs). In simple terms I can say that I have an interest in learning about the universe, about its beginning, possibly before big bang and where its is proceeding to …(I think they call it the singularity where all conventional rules of science break down) which for me is a search of meaning and purpose of life. I feel that experimentation requires a skill that I lack, but I can imagine and I like maths. I feel I will need to be familiar with certain mathematical tools so that I may better understand existing models of universe and proceed from there and make my humble contributions to better understand these things. I appreciate the Nobel Prize in practical inventions, but they might not help me find answers/understand solutions for some bugging questions I have ever since I can remember. I hope it makes sence.

Software engineering? Look at how many areas of physics that actually require someone with an intimate knowledge of software and programming. In accelerator physics alone, there's a huge area of study that does nothing but numerical simulation to design everything from accelerator structures to particle beam dynamics. In fact, I'm currently involved with a detector physics project where we are trying to simulate the electron cascade through a multichannel pore plate to find the gain, all in an effort to build a faster and bigger photodetector. And yes, THAT is a part of physics as well!
Zz.

I was not aware of this, but if it helps taking me to what I want, I will be more than happy to have learned these skills (software). I don’t consider software skills a liability, but I don’t think it would be difficult to master it even at 90. I don’t know if the same can be achieved in theoritical physics which requires some mathematical abilities and memory which is inversely proposional to age from here. It was directly proposional till some time back.

But for many others who have posted similar questions (and I've seen more than enough), it's about time this particular aspect is brought up.
Zz.

I am sorry to have annoyed you, but glad that I got ur response which was informative.

The problem here is that people outside of physics tend to have some wildly incorrect ideas about what theoretical physicists do. If you look at what a day in the life of a theoretical physicist looks like, most of it involves staring at a computer screen trying to figure out what is causing this #$@$#@ bug in the computer code.

I will not have to spend more time on this as I have enough training staring. Also I don’t mind staring on code when the bug is a relevant enough. Here in my job fixing a bug might change the label in a certain application that the user has may never have noticed.


I will ask my question in a better manner – How to go abt doing an MS in Astrophysics physics in a good university with the backgroung I have. I don’t want to gradually swich over as that will never happen. I joined this job thinking just that. Days and nights will pass in mundane routine and you will never switch -except from life to death and the pity is that I've got just one life!

 

[twofish-quant]

In simple terms I can say that I have an interest in learning about the universe, about its beginning, possibly before big bang and where its is proceeding to …(I think they call it the singularity where all conventional rules of science break down) which for me is a search of meaning and purpose of life.

This gets into philosophy, but personally I think trying to find the meaning of life in the big bang is a waste of time and effort. It could be decades before people figure out how the big bang work. It's possible that what happened before the big bang is unknowable. While people are trying to figure that out, I have to make decisions on what I do when I get up in the morning.

I think every undergraduate has a phase in graduate school in which he thinks he can discover the deep secrets of the universe. One thing that you do learn in graduate school is how hard it is to find truth about *anything*. If you turn on a faucet, there are some things about the flow of water that are extremely poorly understood.

I will ask my question in a better manner – How to go abt doing an MS in Astrophysics physics in a good university with the backgroung I have. I don’t want to gradually swich over as that will never happen. I joined this job thinking just that. Days and nights will pass in mundane routine and you will never switch -except from life to death and the pity is that I've got just one life!

As other people have pointed out, it is not hard to get into a physics Ph.D. program. Departments need warm bodies to grade papers and debug code. So it's not hard to get in. The thing that you need to be prepared for is how much unglamorous grunt work, real research includes. There are deadlines, schedules, office politics, things that go magically wrong, and things that go magically right. My worry is you'll burn out once you find how much being a research assistant is like your life as a software engineer only with less money.

And don't discount how annoying lack of money can be. When you have a cracked radiator head in a used car that you don't have the money to fix and sick kids with lousy health insurance, it's amazing how unimportant the big bang suddenly turns out to be.

Something that you might want to do is to get an job as an system administrator or application programmer at a university or national lab. You'll see what research is like first hand, and if you want to jump in, then you can get good recommendation letters or possible tuition discounts.

 

[dinnan]

This gets into philosophy, but personally I think trying to find the meaning of life in the big bang is a waste of time and effort. It could be decades before people figure out how the big bang work. It's possible that what happened before the big bang is unknowable. While people are trying to figure that out, I have to make decisions on what I do when I get up in the morning.

I don't imagine myself on a podium receiving the greatest honour for revealing the deepest mystery of universe. It the fun in trying to find out and sustained imagination that goes with it which attracts me. Courses will help giving time for me to work on the necessary tools for objective thinking. I really don't mind if I don't find out anything, but atleast I can try..

I think every undergraduate has a phase in graduate school in which he thinks he can discover the deep secrets of the universe. One thing that you do learn in graduate school is how hard it is to find truth about *anything*.

I too went through that phase and realize how hard it can be. Hence my first position.

If you turn on a faucet, there are some things about the flow of water that are extremely poorly understood.

I aknowledge the difficulty in these things, and consider both issues pressing and at par but its just a question of what interests me.

As other people have pointed out, it is not hard to get into a physics Ph.D. program. Departments need warm bodies to grade papers and debug code. So it's not hard to get in. The thing that you need to be prepared for is how much unglamorous grunt work, real research includes. There are deadlines, schedules, office politics, things that go magically wrong, and things that go magically right. My worry is you'll burn out once you find how much being a research assistant is like your life as a software engineer only with less money.

This is my worst fear, but atleast I hope even so I would be putting in a lot more time into something I am passionate about than what I am able to put in currently. I had worked as a research assistant for 6 months and I was not able to find any of the problems there that you mentioned above, which means there can be exceptions. The only problem was that I worked in fluid dynamics (related to the flow of water) and it did not interest me much.It was a completely experimental stidy.

And don't discount how annoying lack of money can be. When you have a cracked radiator head in a used car that you don't have the money to fix and sick kids with lousy health insurance, it's amazing how unimportant the big bang suddenly turns out to be.

I am no better off now, so I aint got much to loose. Software profession after recession is one of those jobs which has the attributes you mentioned above. Atleast in india.

Something that you might want to do is to get an job as an system administrator or application programmer at a university or national lab. You'll see what research is like first hand, and if you want to jump in, then you can get good recommendation letters or possible tuition discounts.

This is a good idea, but I already have seen it like I mentioned above. But I don't mind traveling that route either. I have already applied to a couple of such jobs.

 

[Amar.alchemy]

Hi dinnan,

It looks like we both are traveling in the same boat...
After working as a software engineer for almost 2 yrs, i resigned the job and now I'm preparing for some graduate exams like GATE and JEST.

From my experience i can say that its better to study basic concepts of physics while doing ur job for 6 months. Even after 6 months if u feel that you want to do higher study in physics then you can take decision about ur future. Since we come from the Engineering background, we find advanced physics little difficult.So be prepared for it. Anyhow you can use online video lectures. My suggestion is before resigning your job please try to read some basic and advanced concepts of physics so that u can get feel for it.

BTW, in my case I'm loving it .

"If I had to live my life again, I'd make the same mistakes, only sooner."

 

[renz]

In simple terms I can say that I have an interest in learning about the universe, about its beginning, possibly before big bang and where its is proceeding to …(I think they call it the singularity where all conventional rules of science break down) which for me is a search of meaning and purpose of life.

Can't help myself. before big bang?
and what does that have to do with the purpose and meaning of life? Those does not sound much like scientific terms.

If I understand your posts correctly, I think you want to study astronomy?
Do you just want to learn what kind of information we have so far, or do you also want to make a contribution to the field by doing research?

If you are sure you want to go into this field, here are some of my suggestions.
You said you need some kind of financial support. I think that would be more likely in a PhD program. (Do they have full support for people in master degree?)
In order to get into a PhD program, you probably need some background in the field to show admission committee that you have what it takes to be successful in the program.

Can't you do part-time studying? If not in your country, is it possible to get a job somewhere else where you would be able to take physics classes?

Another way is to get a job related to astronomy/astrophysics/physics. Your background should be useful for this. Maybe it's possible to join a research group that needs a programmer. Then take some time to study the basics.
Then you can take a PGRE, get letter of recommendation, and apply to programs with your research experience.

 

[dinnan]

Hi dinnan,

It looks like we both are traveling in the same boat...
After working as a software engineer for almost 2 yrs, i resigned the job and now I'm preparing for some graduate exams like GATE and JEST.

From my experience i can say that its better to study basic concepts of physics while doing ur job for 6 months. Even after 6 months if u feel that you want to do higher study in physics then you can take decision about ur future. Since we come from the Engineering background, we find advanced physics little difficult.So be prepared for it. Anyhow you can use online video lectures. My suggestion is before resigning your job please try to read some basic and advanced concepts of physics so that u can get feel for it.

BTW, in my case I'm loving it .

"If I had to live my life again, I'd make the same mistakes, only sooner."

Thanks for being ab;e to understand my situation. I too have some doubts on whether I might actually get along studying it. I have started reading the feynman lectures to understand some basic things. Suggest some other book that you find is a good start.
Another problem is that of finding time after work. I am appearing 4 GATE this time too in physics. Can engineers write it and get admission into colleges with stipend? They had mentioned MS in physics as qualification 4 that.

 

[dinnan]

If you are sure you want to go into this field, here are some of my suggestions.
You said you need some kind of financial support. I think that would be more likely in a PhD program. (Do they have full support for people in master degree?)
In order to get into a PhD program, you probably need some background in the field to show admission committee that you have what it takes to be successful in the program.

Understand that. V have some support system here in MS, but in country of billion people and limited resources, u have to be really good to get that. probability in my case seems less especially when profs look at ur background b4 admission.

Can't you do part-time studying? If not in your country, is it possible to get a job somewhere else where you would be able to take physics classes?

Part times suck in here and get a job and go to classes is difficult as switching into a job near to phy classes and being able to get out of it in time has low probability here in the IT industry. It can be done though, but degrees are valued here and such classes won't be usefull in the long run.

Another way is to get a job related to astronomy/astrophysics/physics. Your background should be useful for this. Maybe it's possible to join a research group that needs a programmer. Then take some time to study the basics.
Then you can take a PGRE, get letter of recommendation, and apply to programs with your research experience.

I will have to look into this. I have noted it down. Its a very good suggestion.

 

[twofish-quant]

Also you really do need a very firm grasp of the fundamentals. Start with the lectures for classical mechanics and E&M.

http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Physics/index.htm

 

[sganesh88]

@dinnan
I am also in a similar situation. I have just completed my BE in Automobile Engineering. But i would like to get into err.. zapperz don't read this.. theoretical physics.
@ZapperZ
What i think is that most of the Indians finish their graduation without much input and effort. We mug up the notes just before the exams and the system in almost all the colleges don't check our understanding of the subject as they check our transient-memory power.. One guy from the final year (4th year) in our Automobile Dept remarked this while i was elucidating my doubt about the forces involved during steering.
"Why are you confused? Just turn the steering wheel. The car will take a turn".
I asked "What if the car is cruising through space".
"So what? Even then it will take a turn".
"Yeah right!"
My college is allegedly a premiere institution in India. See the understanding of a final year student. This guy actually has a CGPA of 9 out of 10.
Hence, just like we complete our schooling we complete our graduation. All that matters is a decent aggregate. So after four years we don't really get a feel of having learned something from the course.
When something like Physics comes up catching us off-guard; when we feel that life has no other meaning other than to study it wholeheartedly, we are left with no other option but to abandon our previous pseudo-course and go ahead with learning Physics. Society pressures and poor economic background will resist this decision. Depending on the extent of your love for the subject, one party will win.

@Dinnan (again)
What have you decided? I have applied for GATE Physics. Going to apply for JAM too.
Contact me thro my email- sganesh88@gmail.com
Maybe we need to form a community for people like us. :D

 

[dinnan]

@dinnan
I am also in a similar situation. I have just completed my BE in Automobile Engineering. But i would like to get into err.. zapperz don't read this.. theoretical physics.
@ZapperZ
What i think is that most of the Indians finish their graduation without much input and effort. We mug up the notes just before the exams and the system in almost all the colleges don't check our understanding of the subject as they check our transient-memory power.. One guy from the final year (4th year) in our Automobile Dept remarked this while i was elucidating my doubt about the forces involved during steering.
"Why are you confused? Just turn the steering wheel. The car will take a turn".
I asked "What if the car is cruising through space".
"So what? Even then it will take a turn".
"Yeah right!"
My college is allegedly a premiere institution in India. See the understanding of a final year student. This guy actually has a CGPA of 9 out of 10.
Hence, just like we complete our schooling we complete our graduation. All that matters is a decent aggregate. So after four years we don't really get a feel of having learned something from the course.
When something like Physics comes up catching us off-guard; when we feel that life has no other meaning other than to study it wholeheartedly, we are left with no other option but to abandon our previous pseudo-course and go ahead with learning Physics. Society pressures and poor economic background will resist this decision. Depending on the extent of your love for the subject, one party will win.

@Dinnan (again)
What have you decided? I have applied for GATE Physics. Going to apply for JAM too.
Contact me thro my email- sganesh88@gmail.com
Maybe we need to form a community for people like us. :D

I totally agree. BTW I also studied in one of those "premiere institutes". I think we should all be in contact. I think not only are we all traveling in the same boat, the boat is large and crowded. Surely its not an individual problem.

@ twofish-quant

I will go through the MIT open course ware. Thanks for your advice. I greatly appreciate.

 

[sganesh88]

Yes.. Is there any academic guidance site especially for Indian students?