Is it worth going for a BS and a PhD in physics?

[Kenny Bala]

Hey guys, I'm a gr. 11 student, and like all others my age, I'm now seriously considering what I want to do for the rest of my life. I keep wanting to do a physics BS, and the a physics Master's or PhD, along with minors in conmpsci, but literally all I hear is negative things about choosing this direction(ie I won't be able to ever get a research job, no professorship jobs, no jobs in industry, with only oppurtunities being low paying postdoc positions). I really want to know, is it worth going for a physics PhD, and will it give me a high chance of employment? What topic would I want to do to increase my chances. I should also point out that the uni near me has both an engineering physics and physics/mathematics dual degree, could that also help me out?

Thanks

 

[Student100]

If you want to listen to negativity and job fear mongering by people who 9 times out of ten aren't even physicists than be my guest. Why are you worried about employment at this stage in life, I understand our cultural influences place gainful employment by some employer above all else in life, but it's quite retarded.

If you want to study physics, and would regret not doing it for possibly the rest of your life~do it. There are others here who can point you to areas that need researchers at this time, but still, considering if you actually follow through you have elevenish years before finishing your phd, it's likely things will change by then.

 

[WannabeNewton]

Hi Kenny. I asked the same question a couple of months back in the following thread: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=693016

I hope the responses there are of use! Good luck.

 

[Student100]

Hi Kenny. I asked the same question a couple of months back in the following thread: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=693016

I hope the responses there are of use! Good luck.

After reading your thread WBN I can't believe you almost considered getting out of physics.

 

[heatengine516]

That thread needs to be stickied.

 

[Astronuc]

Hey guys, I'm a gr. 11 student, and like all others my age, I'm now seriously considering what I want to do for the rest of my life. I keep wanting to do a physics BS, and the a physics Master's or PhD, along with minors in conmpsci, but literally all I hear is negative things about choosing this direction(ie I won't be able to ever get a research job, no professorship jobs, no jobs in industry, with only oppurtunities being low paying postdoc positions). I really want to know, is it worth going for a physics PhD, and will it give me a high chance of employment? What topic would I want to do to increase my chances. I should also point out that the uni near me has both an engineering physics and physics/mathematics dual degree, could that also help me out?

Thanks

At least an MS in physics, if not a PhD.

Also, one wish to look at engineering, applied physics and/or engineering physics courses.

I don't understand the negativity toward physics. It's about problem solving.

If one is interested in computational physics or computational science, then physics and math is the way to go.

I started in physics (astro and nuclear), but migrated in nuclear engineering. If I knew then what I learned later or know now, I would have double majored in physics and nuclear engineering as an undergrad. As it is, it's worked out well for me.

 

[Kenny Bala]

At least an MS in physics, if not a PhD.

Also, one wish to look at engineering, applied physics and/or engineering physics courses.

I don't understand the negativity toward physics. It's about problem solving.

If one is interested in computational physics or computational science, then physics and math is the way to go.

I started in physics (astro and nuclear), but migrated in nuclear engineering. If I knew then what I learned later or know now, I would have double majored in physics and nuclear engineering as an undergrad. As it is, it's worked out well for me.

So do you think an engineering physics degree would be best? Right now I'm considering CarletonU, where engineering physics is offered, but I am also considering just going to UWaterloo or Carleton for a physics undergrad.

 

[ModusPwnd]

If you want to listen to negativity and job fear mongering by people who 9 times out of ten aren't even physicists than be my guest.

Its far more than 9 out of 10. Thats the point...

I'm not a physicist. I have a BS and an MS in physics. They have proved completely useless after years of job searching. I am now back in school for engineering.

If you want to be a physicist and think you can get the PhD and land the research positions, then go for it. Otherwise, there are better majors out there if you want more career prospects in a technical field.

I think that 9 times out of 10 the people championing physics degrees are tenure track PhDs or people/students with no physics degree.

 

[Choppy]

I think the important thing to remember is that if you decide to pursue physics, generally, what you are doing is giving yourself an education in the subject. That education is not job-specific training and doesn't directly translate into a profession in most cases.

The data on employment of physics majors seems to suggest that in aggregate, they do okay in the job market - for example, commanding salaries that are roughly middle of the pack amongst engineers (although with a wider standard deviation), but better that many other majors. I think the biggest complaint isn't so much that they don't end up with a decent career - instead, it's that they spend a lot of time in the field as a student and then end up doing something different with the rest of their lives.

 

[Student100]

Its far more than 9 out of 10. Thats the point...

I'm not a physicist. I have a BS and an MS in physics. They have proved completely useless after years of job searching. I am now back in school for engineering.

If you want to be a physicist and think you can get the PhD and land the research positions, then go for it. Otherwise, there are better majors out there if you want more career prospects in a technical field.

I think that 9 times out of 10 the people championing physics degrees are tenure track PhDs or people/students with no physics degree.

Obviously physics is useless to study then, we should all covert to engineering.

 

[ModusPwnd]

Unless you want to be a physicist and think you can get the PhD and land the research positions, of course. Do you have any useful addition to make, or just sarcastic dismissal? That's what the students and tenure track PhDs usually do to advise about physics degrees they don't want said - they dismiss it out of hand.

Please, share you success story with us. I certainly don't want my experience and the experience of my classmates to be the only example given.

 

[Student100]

Unless you want to be a physicist and think you can get the PhD and land the research positions, of course. Do you have any useful addition to make, or just sarcastic dismissal? That's what the students and tenure track PhD's usually do to advise about physics degrees they don't want said - they dismiss it off hand.

I've already made my submission to this discussion. If you really want to study physics study physics. I just responded to your jab/ anecdotal/ other comment, which was off no value.

You shouldn't study something and commit a serious part of your. life to a subject matter on the basis of who's going to hire you afterwards.

 

[ModusPwnd]

You shouldn't study something and commit a serious part of your. life to a subject matter on the basis of who's going to hire you afterwards.

That's the worst advise I have seen here in a while. You absolutely should be considering job and career prospects from your education. Only the very wealthy can afford to do otherwise. Regardless of what you or I think, the original poster explicitly stated that job prospects are important. Its rude of you to tell him that they shouldn't be.

You claim that my advise is worthless because its an anecdote, yet you refuse to offer up your own success story to balance the advise. This happens often and is why I suspect the champions of physics degrees are often not even physics graduates. Those that are have made it all the way and actually are professional physicists, a large minority like your guess at the proportions implies.

 

[Student100]

Of course, because we can all look into the OPs future and judge the job markets in 5 to 11 years.
Man, yeah, a 9 to 5 is the only reason to go to college. Let's shut down all the philosophy or history majors now. It isn't getting people ready for gainful employment. The op is in high school. None of what we tell them will be in vouge necessarily when they complete their degree .in whatever. So the question itself its a silly one.

I'm not basing my advice on the number of physics majors who make it, I'm basing my advice on, what college its for, to study a subject indepth.

 

[MathWarrior]

I think the point to be made here is rather simple: it entirely depends upon your personal aspirations and goals and no one here in this thread can effectively answer which will work for you.

If you feel you must study physics, for whatever reason then do study physics, it ultimately can enrich your life if this is the case. However, be aware that you may have a hard time finding a job, but this is true for almost any major. One thing to consider though is physics is very exclusive. You really need to be one of the best and flexible to find a job doing exactly what you want in physics.

This however should not be a deterrent from studying physics, if you feel you are cut out for it.

On the other hand a degree in something more geared towards a job, such as a engineering, typically prepares you for a career, it is more likely you will find a job if its something your being trained to do. Where as physics prepares you to master a subject.

US Department of labor statistics says expected new jobs from 2010-20 to be only at 2,800 for physics and astronomy jobs. On the other hand, new electrical engineering jobs are expected to be approximately 17,600. (http://www.bls.gov/ooh/)

This is just one subset of engineering, and indeed one area where physics can be used so this is not necessarily an accurate assumption of what you would find but it provides some common ground to compare. You may in fact find physicists working as engineers and vice versa.

However, it is logical to assume someone who studied electrical engineering specifically is more likely to get a job in electrical engineering over someone who studied physics and say got a minor in electrical engineering.

 

[Student100]

Okay, so I'm somewhat sober now, I'll try to type my thoughts in a more lucid manner.

So here is how I see it:

You get your PhD in physics:
1. You land your dream job doing exactly what you want to do.
2. You land a job in physics doing some remotely like your interests.
3 you land a job in physics doing something completely different to your interest.
4. You land a technical or science job related to applied physics.
5. You land a technical job not all that scientific oriented.
6. You land a job outside technical or scientific work.
7 you become homeless

These are all possibilities, we can't say which one the OP will end up in by studying physics. It's impossible.

Now if we steer the OP away from physics to engineering, 1 through 3 will no longer be possibilities. They will never do physics proper, and basically all we've accomplished is removing one more potentially qualified physics major from the pool. 4 becomes more likely, but why trade your desire and your shot at the roulette wheel to basically do something you see as a fall back. Physics PhD will open up the door to do physics, an engineering major won't. A physics PhD will keep the door cracked to do something related to engineering while a engineering degree will open it. Both degrees keep the door open to do something completely non technical, and you can always become self employed.

Not trying to do what you want to do is giving up. Not studying what you want to study is giving up. I'll never agree with someone who sloughs through something they don't really care for in life simply because it will lead to making money. Those types of people take up jobs in hot markets like engineering, lawyering, and the medical profession but have no core interest for the subject, and often averagely or underperform their duties.

 

[Student100]

So do you think an engineering physics degree would be best? Right now I'm considering CarletonU, where engineering physics is offered, but I am also considering just going to UWaterloo or Carleton for a physics undergrad.

Do you really want to do physics, I can't answer that, but you can. If yes, do it. Have you read the sticky "so you want to be physicist" in this sub forum?

 

[R136a1]

Let's shut down all the philosophy or history majors now. It isn't getting people ready for gainful employment.

Student100, nobody is actually saying that. You need to stop taking things so personal.
No matter what the job markets are going to be, stuff like engineering will always be more marketable than pure physics or pure math majors. That's just a fact. Does that mean that we should discourage people from studying physics or math? No, of course not. But we need to talk realistically. The chance that somebody will actually land a professorship in physics or math is extremely small. A good estimate is that about 1 in 10 PhD-holders actually succeeds in academia. No matter what the job market is going to be, this number is highly unlikely to change!

If the OP says that he finds getting a well-paying job important, then we need to be honest and say that engineering is much better in job prospects.

I get that you would rather do something you love than to worry about the job prospects. I'm the same as you. But other people do not think that way. It's not right to judge people for thinking that living a bit comfortable with money is more important than finding out the mysteries of the universe. It's their life, so it's their choice to make.

 

[Student100]

I still disagree R136a1, it is basically what is being said, to quote ModusPwned "I have a bs and an ms in physics. They have proved completely useless after years of job searching."

You could say that for any of the other majors that aren't as employable as engineering. The OP is reflecting on his overheard conversations of no jobs existing for physics-which is incorrect. He's worried about being highly employable after a PhD in physics, which is silly. We can't answer that, but I doubt you'll end up homeless studying physics. He didn't suggest he's worried about living comfortably or making lots of money after a BS. He's specifically asking about job outlooks 11 years from now when he completes his phd.

 

[WannabeNewton]

After reading your thread WBN I can't believe you almost considered getting out of physics.

Well I got to put food on my table you know what I'm saying

 

[Student100]

Well I got to put food on my table you know what I'm saying

You could always open a restaurant, you'll never go hungry.

I've read a lot of your posts, if you don't make in physics then there is no hope at all for me.

 

[R136a1]

You could say that for any of the other majors that aren't as employable as engineering.

Sure, and I would say that. But this is a site for physicists, so you don't get much history majors asking for advice here.

The OP is reflecting on his overheard conversations of no jobs existing for physics-which is incorrect. He's worried about being highly employable after a PhD in physics, which is silly. We can't answer that, but I doubt you'll end up homeless studying physics

You're under the assumption he'll get a PhD. That is no light assumption to make, because many students with a BS in physics don't get a PhD. So you shouldn't just brush aside the situation that you end up with only a BS in physics. And a BS in physics is far from as employable as a PhD in physics!
The same is true for engineering, except for the fact that a BS in engineering is faaaar more employable.

 

[Student100]

True R126a1, but i can only assume the OP is as committed as he is when he talks about getting a PhD in his post. A million and one things could happen between now and then, but that's true by simply being alive, regardless of your studies.

 

[ZapperZ]

We get this type of question very often here. So let's get a few things straight and very clear:

1. There is an extremely low probability for someone to work in physics or as a physicist with just a B.Sc degree. Even with a M.Sc degree, it will be a struggle especially considering that there are people with PhDs seeking the same type of jobs. Now, it doesn't mean that you are not employable in other areas. But within physics itself, it will be difficult, especially if you want to do research work, without a PhD.

2. The degree of employability depends strongly on the area of physics you specialize in, and what skills and knowledge that you posses. I've posted, in another thread, an area of physics (accelerator physics) in which a lot of graduates have a high probability of getting employed simply because of the nature of the field and what these graduates can do. Read it! And yet, at the same time, we have high-energy physics theorists who can't find jobs, even outside of their fields. So asking about the possibility of employment with a physics PhD is as meaningful as asking for the possibility of employment with A PhD degree! Things can vary wildly from one field/expertise to another!

3. Figure out what you like. Then figure out the employment picture in that area that you like. Now weigh the two against each other. What is your comfort level in taking such a risk? Some people have a higher tolerance for taking such a risk than others. We all have different backgrounds, different aspirations, different economic origins, etc. Each one of these factors can dictate how much we are willing to go to pursue what we want to do, and when it isn't worth the risk. No one else but you can decide that. However, you need to know both sides of the equation, which is what you wish to pursue, and what are the odds of working in that field. Only with clear and sufficient information should you make such a decision. And it may even change over time as you not only learn more about it, but also as times and circumstances change.

If anyone has looked at the series of advices that I've dished out on here, you would have seen me give encouragement to someone who seemedto be skeptical of pursuing a career in physics, and you would have also seen me try to inject some reality of employment (or lack of it) to someone who was dead-set on pursing a specific field in physics. I mean, look at this thread, for instance:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=724673

And then look at the poll that I did on here:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=667559

So on one hand, I'm all for students getting into physics, and on the other hand, I'm painting these vivid, sometime discouraging, picture of the struggle for employment in the every same field. Am I being inconsistent and contradictory? Nope!

And this is because of what I said earlier. You need to know BOTH factors before you decide. If you know fully well that the chances of getting employment in string theory and getting a faculty position is very low, and you still decide to pursue majoring in string theory, then all power to you! You are choosing something with your eyes wide open. And if you can't find a job in that field, there shouldn't be any sense of resentment or bitterness, because you knew fully-well of your chances and the risk that you are taking.

What we can do here is simply to give you the avenue to do what you wish to pursue, and also provide you with the information about the nature of the employment pattern in such-and-such an area. You'll hear many anecdotal accounts, often conflicting ones, that you will have to evaluate for yourself. You will also need to do your own research, look at many statistics, and figure out on your own at what the scenario is. The more you know, the better informed you are at making your decision. This point should not be a surprise.

Zz.

 

[Sentin3l]

OP, while having a PhD in physics won't hurt you in the job search and traditionally, the unemployment rate is low for Physics PhD's. http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201208/phdjobs.cfm this report agrees, and other sources put the unemployment rate at about 2.7% or so. However getting an academic job is extremely difficult, most of physics PhD's end up working in industry either by choice or by the fact no institution is hiring.

If you want to do physics, then go for it. But keep in mind that you may not get what you want.

 

[Kenny Bala]

We get this type of question very often here. So let's get a few things straight and very clear:

1. There is an extremely low probability for someone to work in physics or as a physicist with just a B.Sc degree. Even with a M.Sc degree, it will be a struggle especially considering that there are people with PhDs seeking the same type of jobs. Now, it doesn't mean that you are not employable in other areas. But within physics itself, it will be difficult, especially if you want to do research work, without a PhD.

2. The degree of employability depends strongly on the area of physics you specialize in, and what skills and knowledge that you posses. I've posted, in another thread, an area of physics (accelerator physics) in which a lot of graduates have a high probability of getting employed simply because of the nature of the field and what these graduates can do. Read it! And yet, at the same time, we have high-energy physics theorists who can't find jobs, even outside of their fields. So asking about the possibility of employment with a physics PhD is as meaningful as asking for the possibility of employment with A PhD degree! Things can vary wildly from one field/expertise to another!

3. Figure out what you like. Then figure out the employment picture in that area that you like. Now weigh the two against each other. What is your comfort level in taking such a risk? Some people have a higher tolerance for taking such a risk than others. We all have different backgrounds, different aspirations, different economic origins, etc. Each one of these factors can dictate how much we are willing to go to pursue what we want to do, and when it isn't worth the risk. No one else but you can decide that. However, you need to know both sides of the equation, which is what you wish to pursue, and what are the odds of working in that field. Only with clear and sufficient information should you make such a decision. And it may even change over time as you not only learn more about it, but also as times and circumstances change.

If anyone has looked at the series of advices that I've dished out on here, you would have seen me give encouragement to someone who seemedto be skeptical of pursuing a career in physics, and you would have also seen me try to inject some reality of employment (or lack of it) to someone who was dead-set on pursing a specific field in physics. I mean, look at this thread, for instance:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=724673

And then look at the poll that I did on here:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=667559

So on one hand, I'm all for students getting into physics, and on the other hand, I'm painting these vivid, sometime discouraging, picture of the struggle for employment in the every same field. Am I being inconsistent and contradictory? Nope!

And this is because of what I said earlier. You need to know BOTH factors before you decide. If you know fully well that the chances of getting employment in string theory and getting a faculty position is very low, and you still decide to pursue majoring in string theory, then all power to you! You are choosing something with your eyes wide open. And if you can't find a job in that field, there shouldn't be any sense of resentment or bitterness, because you knew fully-well of your chances and the risk that you are taking.

What we can do here is simply to give you the avenue to do what you wish to pursue, and also provide you with the information about the nature of the employment pattern in such-and-such an area. You'll hear many anecdotal accounts, often conflicting ones, that you will have to evaluate for yourself. You will also need to do your own research, look at many statistics, and figure out on your own at what the scenario is. The more you know, the better informed you are at making your decision. This point should not be a surprise.

Zz.

ZapperZ, I don't know exactly what I would get a PhD in, but condensed matter, nuclear, would be something I would most likely do. I heard Intel has a real crush on physics grads, so condensed matter or so would be pretty good as a "fall back" field If I can't get into academia. I should mention that I'm pretty good at C++ programming(beginner, but I'm no slouch) so that does bring my employability factor up. I also should say that engineering is not something I wouldn't want to do, but physics is the "dream come true" for me, and engineering really would be something that I would do only if I had to.

 

[Kenny Bala]

OP, while having a PhD in physics won't hurt you in the job search and traditionally, the unemployment rate is low for Physics PhD's. http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201208/phdjobs.cfm this report agrees, and other sources put the unemployment rate at about 2.7% or so. However getting an academic job is extremely difficult, most of physics PhD's end up working in industry either by choice or by the fact no institution is hiring.

If you want to do physics, then go for it. But keep in mind that you may not get what you want.

Sentin3, why is there such a disproportionality between the comments here and National stats? I rarely read good things about physics PhD's but then US surveys completely say the opposite. I'm guessing it would be due to the number of postdocs, in which case it make sense why the unemployment rate is 2.7.

 

[Kenny Bala]

I still disagree R136a1, it is basically what is being said, to quote ModusPwned "I have a bs and an ms in physics. They have proved completely useless after years of job searching."

You could say that for any of the other majors that aren't as employable as engineering. The OP is reflecting on his overheard conversations of no jobs existing for physics-which is incorrect. He's worried about being highly employable after a PhD in physics, which is silly. We can't answer that, but I doubt you'll end up homeless studying physics. He didn't suggest he's worried about living comfortably or making lots of money after a BS. He's specifically asking about job outlooks 11 years from now when he completes his phd.

Student100, I could care less about money. I think 70k-90k would be good when I'm employed for a while, just enough to support my kids and family.

 

[Lavabug]

I agree with ZZ wholeheartedly. I have only a few things to add:

Worth going for just a BS in Physics? Probably not. Job market sucks, industry does not give a damn about you, even if you are very capable and have some very relevant technical skills for the job.

Worth going for a PhD in physics, providing you can make it into grad school and succeed, which may depend strongly on your choice of field, productivity, your flexibility and connections (like any other profession)? Definitely.

(and now comes the subjective rant that may offend some sensibilities)

Unless you come from a typical "middle-class" American family background (or anywhere above that on the social ladder).

I am nothing short of amazed of the expectations people have (or moaning people make) about making 40, 50... 90k$ a year or beyond. Do you even realize how incredibly amazing your standard of living would be compared to 99.5% of the world population even if you made 30k$? 90k$ is what an esteemed research professor at a big public research university might expect to make (I just happened to read the profile of one prof that made exactly that amount). I think this is a lot of money to get to spend your 9 to 5 (or beyond) doing something you actually care about, rather than have to slog through unpleasant labor for most of your waking hours for the rest of your adult life like a good portion of the rest of the planet has to do just to live barely above starving.

Will you only be happy if you can afford a 250k$ mortgage, swap a new vehicle every few years, and a brand new iphone every eight months? If so, no scientific or technical career will ever seem like it's worth the effort for you. But IMO, you'll never be pleased with anything else in life either, even if you make more than 100k$. I think people who think like this are spoiled and have a very distorted view of the world if you think this way.

 

[ModusPwnd]

Student100, I could care less about money. I think 70k-90k would be good when I'm employed for a while, just enough to support my kids and family.

You could care less about money but think that 70k-90k would be "good"? That pay is well above the average US household income. That is very high pay.

 

[Kenny Bala]

You could care less about money but think that 70k-90k would be "good"? That pay is well above the average US household income. That is very high pay.

I read that 70k a year was about 34k under the average income for a physicist...I don't think I'm reaching that far when I say 70k would be good. Anyways, I intended 70k to be a good yearly income for a whole family and to help my parents, as I'm not really concerned about money to satisfy my needs...I wouldn't be choosing physics if money was even remotely an aspiration of mine.

 

[Sentin3l]

Sentin3l, why is there such a disproportionality between the comments here and National stats? I rarely read good things about physics PhD's but then US surveys completely say the opposite. I'm guessing it would be due to the number of postdocs, in which case it make sense why the unemployment rate is 2.7.

Because when you talk about jobs here, most assume you are talking about academic jobs/research positions. Such jobs are very rare and perhaps only 10% of Physics PhD's ever get one.

 

[Kenny Bala]

Because when you talk about jobs here, most assume you are talking about academic jobs/research positions. Such jobs are very rare and perhaps only 10% of Physics PhD's ever get one.

Then I should probably clarify that I am asking if the employability of Physics PhD's as a whole is good enough for the degree to be worth it. I want an academic position the most, but if worst comes to worst, I'm going to take an industry job.

 

[ModusPwnd]

I read that 70k a year was about 34k under the average income for a physicist...I don't think I'm reaching that far when I say 70k would be good. Anyways, I intended 70k to be a good yearly income for a whole family and to help my parents, as I'm not really concerned about money to satisfy my needs...I wouldn't be choosing physics if money was even remotely an aspiration of mine.

I think you need a bit of a reality check on this way of thinking. Just admit that you care about money if you want to make 70k+. Its ok to care about money. If you really didnt care about money then you could be studying esoteric branches of physics and make less than 40k a year. I know people who do just that. Its your call either way. But if you want to make 70k+ then I think you should admit to yourself that you do care about money and try to plan your physics studies accordingly.

 

[ParticleGrl]

Sentin3, why is there such a disproportionality between the comments here and National stats? I rarely read good things about physics PhD's but then US surveys completely say the opposite. I'm guessing it would be due to the number of postdocs, in which case it make sense why the unemployment rate is 2.7.

The national stats count employment ANYWHERE, people here are usually talking about getting a job that actually uses your degree.

After my phd in high energy physics, I worked as a bartender for nearly a year while I was teaching myself enough statistics and machine learning to make a move into data-science. I was able to make the switch, but pretty much nothing I learned in a physics course or during my phd was of much use.

But, I fit the stats- I was never unemployed. I even fit the early career salary stats, because bartenders can make as much as postdocs. If you can get through a physics phd, you are smart enough to learn and adapt when you find out there isn't much of a market for physics phds.

 

[ParticleGrl]

You get your PhD in physics:
1. You land your dream job doing exactly what you want to do.
2. You land a job in physics doing some remotely like your interests.
3 you land a job in physics doing something completely different to your interest.
4. You land a technical or science job related to applied physics.
5. You land a technical job not all that scientific oriented.
6. You land a job outside technical or scientific work.
7 you become homelessNow if we steer the OP away from physics to engineering, 1 through 3 will no longer be possibilities. They will never do physics proper, and basically all we've accomplished is removing one more potentially qualified physics major from the pool. 4 becomes more likely, but why trade your desire and your shot at the roulette wheel to basically do something you see as a fall back.

Because you hate the idea of 5 and 6. 5 and 6 are the MOST LIKELY outcomes for a physics phd, and 4 is the most likely outcome for an engineer. After my physics phd, the only thing I could find was data science in insurance/finance type companies. If your preference for physics over engineering is mild, but your preference for technical/scientific work over non-scientific work is large, then you should seriously consider engineering.

A physics PhD will keep the door cracked to do something related to engineering while a engineering degree will open it.

Not really- its very hard for a physics phd to break into engineering- they are unlikely to have the specific skills the companies want, AND the phd has left them overqualified for intro positions.

Not trying to do what you want to do is giving up. Not studying what you want to study is giving up.

The question is, do you trade a decade of your life for a lottery ticket (winner gets "the dream job"), or do you maximize your chances of getting a job you mostly like. A physics phd is highly specialized training for a jobs that are increasingly scarce.

 

[jesse73]

Aside from the dismissals.

I get the impression that people are saying that if you get a physics degree there is a high likelihood you won't even end up working in physics and the statistics show this. I understand older posters feel differently but the initial job market has changed since a decade or more ago. We live in a more specialized job market with application tracking systems which will bounce your applications based on your major without a human eye ever even lay an eye on your resume.

This is why you hear engineering recommendations because you get to work in similar problems and have a much higher likelihood of doing engineering. Engineers tend to engineer.

 

[jesse73]

Because you hate the idea of 5 and 6. 5 and 6 are the MOST LIKELY outcomes for a physics phd, and 4 is the most likely outcome for an engineer.

Exactly.

What type of rational argument assumes you will find a job as a research professor. As an estimate only about 30% of physics bachelors go to grad school, only 10% of phd grads get a tenure track position => generously about 3% of physics majors will end up as professors. Now let's take that 3% success rate and assume it as a given for comparing salaries.

?

I am referring to Lavabugs post which assumes a research professors salary.

 

[Student100]

Most people who're interested in physics will also find 4 mundane.

When I worked as an engineer I spent a lot of time doing multisim/LabView/Matlab/Simulation. I found 90% of the work the company was worried about boring. When we actually were able to work on interesting projects with the physics side of the company developing new sensors or what not is where I actually enjoyed working. Unfortunately, many of the interesting projects were canceled after a few weeks because of a perceived lack of ROI.

I could have remained there making more than I probably ever will make after completing my physics education, but I would hate myself in the long run for not trying.

 

[ParticleGrl]

When I worked as an engineer I spent a lot of time doing multisim/LabView/Matlab/Simulation.

You are aware that this describes the majority of the work of a great many physics graduate students, right? Most of the job (90+% of your time) is routine data collection, simulations, programming, etc.

As you progress in the career you'll spend more time begging for money and in administrative tasks.

I could have remained there making more than I probably ever will make after completing my physics education, but I would hate myself in the long run for not trying.

Sure, but you have the engineering career to fall back on. I went all the way through the phd in physics, did extremely well (outside funding in grad school, decent publication record), and ended up doing statistical work for various insurance companies, after a long sting bartending- I'd be happy for a chance to do grunt engineering work, but getting the phd in physics closed that door.

 

[Student100]

You are aware that this describes the majority of the work of a great many physics graduate students, right? Most of the job (90+% of your time) is routine data collection, simulations, programming, ect.

I'm aware of that, but it isn't the same as getting a circuit design out the door so some company in china can do the production run.

 

[Kenny Bala]

http://www.bls.gov/ooh/life-physical-and-social-science/physicists-and-astronomers.htm#tab-1

I'm curious, why does this paint such a better picture than what everyone on this site is saying? I see people telling me different stuff than the stats. Obviously I don't think you guys are lying, but why the discrepancy?

 

[heatengine516]

I'm going to make it my life's goal to start an R&D company that only hires physics majors/physicists. That way everyone with any kind of physics degree will have a sure place to work making use of their education. With our superior degrees we will make discoveries and solve real-world problems at a rate that no one else can match. The money we bring in from manufacturing and selling our superior products will be used to hire more physicists. It will be a glorious, self-sustaining machine.

 

[jesse73]

I'm aware of that, but it isn't the same as getting a circuit design out the door so some company in china can do the production run.

Or getting a circuit out of the door so you can do an expt to write a publish in phys rev.

The grass is always greener on the other side.

 

[jesse73]

http://www.bls.gov/ooh/life-physical-and-social-science/physicists-and-astronomers.htm#tab-1

I'm curious, why does this paint such a better picture than what everyone on this site is saying? I see people telling me different stuff than the stats. Obviously I don't think you guys are lying, but why the discrepancy?

Nobody is saying you can't a find job somewehere. If you major in early european literature you will likely find a job anywhere. People are arguing that you won't find a job in the field you graduated in which corresponds to AIP data where most people will leave the field.

 

[MathWarrior]

http://www.bls.gov/ooh/life-physical-and-social-science/physicists-and-astronomers.htm#tab-1

I'm curious, why does this paint such a better picture than what everyone on this site is saying? I see people telling me different stuff than the stats. Obviously I don't think you guys are lying, but why the discrepancy?

I don't think 2,800 new jobs in a 10 year period is a very nice picture personally, that is quite a small number of positions when you consider there are 7 billion people on the planet, considering this is a US statistic the estimated US population is around 300,000,000 people.

 

[ParticleGrl]

http://www.bls.gov/ooh/life-physical-and-social-science/physicists-and-astronomers.htm#tab-1

I'm curious, why does this paint such a better picture than what everyone on this site is saying? I see people telling me different stuff than the stats. Obviously I don't think you guys are lying, but why the discrepancy?

Look at the BLS numbers- there are less than 21,000 total jobs in physics (compare- we graduate 7000 physics bachelors each year). There is an additional 1500 or so phd students, and another 1500+ masters students etc.

Now, let's say the average career lasts 30 years. That means in 10 years, we can expect about 1/3 of the employed physicists to retire, so over 10 years we have
2800 (growth) + 7000 (retirement) job openings
for
~100,000 job seekers

 

[heatengine516]

http://www.bls.gov/ooh/life-physical-and-social-science/physicists-and-astronomers.htm#tab-1

I'm curious, why does this paint such a better picture than what everyone on this site is saying? I see people telling me different stuff than the stats. Obviously I don't think you guys are lying, but why the discrepancy?

Also note that they are considering a doctorate or professional degree as "entry level" for physicists. Despite the expected job growth and salary, if you look at say, computer engineering, aerospace engineering, or chemical engineering, the entry level degree is a bachelors, with a median pay pretty close to what it says a PhD in physics would earn after 10 years in college and another 2-4 years postdoc. Not that you would actually make that much with a BS, but the site suggests you could make somewhere close to that. Not to mention the number of jobs available far exceed physics. 20,600 isn't a lot.

 

[ZombieFeynman]

I personally believe selection bias plays a large part in the nature of responses here. Who do you think is more likely to post in these threads, someone who had incredible difficulty finding a position related to their field (and who later had to switch fields) or someone who got their PhD and immediately found a job as a staff scientist at Intel?

If I'm not mistaken, Particlegrl did her PhD in high-energy theory. How much more employable do you think she would have been if she had done a PhD in experimental condensed matter, specializing in nanoscale lithography?

From observing where recent graduates from my PhD program have gone, less than half go for a postdoc (more than half don't even look for one). If this is a wide trend across graduate schools, we should factor this into how we think about the chances of obtaining a professorship. On the other side of the coin, many from my program have gone on to do science related work in other fields.

I think it matters where one attends graduate school as well, a "brand recognition" so to speak.

 

[ModusPwnd]

Who do you think is more likely to post in these threads, someone who had incredible difficulty finding a position related to their field (and who later had to switch fields) or someone who got their PhD and immediately found a job as a staff scientist at Intel?

I think the latter is more likely. If you stay in physics then you are more likely to be a poster on the physics forums. If somebody switches fields they are more likely to be at the forums for that field. Thats why this forum's regulars seem to be professional physicists and physics students.

I think this forum generally has the more optimism about physics grad prospects than anywhere else I frequent online or in real life. Even the pessimism about being a "physicist" in this thread is tempered by the claim that physics grads still do better than average. Considering my graduating class, they are not in science for the most part but they are doing better than average, career wise. They were smart hard working people before the physics degree, they still are smart hard working people and its not surprising they excel in their non-science careers.