ZapperZ said:
I see some "grandiose" ambition to "understand the universe", etc., the very same thing that I foolishly thought I wanted to do when I started out. I think it is OK to have such high ambition, but it must also be tempered down a bit with reality.
Hmm, just the other day, I saw some statistics on employment in academia regarding areas such as cosmology/strings/high-energy particle physics and this alone scared me. I was aware that there are not many jobs in these areas, but for it to be so low numbers indicates huge competition, or few people going into these fields. I'm guessing it's fierce competition though. And if this is the case, I would strongly doubt I would even have the slightest chance, as I am no Einstein, Newton, or Witten.
Can people with these skills (with little, if no application) ever make a smooth transition to industry, in perhaps an experimental field (or a more theoretical, yet applied field)?
I hope to do a Bachelor's degree in Computer Science (mainly focussed on software engineering and computer science theory) on the side, so what about the merge of computer science with theoretical/experimental physics? How useful would this skill set be (with double majors in [applied or pure] mathematics and physics)?
As far as money is concerned, I know it is often shunned in these forums, with people giving advice such as "pursue what you love, rather than what will give you the most money", but isn't it the case that physics professors get anywhere from about $80,000 to $200,000 (whether it be USD or AUD, there is almost parity between the currencies)? Is it only people that are world-renowned that would receive the "higher eschelons of financial reward"?
Because this amount is not in itself, an amount that can easily be shaken off. $100k is more than several managers make, for example (although they would get their pay for likely a larger portion of their life). How close is my image to reality?
I don't want to be invasive on privacy or anything, but in your own field, what is the typical range for salary, per annum? I am purely interested in knowing, because even though money is only a small amount in the equation, it does have importance, as it does allow for more freedom in life.
Hopefully I find a field that grabs me as much as this perhaps naive idea of mine. If it doesn't turn out to be practical, then so be it, but perhaps it would be a big shame (again, depends on what I find I enjoy most while at college/university).
I read your blog post by the way. Again, quite informative. I see that you chose experiment over theory purely because of your own ability to have application and usefulness? I'm interested as to why you found that you didn't like high energy physics - what put you off?
A question here: if I was interested in doing something like physics simulation for example (or perhaps game engine development, considering computer science background), would it be at all likely that one could find themselves in this position, and perhaps, with sponsorship (likely part-time??) do a PhD in theoretical physics? Is this at all tied to reality?
Would a PhD enhance earning potential? I suppose they have more developed skills, so I would be willing to guess that they would, but I'm not dead certain.
What's the field like for people who leave physics after doing a PhD (say for example, people who go into finance and become quants)? Are the skills developed from studying theoretical physics (over experimental physics) more useful there?
The absolute ideal situation I think for me, would be doing some software development on the side (perhaps as a business - consulting work?) to earn some more money, and having that PhD in theoretical physics, perhaps doing research if I found that I was good enough to do so.
I read a few days ago about a theoretical physicist (a professor) at some university had delved into internet security, made presentations for the CIA (c'mon, how many people do this? I don't think it'd be as cool as it sounds though!), and eventually sold his business to Symantec for something like $28m US! This is just one scenario I know of though, and this certainly is far from the reality for most people.
My initial direction would be to do an honours year in theoretical physics (this is an extra year, after the 3 year Bachelor's degree, where you can then work in a more specialised area, as obviously, undergraduate physics encompasses both theoretical and experimental aspects). Doing well enough here can lead to doing a PhD in the field, but this, as far as I'm aware would come a while afterwards. Perhaps then I have a real taste of both the computer science industry and the exciting field of physics (whether it be experimental or theoretical).
Hopefully during the technicalities and overcoming hurdles throughout the journey, I do not lose my great passion for physics, and find something that I really enjoy, and is perhaps, more practical, as I honestly don't believe I am capable enough to do cutting-edge research in theory. Maybe I am wrong though!
Next month, I will be going to my university for a "work experience programme" where I'll have a chance to meet the theoretical physics professor I have been corresponding with for a while, and ask him about the theory side, and what it's actually like in academia! I can come here to ask Zapper and any others in industry for a balanced viewpoint then, so I have a better idea about it all!
Cheers,
-Davin
)
