Astrophysicist Salary: Opportunities & Income

[vladittude0583]

Doctor Degrees

One thing I realized that most people seem to forget though is that those with a Ph.D. (Doctor of Philosophy) is the "REAL DOCTOR" which means "teacher of teachers" and that an M.D. (Doctor of Medicine) was created to give a special name for those that only specialized in medicine back in the old days. Medical Doctors get more recognition because society puts more emphasis on their "status" than Ph.D.'s, but in the end of things, Ph.D. is the only true doctor! I personally respect someone with a Ph.D. in Physics more than one with a M.D. mainly because such a person is a philosopher in their field and is way smarter than a general medical doctor. Given that a medical doctor is smart too in their own way, but I personally view physicists as the true scientist and leaders of the scientific community.

 

[thinkies]

One thing I realized that most people seem to forget though is that those with a Ph.D. (Doctor of Philosophy) is the "REAL DOCTOR" which means "teacher of teachers" and that an M.D. (Doctor of Medicine) was created to give a special name for those that only specialized in medicine back in the old days. Medical Doctors get more recognition because society puts more emphasis on their "status" than Ph.D.'s, but in the end of things, Ph.D. is the only true doctor! I personally respect someone with a Ph.D. in Physics more than one with a M.D. mainly because such a person is a philosopher in their field and is way smarter than a general medical doctor. Given that a medical doctor is smart too in their own way, but I personally view physicists as the true scientist and leaders of the scientific community.

I pretty much agree with you...:D

 

[Asphodel]

A starting-out M.D. is largely a technician...not that we don't need them, and not that they can't go on to make a career studying the science of medicine...but an M.D. is in general a practitioner of existing knowledge not someone that's working to extend our body of knowledge. Similar to engineering. In both cases the people that make a career of extending the field are a small fraction of the total people in the field.

Although with the physics job market being foobared the way it is lately, many people getting a PhD in physics will end up in the same boat. Or spending 10 years as a postdoc or adjunct teacher making wages they could have gotten with zero college. What's the rate now, something like 1/20 of Ph.D.s in physics that actually end up making it to a real position as a physicist and not settling for something outside physics?

 

[thinkies]

A starting-out M.D. is largely a technician...not that we don't need them, and not that they can't go on to make a career studying the science of medicine...but an M.D. is in general a practitioner of existing knowledge not someone that's working to extend our body of knowledge. Similar to engineering. In both cases the people that make a career of extending the field are a small fraction of the total people in the field.

Although with the physics job market being foobared the way it is lately, many people getting a PhD in physics will end up in the same boat. Or spending 10 years as a postdoc or adjunct teacher making wages they could have gotten with zero college. What's the rate now, something like 1/20 of Ph.D.s in physics that actually end up making it to a real position as a physicist and not settling for something outside physics?

By the time i will graduate with a Ph.D, I'm sure many careers in physics will increase and it will be a very competent field...(by 2022) right?

 

[thinkies]

beside, since physicists are good problem-solvers, they can also get jobs in many kinds of fields...right?

 

[Asphodel]

By the time i will graduate with a Ph.D, I'm sure many careers in physics will increase and it will be a very competent field...(by 2022) right?

Got a time machine? Otherwise...maybe, but don't count on it.

beside, since physicists are good problem-solvers, they can also get jobs in many kinds of fields...right?

What's better, a good problem solver with an advanced degree in physics doing X, or a good problem solver with an advanced degree (or even 4-year degree) in X doing X?

Right now, the only sensible reason to major in physics is because you're crazy for the subject to the point that you'd rather study it now and sort out career options later. Career options are pretty much what you make of them, anyway...for now, just realize that after you finish 4 years of undergrad and 6 years of graduate school that your options may come down to 1) indefinite holding pattern as a postdoc AKA cheap labor that more often than not leads to burnout and no permanent job, or 2) get out of physics.

On the up side, management jobs with hard science training pay well? But unless you're someone who can't imagine ever doing anything but physics, even if it means 10 years of school followed by 10 years of postdoc trying to get a shot...well...a "good problem solver" could be most of the way to retired by then. :/

 

[Laura1013]

I've been avoiding this mess of a thread, but now that I've read it all, I do want to clear up one bit of confusion.

When describing a profession, one can get very specific. For example, we've seen the differences between an astronomer and an astrophysicist described here. Two very similar jobs, but with slight differences.

When describing a degree, definitions are not so clear cut. Degree requirements very widely from university to university. What one university calls an astronomy degree is what another university calls an astrophysics degree and vice versa. The foundation is always physics, but the exact degree name and course requirements will vary.

For example: My bachelor's degree is actually in Space Sciences with an emphasis in Astronomy/Astrophysics. Three specific words to describe one degree. My graduate degrees will be in Physics with an emphasis in Astrophysics. Physics is the foundational degree, with astrophysics as a specialization. I'm sure there were very good reasons as to why these degrees were named as such, but sometimes, a name is just a name, and it's best not to get too hung up on it.

 

[TVP45]

One thing I realized that most people seem to forget though is that those with a Ph.D. (Doctor of Philosophy) is the "REAL DOCTOR" which means "teacher of teachers" and that an M.D. (Doctor of Medicine) was created to give a special name for those that only specialized in medicine back in the old days. Medical Doctors get more recognition because society puts more emphasis on their "status" than Ph.D.'s, but in the end of things, Ph.D. is the only true doctor! I personally respect someone with a Ph.D. in Physics more than one with a M.D. mainly because such a person is a philosopher in their field and is way smarter than a general medical doctor. Given that a medical doctor is smart too in their own way, but I personally view physicists as the true scientist and leaders of the scientific community.

Generally, I call people whatever they ask to be called. That seems to work.

 

[thinkies]

Got a time machine? Otherwise...maybe, but don't count on it.



What's better, a good problem solver with an advanced degree in physics doing X, or a good problem solver with an advanced degree (or even 4-year degree) in X doing X?

Right now, the only sensible reason to major in physics is because you're crazy for the subject to the point that you'd rather study it now and sort out career options later. Career options are pretty much what you make of them, anyway...for now, just realize that after you finish 4 years of undergrad and 6 years of graduate school that your options may come down to 1) indefinite holding pattern as a postdoc AKA cheap labor that more often than not leads to burnout and no permanent job, or 2) get out of physics.

On the up side, management jobs with hard science training pay well? But unless you're someone who can't imagine ever doing anything but physics, even if it means 10 years of school followed by 10 years of postdoc trying to get a shot...well...a "good problem solver" could be most of the way to retired by then. :/

I disagree with you :/...and it seems like your telling physicist or astronomer don't make much, well, they do make a lot of money...o.0 Google up, although they don't make 200k etc amount of money, they have a very reasonable salary.

 

[thinkies]

Um guys, a friend of my cousin said his uncle has a Ph.D in astronomy and he's working as a Radiation Physicist. Is that even possible?I don't think so o.0...(specially with an astronomy degree,right)?

 

[chroot]

Why do you disagree with Asphodel, thinkies? He's right, and you're completely ignorant.

- Warren

 

[Asphodel]

I could make more money than a physics postdoc without ever going to college, without trying very hard. Definitely with a 2-year degree. Remember, these guys all have a Ph.D. that took them about 10 years to earn.

Professional physicists have a fairly good median income (see bls.gov, aip.org). However, there are a small number of jobs, and they're largely taken up by people with a median age of 50-something. So good luck landing one.

 

[twinsen]

I wouldn't mind living on the £5000 year bursary I get from the government as long as I am doing what I love which is physics and philosophy. I think experience of the world we live in and the power to question and imagine are what will make you succeeful in any career.
The ones which are not lured by prospects of money and personal wealth are the true physicists, they are the ones which lead the way.

You will either have to change the way you think about life or become a medic/engineer/banker.

Alex

 

[thinkies]

I could make more money than a physics postdoc without ever going to college, without trying very hard. Definitely with a 2-year degree. Remember, these guys all have a Ph.D. that took them about 10 years to earn.

Professional physicists have a fairly good median income (see bls.gov, aip.org). However, there are a small number of jobs, and they're largely taken up by people with a median age of 50-something. So good luck landing one.

This is the situation of today, however physics may be more needed in few years, and I'm still far from starting university ( 5 years remaining) and I'm sure physicist/astronomer will be needed in the *near* future.

Have you heard the-many- developments (space program,research,etc) that are planned concerning space starting from the year 2010 and so on...?

I'm sure there will be a much much better situation (employment,salary,etc) for physicist/astronomer by then..

BTW, in what field are you? (Just curious)

 

[chroot]

This is the situation of today, however physics may be more needed in few years, and I'm still far from starting university ( 5 years remaining) and I'm sure physicist/astronomer will be needed in the *near* future.

It's highly doubtful that there will be a vast increase in the demand for either physicists or astronomers in the near future. You're just making this up. Listen to the people here who know more than you do about the topic.

- Warren

 

[thinkies]

It's highly doubtful that there will be a vast increase in the demand for either physicists or astronomers in the near future. You're just making this up. Listen to the people here who know more than you do about the topic.

- Warren

Why don't you carefully read my comment? I included the word 'MAY'. I never stated it as a fact...(No offense)

 

[thinkies]

Also, although astronomers *may* not be much needed in the near future, I guess physicist should be... They are in many fields such as engineering, biology(biophysicist), geology(geophysicist) and etc

Since astronomer do somewhat have knowledge in physics(although they emphasize more in using physics for space related stuff), they sometime can get few jobs not directly related with astronomy...

 

[trinitron]

"Why don't you carefully read my comment? I included the word 'MAY'. I never stated it as a fact...(No offense)"

"I'm sure physicist/astronomer will be needed in the *near* future."

"I'm sure there will be a much much better situation (employment,salary,etc) for physicist/astronomer by then.."

Grow up.

 

[thinkies]

"Why don't you carefully read my comment? I included the word 'MAY'. I never stated it as a fact...(No offense)"

"I'm sure physicist/astronomer will be needed in the *near* future."

"I'm sure there will be a much much better situation (employment,salary,etc) for physicist/astronomer by then.."

Grow up.

The above statement was my personal opinion, I never stated it as something 'official'. BTW, if you have nothing to say regarding this thread, why don't you just mind your own business or explore other threads...? Also, try to work with your English comprehension. It'll help you distinguish opinions from official statements/informations etc.

 

[thinkies]

Also, the above reply to Chroot was not a sarcasm or an insult to him...So I am not being childish. I respect him and I know some of the above criticisms he provided are somewhat right.

 

[trinitron]

"The above statement was my personal opinion, I never stated it as something 'official'. BTW, if you have nothing to say regarding this thread, why don't you just mind your own business or explore other threads...? Also, try to work with your English comprehension. It'll help you distinguish opinions from official statements/informations etc."

Grow up.

 

[f95toli]

Also, although astronomers *may* not be much needed in the near future, I guess physicist should be... They are in many fields such as engineering, biology(biophysicist), geology(geophysicist) and etc

You are probably right in tha physicists will always be needed. However, you need to remember three things:

1) A LOT of people study physics and many also get a PhD, but only a fraction end up working as physicists for the simple reason that it is an extremely competitive field; permanent positions are very rare. Hence, even if the "market" would double or triple there would be plenty of candidates for each position regardless of the salary.

2) Geography. In most regions/cities there are perhaps one or two potential employers (usually the local univeristy). Hence, in order to have a realistic chance of finding a job you need to be able to move (often to another country) and that is easier said than done for people that have already have a family.

3) Scientists tend to like their jobs and most are willing to work even if it doesn't pay very well. Employers know this and take full advantage, this in combination with points 1 and 2 means that there is really no real reason why the salaries should go up.
The salaries tend to be pretty low even for people who are lucky enought to get a "real" research position in the private sector (at e.g. IBM)

It IT possible to make a lot of money as a research physicist, but that usually happens near the end of the career when you can start competing for "managment" positions like head of school, dean etc.

 

[fasterthanjoao]

What stage in education are you at just now? Seems to me like you've got a lot more investigating to do before you decide what you want. Adding biology and doing a double-major isn't going to appease your parents if they want you to be a MD. What you really need to do is spend a while (months?) getting information about what you can expect. I'm not saying that biology and physics don't (more accurately, can't) go together, of course they can but that doesn't mean its the route for you.

What is it that draws you to astronomy?

 

[thinkies]

What stage in education are you at just now? Seems to me like you've got a lot more investigating to do before you decide what you want. Adding biology and doing a double-major isn't going to appease your parents if they want you to be a MD. What you really need to do is spend a while (months?) getting information about what you can expect. I'm not saying that biology and physics don't (more accurately, can't) go together, of course they can but that doesn't mean its the route for you.

What is it that draws you to astronomy?

I'm still in my 9th grade. What draws me to astronomy? My curiosity for almost everything outside earth.

 

[thinkies]

You are probably right in tha physicists will always be needed. However, you need to remember three things:

1) A LOT of people study physics and many also get a PhD, but only a fraction end up working as physicists for the simple reason that it is an extremely competitive field; permanent positions are very rare. Hence, even if the "market" would double or triple there would be plenty of candidates for each position regardless of the salary.

2) Geography. In most regions/cities there are perhaps one or two potential employers (usually the local univeristy). Hence, in order to have a realistic chance of finding a job you need to be able to move (often to another country) and that is easier said than done for people that have already have a family.

3) Scientists tend to like their jobs and most are willing to work even if it doesn't pay very well. Employers know this and take full advantage, this in combination with points 1 and 2 means that there is really no real reason why the salaries should go up.
The salaries tend to be pretty low even for people who are lucky enought to get a "real" research position in the private sector (at e.g. IBM)

It IT possible to make a lot of money as a research physicist, but that usually happens near the end of the career when you can start competing for "managment" positions like head of school, dean etc.

I do somewhat agree with you, but even today's statistics shows that the median earning of most physicist is between 90k-100k and with few years of experience, you can get a competitive salary (xxx xxx$)...

Well, I hope physics will be recognized as a competitive field in the near future and they should be paid more then what they get (and they deserve it too)...

 

[thinkies]

"The above statement was my personal opinion, I never stated it as something 'official'. BTW, if you have nothing to say regarding this thread, why don't you just mind your own business or explore other threads...? Also, try to work with your English comprehension. It'll help you distinguish opinions from official statements/informations etc."

Grow up.

Please try to emphasize on the following phrase I mentioned in my previous comment:

"BTW, if you have nothing to say regarding this thread, why don't you just mind your own business or explore other threads...?"

Thank You.

 

[godwinscareer]

I do somewhat agree with you, but even today's statistics shows that the median earning of most physicist is between 90k-100k and with few years of experience, you can get a competitive salary (xxx xxx$)...

Well, I hope physics will be recognized as a competitive field in the near future and they should be paid more then what they get (and they deserve it too)...

I think 'thinkies' lives in a fantasy world guys!

The median is 90-100k, that doesn't mean everyone with a physics degree gets that much.

If you want to do a Ph.D. in physics, then you should be ready to face the fact that you won't be making too much! atleast early on

Besides you have plenty of time to worry about these things. You should just concentrate on your studies for now!

 

[Riogho]

You need to stop being such a self-righteous money-laundering jerk. My family makes about 45 thousand a year and we live comfortably. If you truly want to go into physics then the money shouldn't matter to you. If you are truly in it for the money then go be something else, like a lawyer.

 

[Cyrus]

....and thread locked. I don't know what's worse, thinkies comments or you guys wasting 9 pages on him when he won't listen to you.

 

[Asphodel]

Well, I don't know about the money laundering part.

And the rest is largely explained by being in 9th grade. He probably will grow out of it in time.

Well, okay, you can make it fairly well in physics and still be as self-righteous jerk. You just have to learn when to turn it off (i.e. in front of your adviser). But really, there's a lot of politics in academia, and funding can be very dependent on the connections you develop. Which also directly impacts your chances of ever landing a faculty position, or making it through to tenure and one of those jobs that is actually making the upper-middle-class incomes. And really, it's the same thing outside of academia in one form or another - humans are social animals. So it's best to alienate as few people as possible. You may notice that even the professors and grad students that aren't exactly personable are still reasonably polite.

A good article (if written by a CS grad):

http://www.cs.unc.edu/~azuma/hitch4.html

 

[thinkies]

....and thread locked. I don't know what's worse, thinkies comments or you guys wasting 9 pages on him when he won't listen to you.

I know I often exaggerate, but hey, I did consider some advices ;)...

And..hmm yea 9 pages...didn't expect it..

 

[Mathemaniac]

Chroot, to play the devil's advocate, not thinking about careers when I was in high school got me into a whole lot of trouble. I ended up coming out with a GPA of 2.0 and then going to a university that's not very competitive with an incredibly understaffed physics program (imagine two professors trying to teach an entire set of physics classes). Not to say that you need to punch out specifics right away, but it's good to have an idea of what you want to do, just for the sake of motivation, even if you do change your mind a lot.

On the other hand, thinkies, I can't imagine the high school math class you take is going to have any effect on your career path. I didn't even know any math beyond basic algebra when I started college and I was able to start calculus in my second year.

 

[Howers]

I think you need to focus on your studies rather than fantasize about what you will want to be doing in the future. The reality is you haven't been exposed to any of these courses at anything but a superficial level, and studying them for real will change your whole perspective. Introductory astronomy certainly has that effect on many, including my foolish self at one point :)

A double major in physics and biology? No, you won't pull that off. Stop dreaming. You may choose biophysics, which is the closest such thing. I can guarantee you that you will not do a double MD / PhD in medicine and physics, the fields are simply too demanding. You wouldn't even get through undergrad with that route. I'm sorry if that sounds discouraging but its a reality. In my opinion, I'd go with biology... simply because your parent's are physicians and its likely that kind of knowledge runs in your blood. But either way its too early to decide.

As for now? You can easily take all the sciences and maths in high school. Bio, chem, physics, maths, can all easily be done. I imagine by then you will lean towards one discipline, and in your first year of university you will again do all four - by then you will certainly know your direction.

You just got to relax and settle down. Learn as much as you can in high school. And get your head out of space. Focus on the present.

 

[bravernix]

In my opinion, I'd go with biology... simply because your parent's are physicians and its likely that kind of knowledge runs in your blood.

The rest of your post was spot on but...what?

 

[thinkies]

The rest of your post was spot on but...what?

OMG my parents are not physicist, this dude (Howers)is misinterpreting the information ^.^...My parents are DOCTORS and I want to be a astronomer, not a physicist...(although at some point in this thread I may have mentioned becoming physicist, my initial idea was astrophysicist...but i think astronomy suits me better, as of now)

Hope it clarifies...

 

[d_leet]

OMG my parents are not physicist, this dude (Howers)is misinterpreting the information ^.^...My parents are DOCTORS and I want to be a astronomer, not a physicist...(although at some point in this thread I may have mentioned becoming physicist, my initial idea was astrophysicist...but i think astronomy suits me better, as of now)

Hope it clarifies...

He said physicians, not physicists... A physician is a doctor... His comment was that because both your parents are doctors you may have a more natural inclination towards the subject, and this is the point with which there is disagreement.

 

[TMFKAN64]

If only knowledge did run in your blood... getting a transfusion would be much easier than studying!

 

[Asphodel]

If only knowledge did run in your blood... getting a transfusion would be much easier than studying!

Could always hide behind the faculty club at night with a hypodermic...

 

[Howers]

The rest of your post was spot on but...what?

Sorry let me clarify. Looking back, it looks like I'm reviving Lamarckian genetics :p

What I meant to say is, seeing as his parents are physicians it is genetrically more probable that he will succeed in a biology, because his parents shared success in that field. Some people are just better at certain subjects, and this talent is usually genetic. Ontop of that, he will have someone to turn to when the going gets tough.

Either way, take this with a grain of salt because as I (and dozens before me) already said its too early to do anything.

OMG my parents are not physicist, this dude (Howers)is misinterpreting the information ^.^...My parents are DOCTORS and I want to be a astronomer, not a physicist...(although at some point in this thread I may have mentioned becoming physicist, my initial idea was astrophysicist...but i think astronomy suits me better, as of now)

Hope it clarifies...

Physician is the proper word for medical doctor, because a doctor is really anyone with a PhD. You are the one whos misinterpreting. I know you said astrophysicist, but before you can become an astrophysist you really need to become a physicst. Its in grad school you really delve into astrophyiscs.

 

[thinkies]

@Hower

Sorry, I misunderstood what you said. I didn't read your comment properly...Unfortunately, even despite the academic success I have in biology classes, it's just not a passion. I absolutely hate when it comes to stuff like heart, digestive system, lymphatic system, etc etc etc. Also, other fields that are related with bio and physics aren't that interesting (biophysics).

Thanks.

 

[Laura1013]

What I meant to say is, seeing as his parents are physicians it is genetrically more probable that he will succeed in a biology, because his parents shared success in that field. Some people are just better at certain subjects, and this talent is usually genetic.

Is there any scientific backing to that? Both my parents are lawyers. I once acted as a lawyer in a mock trial in school, and I was terrible at it. Neither of my parents have any talent in physics, yet that's what I pursued. Maybe physics is a recessive gene?

 

[thinkies]

Is there any scientific backing to that? Both my parents are lawyers. I once acted as a lawyer in a mock trial in school, and I was terrible at it. Neither of my parents have any talent in physics, yet that's what I pursued. Maybe physics is a recessive gene?

!

 

[bravernix]

Is there any scientific backing to that? Both my parents are lawyers. I once acted as a lawyer in a mock trial in school, and I was terrible at it. Neither of my parents have any talent in physics, yet that's what I pursued. Maybe physics is a recessive gene?

Yeah, that's my point. I'd like to see a source on that, because it sounds quite intriguing!

 

[D H]

Maybe physics is a recessive gene?

Not surprising. Most genetically-inheritable defective conditions are recessive, after all.

I'm a physicist (well, my degree is in physics) and my father-in-law was a physicist. That should be enough to overcome the recessive nature of the physics gene, right? None of my kids (all in college) want to be physicists. One wants to be a Navy Seal!

 

[professor]

Professor

I am going to be an entering freshman in the field of astrophysics this coming year, personally, the reason that I find astrophysics to be both fun and fiscally sound as a decision, is because I plan to move out of the country, where physicians are payed significantly less (France, Switzerland, or Germany I hope). This may not occur to many people, and you may not be moving out of the country, but it is an interesting reason to keep considering physics.

 

[ks_physicist]

How much are the malpractice insurance premiums for an astrophysics Ph.D.?

;)

 

[Lord Einstein]

But also, since i am going to uni quit some years after(im only in 9th!), i was wondering if time can be a key-leader in pure astrophysics jobs...lets say demands get higher by 2025(year where i will be holding a phd in astrophysics)...?u know...with all those super claims of stuff with space related things that going to happen by then..

Any thoughts?

you're in the 9th grade with a possible choice to be an astrophysicist?

 

[Lord Einstein]

I am going to be an entering freshman in the field of astrophysics this coming year, personally, the reason that I find astrophysics to be both fun and fiscally sound as a decision, is because I plan to move out of the country, where physicians are payed significantly less (France, Switzerland, or Germany I hope). This may not occur to many people, and you may not be moving out of the country, but it is an interesting reason to keep considering physics.

Why would you want to move out of the country to get paid significantly less?

 

[Lord Einstein]

Do asrtrophysicist need a really strong background in mathematics to get hired at it?

 

[harvellt]

I spend a lot of time with a medical physicist, he is in charge of all the radiologists and radioactive equip in a hospital he makes 150k with a PHD in physics.