Astrophysicist Salary: Opportunities & Income

Click For Summary
Opportunities for PhD astrophysicists are generally limited compared to medical doctors, with salaries often significantly lower, typically around $100,000 at the upper end. The discussion emphasizes that pursuing astrophysics should be driven by passion rather than financial gain, as the path involves a lengthy commitment with modest pay during training. While some suggest a double major in biology and physics to broaden career prospects, the consensus is that astrophysics is not a lucrative field. The demand for astrophysicists may increase in the future, potentially leading to better salaries, but this is uncertain. Ultimately, the choice of career should align with personal interests and long-term satisfaction rather than solely financial considerations.
  • #91
chroot said:
You should also realize that in the physical sciences, a master's degree is often given as a "consolation prize." In other words, everyone attempts to obtain a Ph.D., and if you fail for some reason, you're kicked out and given a master's. If you decide to pursue astrophysics, you will need to pursue it whole-heartedly, starting in the later years of your undergraduate degree.

I feel I should note that in Canada, most PhD programs require a Masters for admission. The Masters is usually only a couple years, and can be course or research based, while the PhD is longer and a thesis is required.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
thinkies said:
So let's say if i was to have a ph.d in astrophysics, can i be somewhat illegible to work as an astronomer and vice-versa...they both aim ph.d in physics...

Depending on the university, exactly the same work could lead to degrees in astronomy, astrophysics, or physics. Some European universities even put certain types of theoretical astrophysicists in their math departments. There are many specialties where the specific writing on your diploma depends more on administrative details than anything else.

But probably more importantly, no two Ph.D.'s are the same. The things learned by two people with the same degree from the same university could be very different. There is some minimal overlap in that everyone takes the same basic courses. But then there are electives and research. A Ph.D. is primarily a research degree, and the precise nature of this varies enormously. The point is that you pick a specialty and work in that. After graduating, you usually apply for a postdoc (temporary research or intern-type) position in a similar field. You're hired on the basis of original work produced in graduate school. It is extremely rare that you'll find a position which has no particular qualification other than having a Ph.D. in astronomy.

Regardless, I agree with Chroot and others that this discussion isn't very productive. You don't know enough about any of the subjects you've brought up to really know if you'd enjoy them professionally. You also don't know if you have the skill or patience for them. Things should become clearer once you've learned more. An English course might also be helpful at this point.
 
  • #93
rudinreader said:
But no astronauts answered your thread either when you said you were interested in "Aerospace Medicine".

Why *would* an astronaut come to answer my thread for something related with Aerospace Medicine? They are different fields...^.^
 
  • #94
Sariel said:
I feel I should note that in Canada, most PhD programs require a Masters for admission. The Masters is usually only a couple years, and can be course or research based, while the PhD is longer and a thesis is required.

Not really, from what I have read and heard from other graduates there are two options. Some schools for example McMaster has this as almost as a program choice option to anyone who would like to do it and has an all around 3.50 CGPA I believe that was the grade. On the other hand universities like UofT don't do this always but they will allow it only if you can prove that you are able to and have a CGPA of 3.70!

Not too sure about how other schools do it.
 
  • #95
My mental condition is same to you friend. I am undergraduate student student of physics mejor. Yesterday i have found a great solution. Thats get married with a doctor or engr or lawyer :approve:. I think that's a great option for us. You will not earn too much but your partner will. Life will b easier. :-p:wink:
 
  • #96
My Careers adviser once asked me If I would prefer to get paid $10,000 a day, I just had to sit in a silent room all day - or Get paid $100 a day to do what you love. He said any person who was not morbidly money-driven would choose the latter. Money isn't always the most important factor.
 
  • #97
What job is it that allows you to sit in a silent room all day for $10,000?
 
  • #98
I'm sure you can find a typical job that will pay you 3 million dollars...
 
  • #99
Gib Z said:
My Careers adviser once asked me If I would prefer to get paid $10,000 a day, I just had to sit in a silent room all day - or Get paid $100 a day to do what you love. He said any person who was not morbidly money-driven would choose the latter. Money isn't always the most important factor.

Anyone that doesn't suck at math would choose the $10,000 a day, bring some books, and leave after a year (+/- depending on when you get done with the books...there are a *lot* of books...) with about as much money as a physicist makes in a lifetime.

There's something to be said for doing what you love, *and* not having to worry about where the money to fund your lab is coming from.
 
  • #100
Firstly let me say I haven't been to university or had a proper job, but I can tell you from what I have heard, the worst mistake you can make is pursue a career only for the money. Money does not act as a motivator, it is the job prospects and self achievment that usually motivates. You would have to be earning a huge amount to do a full time job that you hated and still feel motivated. Salary is not a motivator.
 
  • #101
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.
 
  • #102
vladittude0583 said:
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
 
  • #103
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?
 
  • #104
Asphodel said:
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?
 
  • #105
beside, since physicists are good problem-solvers, they can also get jobs in many kinds of fields...right?
 
  • #106
thinkies said:
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.

thinkies said:
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. :/
 
  • #107
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.
 
  • #108
vladittude0583 said:
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.
 
  • #109
Asphodel said:
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.
 
  • #110
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)?
 
  • #111
Why do you disagree with Asphodel, thinkies? He's right, and you're completely ignorant.

- Warren
 
  • #112
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.
 
  • #113
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
 
  • #114
Asphodel said:
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)
 
Last edited:
  • #115
thinkies said:
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
 
  • #116
chroot said:
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)
 
  • #117
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...
 
  • #118
"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.
 
  • #119
trinitron said:
"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.
 
  • #120
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.
 

Similar threads

Questions About Becoming an Astrophysicist or Astronomer
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
Other Am I compatible with a PhD?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Schools Which University should I go to for my undergrad in physics?
  • · Replies 82 ·
3
Replies
82
Views
8K
Programs Feedback About Theoretical Cosmology?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Astrophysics: A Student's Questions & Monetary Concerns
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
961
What jobs are available to an Astrophysics Student?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Physics Physics Graduate planning to do research in photonics
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Physics Choosing a Career in Science: The Dilemma of Salary vs. Passion
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Schools Hey everybody - I need to pick a major for college applications
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Programs BA or PhD in Physics? Canada Job Opportunities
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K