Hi everyone, I 'm doing a physics degree in Imperial College london, I have a tendency to do experimental physics research in the future, however, I applied to the theoretical physics course 3 years ago, which means (a year less labs than the experimental physicists, I made this decision because I thought it maybe easier for me to get a first degree in theoretical phyiscs , also I thought that to be a good experimentalist you need a strong theoretical understanding first P.S. It's too late to change degree now : \ I would like to ask if anyone has similar experience? Do I need an experimental physics major to do an experimental based Master programme? I would eventually want to work in industry and academia carrying out experimental research. P.S. I will be doing a computing project (theory) and a computing course in my third year. There are two main reasons I want to do experimental physics , firstly, I consider myself as an observer , I have a higher tendency to gather evidence rather than predicting "outcomes" like theorists do. Secondly, I think being an experimentalist has more funding and is more closely related to industrial research. I have heard many people doing hard core theoretical physics like QFFF and became unemployable, as these programmes are not heavily funded and or is it not true? Is there any advantages doing theory over experimental at all? I welcome any help or opinions from any background. I would like to say thanks in advance.