Competitiveness of various fields of theory

[bjnartowt]

Hi all, I have a question. I hope to be a theoretical physicist, but I'm deciding which field. I'm attracted to theoretical condensed matter because it seems a little better paying, and less competitive. On the other hand, wrapping my mind around things like string theory and particle physics sounds a bit more exciting...but more competitive.

I've already had the experience of not making it in academia once, and wound up almost homeless. I'm being blessed with a second chance: I've worked in a few different fields, and I would honestly take the stress of academia over the monotony of industry any day, for the personal satisfaction. That's really my preference, rather than "I won't be happy unless I study quantum field theory or string theory", etc. So the oft-mentioned (and valid!) advice of "Do what makes you happy and what you have your heart into" is redundant in this case.

So yeah: is condensed matter theory less competitive than, say, particle theory or those other branches of physics which have less-immediate ramifications for industry and society? I'm guessing that condensed matter has more short-term benefits for society, so it should be easier to get grant money in that field. Am I mistaken?

 

[hitmeoff]

I don't have any particular advice because I am not there yet, but if I can ask (only because I do want to go into theoretical physics and definitely in academia) What do you mean you had experience of not making it in academia and you were almost homeless?

I understand that tenure track positions are hard to come by, but certainly there had to be opportunities to be employed as a non-tenured track faculty?

 

[bjnartowt]

I couldn't get into grad school after my undergraduate education, couldn't find a job, and had to really stretch some savings to pay the rent and student loans. Thankfully, I got into grad school the following year as a paid TA...got a nice nest egg after some real penny-pinching, and I finally have a bank account again. It's an interesting story.

What branch of theory do you want to go into? And say...if you're non-tenured track faculty, is it totally hopeless for getting tenure? Do you just keep publishing until your time runs out, and your application looks more attractive when you begin re-applying for hopefully-tenure-track positions?

 

[susskind_leon]

Of course, condensed matter is less competitive.
Many bright people choose QFT and string theory mainly for its prestige. I know first hand that it's quite hard to get postdocs in those areas. I find the (academic) job market in condensed matter much more relaxed than in high energy physics.
My advice would be to go with condensed matter. I know a lot of people who are doing high energy physics now and tell me they wish they had chosen something else!
Also, you should think about the work you will be doing. Although HEP sounds more interesting, I find working in that area extraordinarily frustrating, rigid and uncreative. In condensed matter, you can go bring in your own ideas, make your own models and make new discoveries every day. In HEP, I found that everything you do is to apply existing models. Only a handful of very bright minds make some real contributions. I would choose condensed matter anytime over HEP.

 

[bjnartowt]

Of course, condensed matter is less competitive.
Many bright people choose QFT and string theory mainly for its prestige. I know first hand that it's quite hard to get postdocs in those areas. I find the (academic) job market in condensed matter much more relaxed than in high energy physics.
My advice would be to go with condensed matter. I know a lot of people who are doing high energy physics now and tell me they wish they had chosen something else!
Also, you should think about the work you will be doing. Although HEP sounds more interesting, I find working in that area extraordinarily frustrating, rigid and uncreative. In condensed matter, you can go bring in your own ideas, make your own models and make new discoveries every day. In HEP, I found that everything you do is to apply existing models. Only a handful of very bright minds make some real contributions. I would choose condensed matter anytime over HEP.

PERFECT...I do hate "cutting inside the lines" (as you suggest I'd have to do in HEP and other exotic theories), and have little patience for long stretches without breakthroughs. Plus, I am coming from a chemistry background, and prefer to do things like hypothesize new materials, rather than find new ways to "derive" the mass of a proton, which I'm sure has some neat-o tricksy awesome math behind it, but really doesn't have practical ramifications on everyday life.

On the contrary, I have a friend in information physics, and he's doing some amazing stuff: I think he's gotten ramifications in quantum mechanics and general relativity by making a few assumptions and maximizing entropy. Do you know anything about information physics?

 

[twofish-quant]

Something to point out is that a lot of the physics techniques that get used in particle physics get used in condensed matter and vice versa. Condensed matter physicists use Feynman diagrams and field theory, and the idea of spontaneous symmetry breaking and the Higgs particle started in modelling superconductivity.

 

[bjnartowt]

Something to point out is that a lot of the physics techniques that get used in particle physics get used in condensed matter and vice versa. Condensed matter physicists use Feynman diagrams and field theory, and the idea of spontaneous symmetry breaking and the Higgs particle started in modelling superconductivity.

Right: I was told that there is cross-talk between condensed matter and...particle physics. That kind of got me excited, but I didn't want that to be the deciding factor... : )

Well, I feel better about my decision to be in condensed matter.

 

[susskind_leon]

Well, yes, there are some cross-talks, but I think it's rather rare... From my experience, HEP guys use a quite limited, specialized set of techniques that belongs ALMOST exclusively to HEP... Of course, it's just my limited experience, but I found that condensed matter guys use a lot more techniques to tackle their problems.
I've been told by a prof in statmech that it's hard to get out of HEP once you're in because of that. If you're in statmech, you can easily go to condensed matter, dynamical systems, fluid dynamics, etc. because you have a very broad set of techniques.