Computational Physics: Is It Employable in Industry?

[tamtam402]

I'd like to apply to university in an undergrad physics program because I love math and physics (I took college mechanics, E&M and currently taking waves and modern physics). The university I plan to go to offers different specializations for the final year, one of them being computational physics and scientific calculations.

It adds 4 courses, one of them being databases (we're required to take 1 or 2 CS courses in the first year), one more CS course focused on scientific calculations, but I think it deals with high-performance calculation using supercomputers, etc. Then there's the meat of the theory, a course that teaches a crapload of stuff such as the Monte Carlo method, and more "problem solving and computing" theory/methods that I could dream of. The final course in the specialization is a project. I would also get to choose some electives on top of that, either classical courses such as a third course on quantum physics, or other courses that would be more on the math/compuation and modeling side.

This stuff interests me, and I think I'd enjoy working on simulations/modeling in industry. Is this specialization the kind of stuff that would land me such a job? Of course I'd get an MSc in a computational physics/mathematics field to pursue my knowledge. I think this would allow me to learn more about physics, which is something that interests me a lot, while also allowing me to branch-off to more a employable sub-field, but I could be wrong. My other option would be to go for Electrical Engineering, but I don't know what kind of doors EE grad school would open; it might not be math/theory/research heavy enough for me.

Is it a bad idea to go for physics if this is what I'd like to do later-on? Is this sub-field of physics/math employable in industry? I'll be 5 years older than the average undergrad since I'm going back to school, and graduating with a useless degree isn't something I can afford to do unfortunately. I know EE would be more employable than physics, but maybe computational physics is different.

Thanks in advance!

 

[fss]

Since you haven't even started school yet, why don't you just wait and see where you're at when it actually comes time to make a decision? What interests you today might not interest you in 3 years.

 

[fasterthanjoao]

What fss said.

Re: the rest, no one thing will 'land you a job' from university. Thinking about taking an MSc at the moment is just a little silly (), don't worry about that until you've punished yourself for a few years already.

You also shouldn't think about grad school in general, especially assuming that you'll make it in. Look at the physics and EEE degrees - decide which one seems more appealing. You're a long way off from rejecting one based on research activity (having said that, for you info, there is a lot of academic research in EEE, across lots of different fields. It can be a very exciting area to work with since there there are lots of interdisciplinary projects).

Also, EEE isn't necessarily 'more employable' than physics. Lots of people think this, and I think I disagree. If you sell yourself in the right way with physics, you have access to a bunch more jobs than you would have with EEE. In EEE, you're an electrical engineer. In physics, you know a bit about electronics, mechanics and mathematics. THere will be some doors that would be closed since you straight-up won't be an EEE graduate, but plenty remain open.

 

[tamtam402]

I think the school system here (in quebec) is different, this might cause some misconception.

When we enter university, we have to choose a specific program on our first year, and bachelors degrees last 3 years. Also I'm not sure but do you guys have Calc I, II, III, and college-level Classical mechanics, E&M, waves and modern physics, organic chemistry, etc. when you apply to university?

That means grad school isn't that far away for me.

By the way I'm from Quebec (this might be a global Canadian "issue", I'm not sure) but the order of engineers here is a HUGE deal, much more than in the states from what I've read. Being a member of the orders of engineers here IS pretty much a job-guarantee, and it's harder to land engineering-related jobs without being a member of the order. I think our economy is different than in the states... as an example, I've read everywhere that CS graduates have no work in the USA, but in Montreal head-hunters chase after CS guys and offer them huge bonus. After job-hopping for 2-3 years, most CS graduates make 100k in Montreal.

That's why if I choose physics, I know I'd want to branch-off to something more employable. I already know I have no desire to pursue thoretical physics to the graduate level, since I'm 23 years old and I'll want to have a "foot in the door" by then to secure my future.

 

[fss]

That's why if I choose physics, I know I'd want to branch-off to something more employable. I already know I have no desire to pursue thoretical physics to the graduate level, since I'm 23 years old and I'll want to have a "foot in the door" by then to secure my future.

If you already know you don't want to pursue "theoretical" physics at the graduate level and seem to require that your field is "employable", why are you not looking at an engineering track?

 

[tamtam402]

If you already know you don't want to pursue "theoretical" physics at the graduate level and seem to require that your field is "employable", why are you not looking at an engineering track?

Because all the undergrad physics courses interest me, a lot.

 

[Astronuc]

There is a lot going on in computational physics - actually multiphysics simulation.

Look at COMSOL multphysics simulation software.

Also look at Newton-krylov method and Jacobian-free Newton-krylov methods.

Coupled of PDE for thermo-mechanical and fluid systems is a growing area, as is thermo-mechanical, CFD, and radiation.

There is a lot of research to be done in the systems of coupled PDEs, each PDE, material properties, and solution technique, as well a computational system.

 

[tamtam402]

I see material science popping up a lot when people talk about industry. What does it involve exactly? Is that a sub-branch of physics that is sought after in industry??

Also, why do people get offended when I mention industry? I didn't know I had to had dreams of becoming the next einstein to study physics. Is it wrong if I want to study physics because I'd like a better grasp of how everything works and because I love mathematics, yet I'd like my education to secure a job later on?

I'm 23 years old, which is why I'd like to have a "foot into the door" if I get a master's degree. Physics would be my first choice, and it's my true love, but I might settle with EE to get the job security I need. Unless there exists some fields of physics that are sought-after in industry, in which case I would submit my application tomorrow with a clear mind.

Hell, maybe I'd fall in love with astrophysics and decided to get a PhD in that, but as of now, I feel like I must get a certain job-security in my university program. Graduating at 30 with an MSc and no job scares the hell out of me.

 

[twofish-quant]

The good news/bad news is that most software companies don't care what you get your degree in. They care how good you can code software. If getting a degree helps you code software, that's good. However, it's possible to get a masters in CS with minimal coding ability and that is bad.

 

[Astronuc]

I see material science popping up a lot when people talk about industry. What does it involve exactly? Is that a sub-branch of physics that is sought after in industry??

Materials science and engineering (engineering = applied physics) is a field unto itself, but it is essentially a sub-branch of physics related to condensed matter physics. One can work at the atomic level trying to understand a materials behavior at that level, once can work at the nanometer level, at the micron level (typical grain size is a 5 - 25 microns), or larger dimensions depending one's fancy. There are also materials made of large single crystals.

Every product one uses is made of materials. Highly engineered products are made of highly engineered materials, e.g., microcircuits in microprocessors or turbine blades in aircraft jet engines. A lot of fundamental research goes into the design of the product, components, and materials. Besides composition, one must also determine the manufacturing processes involved. How one manufactures a material will determine it's performance.

Part of computational physics involves predictive analysis in which one takes the inputs such as the characteristics of the material, and then applies the operating and environmental boundaries conditions in which that material is expected to function. In some cases, one might predict the outcome of an experiment. In other cases, one may predict the performance of the material in service. Months or years later, a component may be taken from service, and the actual performance compared with prediction.

How well a simulation predicts depends on how well on can simulate the physics of the material in its environment.

Read the bio of Vin Crespi, who is a Distinguished Professor of physics and materials science and engineering at Penn State University.
http://aipadvances.aip.org/about/executive_editors

See this conference - http://scitation.aip.org/proceedings/confproceed/712.jsp
or these - http://scitation.aip.org/proceedings/volume.jsp?key=APCPCS&scode=MATPHYSAPP

ASM International can give one a broad perspective on materials science and engineering
http://www.asminternational.org/portal/site/www/news/amp/

The Metallurgical Society is another
www.tms.org - e.g., Emerging Materials Technology: Front Page
http://materialstechnology.tms.org/EMT/home.aspx

Also, why do people get offended when I mention industry? I didn't know I had to had dreams of becoming the next einstein to study physics. Is it wrong if I want to study physics because I'd like a better grasp of how everything works and because I love mathematics, yet I'd like my education to secure a job later on?

I work in industry, but I also work with colleagues from national labs and academia. Being proficient at problem solving means job security.

I'm 23 years old, which is why I'd like to have a "foot into the door" if I get a master's degree. Physics would be my first choice, and it's my true love, but I might settle with EE to get the job security I need. Unless there exists some fields of physics that are sought-after in industry, in which case I would submit my application tomorrow with a clear mind.

Hell, maybe I'd fall in love with astrophysics and decided to get a PhD in that, but as of now, I feel like I must get a certain job-security in my university program. Graduating at 30 with an MSc and no job scares the hell out of me.

Physics is a great major! If one is interested in plasmas, there is plenty of work in understanding plasmas in industry as well as astrophysics research.

 

[tamtam402]

Thanks, it just gets discouraging to see all the posts about people unable to find jobs, even with MSc's and PhD's in physics. Part of me would like to think "I know what I'm worth, I'll bust my *** off and get noticed!" but it's physics we're talking about; chances are these other guys looking for work would be at least as good as me.

 

[twofish-quant]

Thanks, it just gets discouraging to see all the posts about people unable to find jobs, even with MSc's and PhD's in physics.

That's why I post as much as I do. There is life after getting your Ph.D.

Also, it's really not that bad. However bad it is for people with technical skills, it's a lot, lot worse for people without them.

Part of me would like to think "I know what I'm worth, I'll bust my *** off and get noticed!" but it's physics we're talking about; chances are these other guys looking for work would be at least as good as me.

Sure. So that's when the total number of jobs becomes important.

The other thing is what constitutes "good" depends a lot on the job, and it's not that hard to create a skill at which you are the best in the world using a "chess-boxing" strategy. There is this sport called chess-boxing at which you play chess and box. If you are good at either chess *or* boxing you get creamed.
.

 

[tamtam402]

That's why I post as much as I do. There is life after getting your Ph.D.

Also, it's really not that bad. However bad it is for people with technical skills, it's a lot, lot worse for people without them.



Sure. So that's when the total number of jobs becomes important.

The other thing is what constitutes "good" depends a lot on the job, and it's not that hard to create a skill at which you are the best in the world using a "chess-boxing" strategy. There is this sport called chess-boxing at which you play chess and box. If you are good at either chess *or* boxing you get creamed.
.

Would trying to get some self-taught programming time done during my whole university carreer qualify as a useful technical skill? I think I'd be very happy to branch off to some sort of physics-math-programming hydrid research if such a thing exist during grad school. Since I'm not trying to become a professor, it would be smart to complete some numerical computing/programming electives instead of stuff such as Quantum mechanics III, right?

One last thing. If my aim is to study physics and then develop more applied skills, would it be smarter to go for an engineering degree and then do more theoretical stuff during grad school? Would the applied physics stuff pretty much be the same as theorical/reseach-heavy engineering?
Is being part of the order of engineers a huge deal in industry?

 

[twofish-quant]

Would trying to get some self-taught programming time done during my whole university carreer qualify as a useful technical skill?

It's pretty much essential. What you learn in class is just the start of your education. A programmer is like a writer, and if you want to be a good writer, then write.

I think I'd be very happy to branch off to some sort of physics-math-programming hydrid research if such a thing exist during grad school.

All of computational physics is some physics-math-programming hybrid research.

Since I'm not trying to become a professor, it would be smart to complete some numerical computing/programming electives instead of stuff such as Quantum mechanics III, right?

Don't think so. At least with me I found that I was able to learn programming more or less on my own without a formal class. I think I've taken only two formal classes in programming in my life (but they were *GOOD* classes). Physics is something I learn better in a more formal setting.

One last thing. If my aim is to study physics and then develop more applied skills, would it be smarter to go for an engineering degree and then do more theoretical stuff during grad school?

It's harder to get into grad school without a physics degree, and in computational physics there isn't a clear division between "theoretical" and "applied".

Would the applied physics stuff pretty much be the same as theorical/reseach-heavy engineering?
Is being part of the order of engineers a huge deal in industry?

It depends which industry. In some areas, (civil engineering for example), certifications are extremely important. In software and electrical engineering, certifications are close to irrelevant.