Do Physicists Have To Work From Big Cities?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Silverbackman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physicists Work
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Physicists do not necessarily need to work in big cities, as many opportunities exist in smaller towns, particularly near national laboratories and universities. Locations such as Oak Ridge and Los Alamos demonstrate that significant research centers are often situated in rural areas. While commuting may be necessary, positions at institutions like UC Davis and Penn State offer viable career paths for physicists outside urban environments. The discussion emphasizes the importance of flexibility and the nature of the job when considering employment opportunities in physics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of physics career paths and academic requirements
  • Familiarity with national laboratories such as Los Alamos and Argonne
  • Knowledge of university systems and their geographic distributions
  • Awareness of remote work possibilities in scientific research
NEXT STEPS
  • Research job opportunities at national laboratories like Los Alamos and Sandia
  • Explore academic positions at universities located in small towns, such as Penn State
  • Investigate remote work policies in physics research roles
  • Learn about the application process for top-tier research institutions
USEFUL FOR

Recent physics graduates, researchers considering rural employment, and anyone interested in the dynamics of physics careers outside major urban centers.

Silverbackman
[SOLVED] Do Physicists Have To Work From Big Cities?

Let us say you are fresh out of college with a PHD in physics, do you have to work in a city? When I get older I would have rather lived in a small town, but am I allowed to have a job from a small town and still make a good living? Or do you have to live in a bigger city to actually get a job in the physics field?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Just commute
 
how many physics jobs do you think there are in the "small towns"? None.

Most likely you'll have to commute.
 
What about Livermoore? I drove by there and it didnt seem like there were more then 100,000 people living there! But then again it was just a drive through to get to Oakland...
 
leright said:
how many physics jobs do you think there are in the "small towns"? None.

Most likely you'll have to commute.

I doubt that. I live 'near' Oak Ridge and the UT space institute, and I practically live on a farm. I believe most major national labs are not inside major cities. And what about all the colleges that are rurally located, they don't count?
 
some particle accelerators are located in remote areas. astronomical observatory too.
 
Wasn't the OP some dude who wanted to go into politics, possibly on the national level?
 
You could be a professor in a college or university, many of which are not in big cities. (What are your definitions of a "big" city and "small" town?)

Here's a remote location (far from cities) http://icecube.wisc.edu/what_is_icecube/overview/index.shtml :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
robphy said:
Here's a remote location (far from cities) http://icecube.wisc.edu/what_is_icecube/overview/index.shtml :wink:

Yah but there may be only 2 or 3 starbucks there :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
There are 2 PhD phyicisits in the group I work with, and there are others on site I do not know, local population ~50K.



What is you idea of a small town?
 
  • #12
My city is only ~50k people but we have a university so I'm assuming there's some physics PhDs. I consider it a pretty small city :smile:
 
  • #13
I have heard and read many strange questions about physicists (no, all of us do not work in making nuclear bombs), but I'd say this one is way up there in the degree of strangeness - and there's not even a quark involved.

Zz.
 
  • #14
lol, prety small. I grew up in a town which would considered quite small. A population of about 15,000.

There are actually theoretical physicist I know in my town, but he has almost no name in the scientific community. I also assume that if there are any physics research centers that they won't be payed as much as someone who let's say works at UC Davis or UC Berkeley. Is this true? And if they are no centers or a small center are you allowed do your job by getting the order from the big center?

For example if you work for the UC Davis physics team can you go there once, twice, or three times a week and get your work info or research info and work on it at home or some scientific center?
 
  • #15
A lot of good State US universities are based in small towns, or have large campuses in small towns (the notable exceptions would be California and Washington, though I hear that RIverside is small and they have Jon Baez). PSU for instance is a good State Univeristy for physics that is in a tiny town (State College). Or do you mean non-academic?
 
  • #16
Silverbackman said:
lol, prety small. I grew up in a town which would considered quite small. A population of about 15,000.

There are actually theoretical physicist I know in my town, but he has almost no name in the scientific community. I also assume that if there are any physics research centers that they won't be payed as much as someone who let's say works at UC Davis or UC Berkeley. Is this true? And if they are no centers or a small center are you allowed do your job by getting the order from the big center?

For example if you work for the UC Davis physics team can you go there once, twice, or three times a week and get your work info or research info and work on it at home or some scientific center?

Have you been to Los Alamos? Do you know how isolated that place is? Even if you live in the surrounding area (not in Santa Fe), it is considered a REMOTE area, by any standard...

Unless, of course, you consider Los Alamos National lab as a "small center" that make insignificant contribution to science/physics.

Want more? How "big" do you think Urbana, IL is? You drive by it and if you blink, you'll miss it. Yet, UIUC is a very renowned university with big-time research and big-time physicists. The same can be said about Cornell. Try getting to Ithaca NY.

Zz.
 
  • #17
Silverback, if you want to be in a place with a population below 15,000 (for whatever reason), then you have choices ranging from the smaller university towns (Princeton, State College, etc.) to some of the national labs (LANL, Sandia, etc.). But even at Penn State, during the football season weekends, there will be over a 100,000 people in town. Think you can handle that ? :wink:
 
  • #18
The reason why I like to live in a small town is because I cannot live without nature. Well, I maybe could live without nature, the last few years I have been in a bigger city but once I start my private life after college I would rather live in for example a 100 acre land close to wildlife and nature. I was actually thinking of living close to Lake Tahoe or some place in Placer County and El Dorado County in California, but most town there are really small.

I actually done mind 100,000 people, but it has to be isolated with forests and stuff surounding it. The problem is I don't know many places towns this big with no city right next to it.

Do any of you know a high paying center in North Eastern California or Western Nevada? Especially if anyone knows any places in South Lake Tahoe (a large small town of about 21,000 I think).
 
  • #19
I checked Los Alamos looks interesting, though it is not my favorite climate. But definatley yea that is a very famous research center, didn't know it only had 18,000 though. Know any others in the West US?
 
  • #20
You could retire to a small town, during the summers I live in my home town which is now made up of 6 smaller towns, the the combined population is 4600, I'd say my town alone is about 1600-2000. Anyways, there is a super genius here that retired from NASA prematurely, he had multiple PHD's in physics, languages, politics, but he got too smart. Now he lives in a tiny house reclusive to the world and boards up all his rooms in the winter to save energy. He currently makes a living off tutoring math and physics, and scrimps together enough change to buy cheap carbon batteries sometimes to listen to his radio. Very interesting fellow to talk to, very very smart. But I don't think you want to revert to that lifestyle.
Pointless story probably.
 
  • #21
AS much as i find it odd to say, it sounds like PSU is the place for you: good university, small (practically dead outside of term), in the mountains, 200 miles from a city, from my balcony i could stare at the forests in three directions (the 4th direction was the campus and you can't see it through the building but beyond the campus are fields, lots of fields uninterrupted for miles, bloody cold when the wind comes in off it in winter), plenty of walks and good climbing. it is busy on game day but you can ignore that (if i, a european with no interest in the damn game of american football, can put up with it so can anyone).
 
  • #22
So there would be no way I can work for a major research for center outside the rsearch center? For example if I work for UC Davis and go there every week or two to get work from them. Do you have to work only in places the research centers are in?
 
  • #23
Silverbackman said:
So there would be no way I can work for a major research for center outside the rsearch center? For example if I work for UC Davis and go there every week or two to get work from them. Do you have to work only in places the research centers are in?

Y'know, aren't you putting the cart before the horse here in this thread? I mean, it appears as if that the decision to work there, and not there, etc. only falls on you. Aren't you forgetting another important (and I'd say a MORE important) part, which is what makes you think that THEY would want you in the first place? Is it THAT easy to get an appointment at Los Alamos? Or at Sandia? What about at JILA?

We're talking about places here that get to pick the cream of the crop, and not just people from within the US, but all over the world. I've seen people pull up roots because they get a job offer at some of these places.

Zz.
 
  • #24
ZapperZ said:
Y'know, aren't you putting the cart before the horse here in this thread? I mean, it appears as if that the decision to work there, and not there, etc. only falls on you. Aren't you forgetting another important (and I'd say a MORE important) part, which is what makes you think that THEY would want you in the first place? Is it THAT easy to get an appointment at Los Alamos? Or at Sandia? What about at JILA?

We're talking about places here that get to pick the cream of the crop, and not just people from within the US, but all over the world. I've seen people pull up roots because they get a job offer at some of these places.

Zz.

Never said it was that easy. But I know I can definatley do it if I work at it.

Now that you bring it up what would you need to work in a top research center such as Los Alamos? I am think a PHD from a high ranking university such as Davis, Stanford, or IV League to get a job. What are the main requirments?


But about my original question (which was more of an example) can I work for a resarch center outside the research center by getting work from them and coming once or twice a week?
 
  • #25
Silverbackman said:
But about my original question (which was more of an example) can I work for a resarch center outside the research center by getting work from them and coming once or twice a week?

Isn't this more dependent on the NATURE of the job? I'm employed at Argonne to not only do physics, but actually BUILD something. I think it would be impracticle to do my task of building something by just coming in once or twice a week, don't you? Do you think I would have been employed to do just that under that circumstance? I don't think so.

So unless you're willing to be SPECIFIC, I'd say your question cannot be answered.

BTW, getting an employment in anything at any place depends on not just ability, but being at the right place and the right time. You could have all the talent and ability that you want, but if the opportunity isn't there just at the right time, you won't get what you want either. Most of us who went through this (and life) have realized a long time ago that things seldom work out in the ways we planned.

Zz.
 
Last edited:
  • #26
You'll definitely find more satisfaction in life if you're flexible. Life (including your own whims) is unpredictable.
 
  • #27
ZapperZ said:
Isn't this more dependent on the NATURE of the job? I'm employed at Argonne to not only do physics, but actually BUILD something. I think it would be impracticle to do my task of building something by just coming in once or twice a week, don't you? Do you think I would have been employed to do just that under that circumstance? I don't think so.

So unless you're willing to be SPECIFIC, I'd say your question cannot be answered.

BTW, getting an employment in anything at any place depends on not just ability, but being at the right place and the right time. You could have all the talent and ability that you want, but if the opportunity isn't there just at the right time, you won't get what you want either. Most of us who went through this (and life) have realized a long time ago that things seldom work out in the ways we planned.

Zz.

What I mean is this, for example;

Let us say I am a theoretical physicist working on a project in researching the M-theory. Let us say I am assigned from a research center in Davis and I live in Tahoe. Can I go to the research a couple times a week, spend a lot if the their those couple times, get the work and live in Tahoe? Get the equations I need to work on for the rest of the week in at home or some center in Tahoe for example. Please note this is only an example, I am not saying that I have to live in Tahoe or I have to work for Davis, just an example.

BTW, if you want to work at a top research center such as Los Alamos wouldn't you get a job most likely if you have a PHD from a prestigious university?
 
  • #28
I have heard of that kind of deal only once, and it was for a very well established theoretician. I don't think you can count on finding an arrengement like that at the beginning of a career.

Also, regardless of the kind of work you find, there is a good reason for a project leader to want people to be in the same building or complex: interaction. The thrust of a good group doesn't come only from the talents of the individual members, but also from the (positive) push that "the group" exerts on all of them, by finding fast the answers to things each person does not know, by bouncing ideas with each other, or by the fact that you need to compete with other groups. There is also politics that enter the game, and the need for visibility in the case of big collaborations.

I think the main reason to work in one particular place should be that you deeply enjoy what you do there. When you are at it, you may not pay attention to the surroundings, and on free time you can go to your own place.

That said, a couple places you may find appealing regarding natural surroindings are Fermilab and CERN. Besides a High Energy physics lab, Fermilab is a reserve for buffalos and Canadian giese. CERN, otoh, is in the border between France and Switzerland, very close to Geneva and lake Geneva (or Lac Leman in French) and to the French countriside.
 
  • #29
Silverbackman said:
BTW, if you want to work at a top research center such as Los Alamos wouldn't you get a job most likely if you have a PHD from a prestigious university?

That is in general true. There is no rule that it should be that way; people that evaluate applications will naturally tend to pay closer attention to cv's from those, but will anyway keep an eye on honors and awards and publications and projects and GPA and other things.

The most important factor will anyway be the quality (and to some extent the quantity) of your work.
 
  • #30
Ahkron thanks for the extra advice :smile:. Though I think I would rather stay in my country, but I'll keep Genova in mind. But yea you are right I really should find a way to enjoy myself at the workplace as much as I enjoy nature and the outdoors.

I have another question for you all that is somewhat off-topic. It is about the field of physics I am going in. By the looks of it Astrophysics will be the field I will be going in if I become a physicist, probably in cosmology. However why is it that Grand Unification Theory, M-theory, Theory of everything, ect. listed under Particle Physics. How can this be when those theories are under Particle Physics when they fit better under Astrophysics in cosmology since they describe more about the history of the universe and what not.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
32
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 82 ·
3
Replies
82
Views
8K