Does anyone have any experience with computer vision?

[tamtam402]

Hello, first of all I want to say english isn't my primary language (I'm from Quebec), so I'm sorry if you have trouble understanding me.

I will be attending university next year (I think this is what you guys call undergrad school in the US, with one less year since we have "CEGEP" between high school and college).

I'm hesitating between a B. Sc. in Computer vision (I think the university here is the only one to offer that program at the bachelor's level in North America, but I'm not sure) and a B. Sc. in Physics.

Does anyone have any experience with computer vision?? Is it an interesting field? I really hesitate between these 2, and while I KNOW physics interest me more, I think it would be waaay harder to find a physics-related job once I graduate. I'd like to get a master's degree at the very least (in either computer vision or physics, depending on what I choose to do), but I don't know if a Ph D will be a realistic option for me since I'm 5 years "too old". I basically went straight to the job market after high school before deciding to go back to school (I still get 90's+ everywhere, I'm not a genius but I'm very focused, I think being older gives me a certain advantage in that regard), and I'd like to start "real life" before I'm 35. Of course if I get the chance to complete a PhD it's something I'd consider, but it's not something I guarantee.

I think the computer vision path is *almost* as interesting as physics, but would I be right to believe the probability of finding a related job would be close to 100% if I pursue this field?

Basically, here are the pros and cons I see:

Physics:
1) It interests me a bit more
2) Lower probability of finding a physics-related job once I graduate (can anyone confirm/deny this?)

Computer vision:
1) Slightly lower interest
2) I think I'd rather study something that interests me a bit less BUT with the guarantee to work in the same field over studying something that interests me more and being unable to find a related job later



Sorry for my poor english, hopefully you guys can understand my moral dilemma and give me some insight. If anyone has any general information on computer vision, feel free to share it as I'm not too familiar with it. What attracted me to that field at first was the fact that I like maths and I see it as a good way to make maths "useful". A math genius in engineering might do good in school but there's less opportunity to really use these skills once you graduate, but I think someone who's really interested in maths (and gets good at it at because of that) would have a lot of opportunity to use these skills in computer vision, even in the "real world" after graduation.

 

[NobodySpecial]

I generally think that specialization at undergrad is a mistake.
A BSc in 'computer vision' is going to be (at best) a CS degree with a couple of vision option courses. At worst it's a poor CS course that they are desparately trying to attract students to.

A physics degree, with some interest and practice of programming, is likely to open up as many software jobs as a CS degree. You could certainly do a computer vision phD with a physics BSc as a 'computer vision' one.

 

[tamtam402]

I generally think that specialization at undergrad is a mistake.
A BSc in 'computer vision' is going to be (at best) a CS degree with a couple of vision option courses. At worst it's a poor CS course that they are desparately trying to attract students to.

A physics degree, with some interest and practice of programming, is likely to open up as many software jobs as a CS degree. You could certainly do a computer vision phD with a physics BSc as a 'computer vision' one.

The degree is very good. Students that have done part of the CS degree at this university then transferred to the computer vision degree all agree that the computer vision course is MUCH harder, but very interesting. Basically you get a truckload of math courses (as much as the physics guys), and the programming + computer vision specific courses. People say the "other computer stuff" courses from a CS degree are replaced by maths. As for the computer vision course per se, someone in the normal CS degree could complete almost as many of the computer vision related courses as the computer vision guys (BUT they would lack the advanced maths required to do anything advanced in comp. vision).

 

[tamtam402]

Double major in computer science and physics

Is it a bad idea to do a double major program? This will make me a B.Sc in CS and physics. Both subjets interest me a lot but I know I won't pursue a PhD, I'll stop at the masters level. This is because I'm staying 5 years "late" and I'd like to settle down, get a real job and a family before it's too late. By getting 2 B. Sc I'll be able to see what really interests me AND I'll be more employable once I get my masters.

Thoughts?

 

[fss]

Double majoring ≠ two degrees, which usually requires double the credit hours. You get one degree with two majors.

 

[tamtam402]

Sorry I'm not too familiar with the english names (I'm from Quebec, and our school system is different). This university program does give two different B Sc, one in physics and one in computer science. It takes one year longer than a normal B. Sc to complete (4 years instead of 3).

Now I understand this would be bad if I wanted to be a "pure" physicists and attend one of the top school as a grad student, but since my plan is to end up working in industry or for the governement, would this actually boost my desirability?

 

[Kevin_Axion]

Yea, Computer Scientists are in great demand.

 

[tamtam402]

Is that sarcastic? No offense.
I'm asking because I read that there's a shortage of jobs related to computer science.

 

[tamtam402]

Should I even bother with physics engineering?

I really love physics, but I'd like to securely land a job in R&D after graduate school ( I want a masters degree).

Would doing a B.Sc in physics engineering and then getting a Master in a more specific branch (some part of electrical or mecanical engineering) be a good idea?? Should I even bother doing physics engineering and directly go to electrical and mechanical engineering instead?

 

[physics girl phd]

I've written a few notes before on physics undergrad to engineering masters, and the big question to consider is whether you care to get professional certification as a "Professional engineer" (which might help you in the job hunt). Why?: only certain undergraduate degree programs qualify you to take the written test portion of the certification process, and you may want to look into whether your physics engineering program is an accepted program. Having a master's degree currently does not qualify one to take the written test (although there has been talk of changing this. In short, if you think you want to be a "engineer" in some particular branch, you may want to really look into that now... why wait?

On the other hand, say you've been a physics major, but want to transition into engineering in a reasonable time frame, and the physics engineering program would let you do so. Professional certification isn't required for all jobs (in fact you can't go through the process until you've been a practicing engineer for some number of years), the certification is just often seen as a plus.

 

[tamtam402]

Well the way I see it is that the physics engineering background would give me more chance to work in the R&D field, while still giving me the engineer certification (it's an approved program, I've checked).

Would R&D companies really favor an electrical engineer over a physics engineer with a Masters degree in electrical engineering? To be honest my biggest passion is physics but I'll be 24 years old by the time I begin my 4 year B Sc (I get A's everywhere, my "late" entrance has nothing to do with my capabilities), and while I could get paid to do a masters and a phd in physics (it would be enough for me to survive without getting debt), I would be 32 years old by the time I get my phD without any guarantee to get a job after that. Also, I might think I absolutely want my phD in physics right now, but if I decide I don't want to get a masters degree in 4 years, I'll be left with no alternative option at all (the job prospect for "only" a physics b sc is pretty grim).

That's why I saw engineering physics as a great alternative: I'll be able to follow a lot of physics undergrad courses while getting certified as an engineer.

If I was 5 years younger I'd jump head first into the physics path but I'm getting older and I have to think about the future, unfortunately. Physics is my biggest passion but I don't want to make all other aspects of my life miserable to follow that dream.

 

[Ryker]

If I was 5 years younger I'd jump head first into the physics path but I'm getting older and I have to think about the future, unfortunately. Physics is my biggest passion but I don't want to make all other aspects of my life miserable to follow that dream.

But it's only 5 years. Is that really that much?

 

[clope023]

But it's only 5 years. Is that really that much?

Yes, it's a long time, not everyone likes being a non-traditional student (I certainly don't).

That being said, if my school offered engineering physics I would do that so that I have the technical skills of an engineer with the math/science skills of a physicist and than perhaps master in a specific discipline if I were the OP (speaking as an EE student).

 

[tamtam402]

Yes, it's a long time, not everyone likes being a non-traditional student (I certainly don't).

That being said, if my school offered engineering physics I would do that so that I have the technical skills of an engineer with the math/science skills of a physicist and than perhaps master in a specific discipline if I were the OP (speaking as an EE student).

That's what I'd like to do, but I'm trying to find information on what a physics engineer does and I'm not very successful. Is it better to get a masters degree in a more specialized field if I go the physics engineer route? I was thinking about semiconductors or stuff like that; would that spread me too thin?

 

[clope023]

That's what I'd like to do, but I'm trying to find information on what a physics engineer does and I'm not very successful. Is it better to get a masters degree in a more specialized field if I go the physics engineer route? I was thinking about semiconductors or stuff like that; would that spread me too thin?

From my understanding, even if you were to become a physicist you'd have to specialize in something.

Engineering physicist is also sometimes known as an applied physicist (which have quite a number of schools for semiconductors and other material science subjects); you'd be able to study semiconductor stuff if you were an EE as well though it depends on the schools strengths in the subject (for instance my school seems to put a lot into communications and power engineering vs solid state for undergraduates though their graduate students study it in deph). I do think the extra math and physics background (which shows up in engineering grad school from what I hear/read) would give you an edge vs just pure engineering graduates but that might be my slightly uneducated view on the subject and the somewhat weak mathematics of my own schools engineering program (they don't have to take linear algebra here for instance).

 

[Ryker]

Yes, it's a long time, not everyone likes being a non-traditional student (I certainly don't).

Alright, fair enough. I guess it depends on people's preferences. I was actually in the same situation, but I just figured since we're going to live to be 100 years old, and retire at age 70, it is worth risking 5 additional years to be able to do what you really like the most (even if the jobs you get aren't exactly what you envisioned them to be).

 

[physics girl phd]

Well the way I see it is that the physics engineering background would give me more chance to work in the R&D field, while still giving me the engineer certification (it's an approved program, I've checked).

Would R&D companies really favor an electrical engineer over a physics engineer with a Masters degree in electrical engineering?

I think you're looking at things in a fine way -- and have done your research by checking to be sure the program qualifies you for the certification path. Companies would tend to look at the final degree... and a master's in EE is more employable, especially over a PhD in physics.

I took about the same route, but I had a BS in physics (so I don't qualify for the PE exams), before getting an MS in electro-optical engineering. Note, however, that then I wanted to cap off my degrees (which also included an earlier M.Ed. in classroom teaching) with the PhD in physics. I mention this because you briefly talk about it also. I will add here that I think this move (along with the family that came at about the same time as the PhD) did what you are wary about -- it considerably curtailed my employment possibilities (I'm now a part-time lecturer at a large state university in the US). If I had to do it over again, I'd stop at the MS in engineering, rather than get the small amount of self-edification that went with getting the PhD (although there have been pluses, like my small daughter, that have more than made up for things). It's just a point I look back on and often think a big decision to stop at the MS may have meant a more happy professional life.

 

[tamtam402]

I think you're looking at things in a fine way -- and have done your research by checking to be sure the program qualifies you for the certification path. Companies would tend to look at the final degree... and a master's in EE is more employable, especially over a PhD in physics.

I took about the same route, but I had a BS in physics (so I don't qualify for the PE exams), before getting an MS in electro-optical engineering. Note, however, that then I wanted to cap off my degrees (which also included an earlier M.Ed. in classroom teaching) with the PhD in physics. I mention this because you briefly talk about it also. I will add here that I think this move (along with the family that came at about the same time as the PhD) did what you are wary about -- it considerably curtailed my employment possibilities (I'm now a part-time lecturer at a large state university in the US). If I had to do it over again, I'd stop at the MS in engineering, rather than get the small amount of self-edification that went with getting the PhD (although there have been pluses, like my small daughter, that have more than made up for things). It's just a point I look back on and often think a big decision to stop at the MS may have meant a more happy professional life.

Couldn't you go job-hunting without mentionning your PhD though? Do you think it's the PhD that is holding you back, or the lack of a PE title?

Also, does anyone have any experience to share about Physics engineers?? Would it be hard to find a job as a Physics Engineer bachelor (with the PE title) and a masters in a sub-field of engineering?

 

[tamtam402]

Top schools cost?

How much does it cost for 1 year of grad school at Stanford or MIT (and similar schools)? I'm from Canada and I have to pay for my own education, my parents won't help me. Would I end up in debt if I were to attend such a school, or would my "salary" (sorry I'm not sure what the appropriate word id, I'm from Quebec) make me at least break even?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Jack21222]

In a PhD program?

Free.

 

[fss]

If you're in a PhD program you usually get some sort of stipend that covers your education as well as tries to contribute towards your living costs (usually you TA a lab section or two or do something of that nature to "earn" your stipend). Neither Palo Alto nor Boston are inexpensive cities, though.

 

[leright]

I've never heard of "physics engineering". This is not something that is granted in the US, am I right? Are you Canadian? I have heard of engineering physics though. Is this the same thing?

 

[tamtam402]

What about master degrees though? One needs a master in a "top" school to also be admitted to one of these universities for a PhD, right?

 

[tamtam402]

Sorry I don't know the proper term in english, I'm from Quebec. I assume that would be the same thing, yes.

 

[Pengwuino]

What about master degrees though? One needs a master in a "top" school to also be admitted to one of these universities for a PhD, right?

No. Why would they?

 

[Jack21222]

What about master degrees though? One needs a master in a "top" school to also be admitted to one of these universities for a PhD, right?

In the US, it goes B.S. --> Ph.D.

Is this for Physics? If so, read ZapperZ's sticky.

 

[Shackleford]

In the US, it goes B.S. --> Ph.D.

Is this for Physics? If so, read ZapperZ's sticky.

At many universities, you can of course along the way get your masters. You also can start your Ph.D work from a masters, too.

 

[twofish-quant]

For physics and math Ph.D.'s, the school pays everything and gives you a stipend. You end up with zero debt. Also, you can often get subsidized housing.

As far as undergraduate (which wasn't the topic of the original question), all of the major schools offer some form of financial aid, but the amount that you will get and how to play the game to maximize your package is something that people can (and have) written entire books about.

 

[eri]

In the US, you can enroll in a PhD program with a bachelors and you will take the masters classes (and often write a masters thesis or take a qualifying exam) en route to the PhD. You CAN do them separately, but this isn't common - because after you transfer, most schools will make you retake some of your courses and you'll need to take their qualifying exam. Also, masters-only programs rarely offer funding (you'll have to pay for them) and top schools don't admit students who are only doing a masters (terminal masters) because rankings depend on how many PhDs you graduate.

 

[tamtam402]

Is there anything for me in electrical engineering?

I'm more of a calculations and "thinking" man than a hands-on person. Is there anything for me in electrical engineering?? I was interested by physics engineering but I'm older (23) and I'd have to do a masters to get a decent job if I go that route, not to mention I'm not sure I could even find an interesting job (there's not much information on physics engineering/applied physics).

 

[Stan Marsh]

Lots of my physics background schoolmates get EE/EECS master admission. They do research of CMP or plasma or else during undergraduate. So I guess it is not hard to get admitted for a master degree.
If you don't like that, maybe you can consider interdisciplinary phd. You still have a chance to learn physics, and interdisciplinary programs -- in my opinion -- is more practical and funny.

 

[tamtam402]

Lots of my physics background schoolmates get EE/EECS master admission. They do research of CMP or plasma or else during undergraduate. So I guess it is not hard to get admitted for a master degree.
If you don't like that, maybe you can consider interdisciplinary phd. You still have a chance to learn physics, and interdisciplinary programs -- in my opinion -- is more practical and funny.

Yes, this is exactly my problem. I don't want to have to rely on a master's degree to be "useful" and get a decent job. I'm older and I'm not sure if I will want to get a master's degree. Actually that's not true, I know I'll *want* it, but I'm not sure I'll be able to realistically get one; I have to start "real life" some day, and I'll be 28 by the time I finish undergrad school.

 

[tamtam402]

Engineering physics > Physics in industry?

Would engineering physics be a good idea if I plan to get a masters degree and work in industry? I'm from Canada if that changes anything (I think the engineer title is valued a lot here).

Unfortunately I can't find much information on engineering physics.

 

[dacruick]

hi tamtam, what do you mean by engineering physics? Like mechanical engineering?

If you want to go work in industry, you would probably look at an engineering degree. I'm personally a physics student, and I am working at a solar energy company right now. There are 2 other PhD physics guys and myself. The rest are all engineers. The rest being around 15 people or so.

If you have a knack for physics, and you are the hands on type and like creating things, you should go for engineering.

I always find that its a safer bet to just do what you love to do, and good things will follow.

EDIT: And if you don't love to do anything, make the most money so you have to work as little as possible :)

 

[tamtam402]

Does this job/specialization even exist?

My university offer a physics BSc and one of the specific branches is "scientific calculation". That got me thinking, is it possible to do graduate study in some sort of physics simulation/calculation programming hybrid? Would there be a market for someone with such skills?

Is there a more "direct" approach if these are my goals? (ex: if aerospace engineers specialise in such simulations, it might be wiser for me to study that and then specialise in the simulation part)

 

[NobodySpecial]

A lot of graduate study in physics and astronomy is numerical modelling.

The main industrial use is probably Wall St (quants) - so you should probably be able to find a job if you know how to solve massively complex problems on a computer efficently.

 

[Locrian]

hi tamtam, what do you mean by engineering physics? Like mechanical engineering?

In my opinion this is the biggest barrier engineering physics faces - many employers have no idea what it is, and are more comfortable just grabbing an engineer, or physics student with the relavant background.

You can get around the problem with experience and good communication, but you need to be aware it exists.

 

[tamtam402]

In my opinion this is the biggest barrier engineering physics faces - many employers have no idea what it is, and are more comfortable just grabbing an engineer, or physics student with the relavant background.

You can get around the problem with experience and good communication, but you need to be aware it exists.

Well what am I supposed to do with my life then? :(

My goal is to work in R&D with interesting technology, OR to work on challenging problems (twofish comes to mind, his job in finance looks like something I would find challenging and fun). However, I'll be 24 when I start undergrad and I can't really get a PhD, I feel like that will make me start "real life" too late; I settled for a masters degree.

Maths and physics interest me a lot, and I have been around computers since I was a child. However, I've never programmed. I think Computer Science would be interesting, especially the kind of jobs you can get with a master's degree (it's more than grunt programming, right?), BUT I don't see myself being able to compete with all the self-taught programmer kids who have been doing the stuff for 10 years.

Would there be something for a not-so-hands-on kind of guy in engineering? Would getting a master's degree open me doors for R&D positions that would better fit the theory guy?

 

[dacruick]

In research and development you hit an interesting barrier. If you are researching, that means you are not producing. If you are not producing, that means you are not making the company money. That means that there isn't always a huge budget for R&D, especially to fork out the kind of money that people with their masters and PhD usually get. R&D is also the first government sector to fall when there is economic issues.

That being said, I work in R&D, I am a physics student on a co-op term, and I almost exclusively program. I've been writing in python for about 6 months and I'm getting fairly advanced already. And I had never done programming before last year, so don't rule that out as an option. If you have ethic and a good mind for programming then you will be able to bring yourself to levels that others are at.

 

[tamtam402]

What about the "code monkey factor" though? I'm pretty sure programming *could* interest me, but only if I get to use mathematics and problem solving logics daily.

The way I see it, programming is the most "accessible" way to use a fair amount of maths in the real world, but would I really use mathematics?

I'm the kind of guy that would take all the math courses possible if I ever went into Comp. Science. However, I've been reading and from what I could find, you rarely use mathematics in your "real job" as a comp sci. graduate. Anyone mind sharing some opinion/experience here? Drone jobs bore me to death, I know some smart people than can endure them to some extent but I'm not one of these guys. If I'm not challenged, I get bored FAST.

 

[eri]

The University of Maryland has a program in Computational Physics, and I'm sure they're not the only one.

 

[tamtam402]

Is there anything for a math/problem solving guy in EE?

Hello! First of all I must say I would be starting as an EE undergrad at 24 years old. I've been debating a lot about going the physics or the engineering route, and I had to settle with engineering since I'm older than the average student and I need a certain job security once I'm done with school.

I plan to get a master's degree, but a PhD might be too long for me (I'd be 32 by the time I get one, and chances are I'll want to start "real life" before then). This is another reason why I chose engineering over physics; a PhD is pretty much required to do anything physics related.

Now, I have absolutely no experience with electrical devices, circuits, etc. All I know is that I LOVE maths and solving problems. If maths could be part of my daily job I couldn't be happier ("hard" math, of course. Something that required thinking). Is there a field of EE that could be good for someone like me? I'm not really a hands-on person. Is that a big issue if I go the engineer route? I don't want to be a mediocre engineer that went in it for the money; I work very hard and I consider myself a fast learner.

I'd love to have a few recommendations on EE sub-fields that might be appealing to someone like me. Also, if you have other suggestions in other fields, feel free to list them!

 

[chaoseverlasting]

Signal analysis uses a lot of math. I think anything related to EE in any way uses a considerable amount of math. You don't necessarily need to be a hands on guy though it does help, and in some cases is absolutely required.

Another area could be power systems. Load flow analysis, etc requires a significant amount of math, and EE in general, it seems, is dependent on computational techniques in these areas. Maybe software design? I'm a student myself, so I could be completely off the mark as regards the job scene afterwards.

 

[fss]

Pretty much every branch of (electrical) engineering involves math and problem solving on a daily basis. Since you haven't even started your coursework yet, why don't you wait a bit and get your feet wet with the basics before thinking about a subfield to specialize in? There's a lot to be said about crossing bridges when you come to them.

 

[dacruick]

You will definitely need math if you end up programming for the rest of your life. it would be very useful to become good at statistical analysis too.

But the fact of the matter is if you go to university, they teach you to be able to get into grad school, not to go out to a specific job and be successful. so you'll be doing math in dimensions no one will ever hire you for.

 

[tamtam402]

Pretty much every branch of (electrical) engineering involves math and problem solving on a daily basis. Since you haven't even started your coursework yet, why don't you wait a bit and get your feet wet with the basics before thinking about a subfield to specialize in? There's a lot to be said about crossing bridges when you come to them.

Because I haven't started yet. See, my "true" passions are physics and math. However I already stated I'm 23 and I would need a PhD in either of these fields to *maybe* land a good job. I'm too old to go the physics path, get my PhD and end up developing software in a completely unrelated field.

My dad is an EE but he's been working in, err, I'm not sure how that's called in english but he makes building plans. He doesn't really use math and some technicians at his job do the same thing as him. I've also read a lot of posts about EE/ME that spend an insane amount of time on trivial tasks such as designing parts in CAD, involving no mathematics at all. Of course it takes someone to do that and I bet some people love it (my dad love his job), but I'm not one of these guys. My dad solves problems at his job everyday, but they're not math problems; he has to coordinate a lot of people, solve issues with the electricians on the jobsites, solve issues with architects, etc. That's not what I'm looking for.

Engineering seemed like a "secure" field to get into, which I believe is good for someone a bit older like me. Can I get into engineering expecting to do a job involving math and mathematical problem solving though? Will I find such as job if that's what I want? I plan to get a master's degree if that changes anything. Am I the wrong type of person for engineering jobs? I'm not looking for money, I'm looking for a job that will keep me interested, which in turn will make me want to do it and get better at it.

 

[tamtam402]

You will definitely need math if you end up programming for the rest of your life. it would be very useful to become good at statistical analysis too.

But the fact of the matter is if you go to university, they teach you to be able to get into grad school, not to go out to a specific job and be successful. so you'll be doing math in dimensions no one will ever hire you for.

When I say I'm interested in maths, I don't expect to solve problems in 12 dimensions as a daily job, of course. But, something that would require me to think and "see" what kind of math can be used to solve X problem, even though the math isn't the hardest thing in the world, would be a step above getting told to program X thing using Y way. Can I expect to find a "math" job like that in Comp Sci., or am I better off somewhere else if I want to use my brain daily at a job?

 

[dacruick]

no one is going to baby you through anything. If you are the programmer they are going to tell you to program X, and that it better be good.

As for myself, I want programming to be a tool, not a career. If you told me I had to be a programmer for the rest of my life I would be very upset.

 

[fss]

Because I haven't started yet. See, my "true" passions are physics and math. However I already stated I'm 23 and I would need a PhD in either of these fields to *maybe* land a good job.

What gives you this impression?

I've also read a lot of posts about EE/ME that spend an insane amount of time on trivial tasks such as designing parts in CAD, involving no mathematics at all.

Hate to break it to you, but grunt work is a part of almost every job in a technical or scientific field.

My dad solves problems at his job everyday, but they're not math problems; he has to coordinate a lot of people, solve issues with the electricians on the jobsites, solve issues with architects, etc. That's not what I'm looking for.

At a certain point (well, if career advancement is at all important to you) both physicists and engineers become managers in some capacity.

 

[Learnphysics]

Hello! First of all I must say I would be starting as an EE undergrad at 24 years old. I've been debating a lot about going the physics or the engineering route, and I had to settle with engineering since I'm older than the average student and I need a certain job security once I'm done with school.

I plan to get a master's degree, but a PhD might be too long for me (I'd be 32 by the time I get one, and chances are I'll want to start "real life" before then). This is another reason why I chose engineering over physics; a PhD is pretty much required to do anything physics related.

Now, I have absolutely no experience with electrical devices, circuits, etc. All I know is that I LOVE maths and solving problems. If maths could be part of my daily job I couldn't be happier ("hard" math, of course. Something that required thinking). Is there a field of EE that could be good for someone like me? I'm not really a hands-on person. Is that a big issue if I go the engineer route? I don't want to be a mediocre engineer that went in it for the money; I work very hard and I consider myself a fast learner.

I'd love to have a few recommendations on EE sub-fields that might be appealing to someone like me. Also, if you have other suggestions in other fields, feel free to list them!

I've dabbled a bit into electrical in my first year (my degree is a mechatronics degree, so mechanical/electrical/software mix)

From what I've seen so far, the math is quite interesting. However there's a lot of things like circuit design/physically putting together circuits which is fun, but may not be your thing.

But yeah, i think EE is probably a pretty math heavy Engineering field. (far more than mechanical/software at least)