The discussion revolves around the decision-making process regarding undergraduate studies in computer vision versus physics, with considerations of job prospects, personal interests, and potential for further education. Participants share their experiences and perspectives on the fields of computer vision and physics, as well as related engineering paths.
Participants do not reach a consensus on the best path forward, with multiple competing views on the value of specialization, the job market, and the relevance of physics versus computer vision or engineering degrees. Uncertainty remains regarding the implications of pursuing a double major or transitioning from physics to engineering.
Participants express varying levels of familiarity with the educational systems and job markets, which may influence their perspectives. There are also references to the differences in degree requirements and professional certifications that could impact career trajectories.
Individuals considering undergraduate studies in computer vision, physics, or engineering, as well as those interested in the job market dynamics within these fields.
Stan Marsh said: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.
dacruick said:hi tamtam, what do you mean by engineering physics? Like mechanical engineering?
Locrian said: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.
fss said: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 said: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 said: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'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.
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.
tamtam402 said: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!
Learnphysics said: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)
Studiot said:If you like maths, do maths.
Most fields of engineering ( Aerospace, software, major electrical power engineering, oilfield engineering...) require heavy duty computational and applied maths and employ (applied) mathematicians, such as myself.
I have done such work for surveying, gas flow engineering, bridge engineering, corrosion engineering, to name a few, during my career.