Industrial grad degrees with a physics bs

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the exploration of graduate degree options for students with a Bachelor’s degree in physics, particularly focusing on fields that offer stable employment and align with personal interests. Topics include medical physics, biomedical engineering, and nuclear engineering, along with considerations of job market demand and ethical implications.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses a desire to find a graduate degree that offers job stability and aligns with their interests, mentioning medical physics and biomedical engineering as potential options.
  • Another participant endorses medical physics as a lucrative career choice but notes it does not interest them personally, suggesting that the original poster should choose based on their own interests.
  • Concerns about nuclear engineering contributing to harm are raised, with one participant arguing that it should not lead to negative outcomes unless involved in weapons development.
  • A participant defends nuclear engineering, citing the safety record of nuclear power in the U.S. and arguing that it could save lives by providing cleaner energy compared to fossil fuels.
  • Discussion includes the potential demand for nuclear engineers as the U.S. resumes nuclear power initiatives, with references to specific organizations like the Tennessee Valley Authority considering nuclear options.
  • Concerns about radioactive waste management are highlighted, with one participant mentioning ongoing issues with waste storage and advancements aimed at reducing waste production in nuclear energy processes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of pursuing nuclear engineering, particularly regarding safety and ethical considerations. While some advocate for its benefits, others remain concerned about its potential risks. There is no consensus on the best graduate path, as interests and values vary among participants.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the implications of various fields without resolving the ethical concerns associated with nuclear engineering or the specific job market conditions for each suggested career path.

marmot
Messages
55
Reaction score
1
I am studying physics and I love it. However, I think I am not cut for academia's cutthroat atmosphere, nor am I smart enough for it. I was wondering for other grad degrees that offer a stable job and a stable salary while still doing the stuff I like. I read about medical physics, which seems not a bad idea. I also read about biomedical engineering, which accepts a lot of physics students. Any more suggestions? There is also nuclear engineering but I don't like the possibility that I might contribute to the murder of children.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Medical physics is a wonderful carrer choice. Lots of money available, and decent demand if you do well in graduate studies. Unfortunately for me it in no way interests me, but we are talking about you. I would recommend choosing what interests you the most... And nuclear engineering should not lead to the death of children unless you go into weapons development. Just look around. And have you considered IT.
 
Nuclear engineering is far from killing any children. Three Mile Island, the only nuclear meltdown the U.S. ever had killed 0 children, (0 people, with i believe like 3 total injuries). I know that nuclear power gets a bad rap, but it would actually save a lot more than hurt, in my opinion. It is such an efficient energy, once the waste can be properly disposed of, but hey, maybe that is what you could do! Nuclear engineers are going to be in insane demand soon as the U.S. is going to have to start with the resuming of nuclear power.
 
lax1113 said:
Nuclear engineers are going to be in insane demand soon as the U.S. is going to have to start with the resuming of nuclear power.

True: TVA (the Tennessee Valley Authority) is looking at nuclear power plants (they were already, but I'm sure it's even now more pressing after the recent "sludge" of fly ash).
 
Yeah I mean at the moment, the other ways of producing energy, coal/fossil fuels produce so much more pollution than nuclear energy that it would really help to be cleaner. The big issue is the radioactive biproduct. This is another cause for nuclear engineers. At the moment a lot of the waste is literally being stored in a mountain in Nevada. Sections are cut out and barrels of radioactive waste is just put into it. Definetly not a good idea, but ways are being developed to make a lot less waste. (read one article that a nuclear engineer foudn a way to use only part of the radioactive isotope that led to 90% less of the radioactive waste in the end!) This way just didn't produce the energy quick enough.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 92 ·
4
Replies
92
Views
22K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K