Is Specializing in Theoretical Physics Worth the Risk at Age 32?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SPK81
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    General
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the considerations of pursuing a specialization in theoretical physics at the age of 32, particularly focusing on the implications for career prospects in academia versus industry. Participants explore the balance between specialization and generalization in education, the potential risks associated with pursuing a PhD, and alternative pathways such as engineering.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses concern about the financial implications and job security of pursuing a PhD in theoretical physics, noting the lengthy post-doctoral period before achieving a stable position.
  • Another participant suggests that staying general during undergraduate studies may be beneficial, as it keeps more career options open and emphasizes the importance of having a backup plan.
  • There is a discussion about the potential disadvantages of specializing too early, with one participant mentioning that a general PhD might not be feasible.
  • One participant proposes considering engineering graduate school as an alternative, highlighting the perceived fulfillment and career opportunities in engineering compared to theoretical physics.
  • A later reply questions the value of a PhD in physics for industry jobs compared to an honors degree, seeking clarity on employment advantages.
  • Another participant shares insights from their workplace, indicating a preference for hiring engineers over physicists, particularly for roles requiring specific technical knowledge.
  • One participant concludes that they will pursue a double major in physics while keeping options open for both academic and industry careers.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the merits of specialization versus generalization, with no consensus reached on the best path forward. Concerns about job security and the value of advanced degrees in different fields are also debated, indicating a lack of agreement on the implications of pursuing a PhD in theoretical physics.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various assumptions regarding job market conditions, the nature of academic careers, and the competitive landscape for physics PhDs, which remain unresolved in the discussion.

SPK81
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I started university two years ago, aged 30. I'm now 32 and have achieved minors in math and physics. I really want to focus now on theoretical/mathematical physics (I'm particularly interested in particle physics and cosmology) but I'm concerned that, given my age and the nature the field, it might not be the wisest path. If I go on to do honours and a PhD I'll be 38 by the time I finish and, from what I've been reading in these forums, it might be an additional 10+ years of post-docs etc. before I have a secure job with a decent income… and that's if I'm a good physicist, which of course there's no guarantee I will be.

So, rather than filling my third year of undergrad with units aimed at specialising in theoretical particle physics and cosmology, I'm considering taking a more general approach and gaining a major in a more mainstream field of physics as well as a major in applied mathematics. That way I can choose to do honours in either of these fields and probably find an industry job relatively easily after that.

I feel like I'm coping out on my dream a little if I take the later option, but I am married with a daughter and I am genuinely concerned that if I do go down the PhD route, I may be shooting myself in the foot financially.

If anyone feels they can either alleviate my concerns, or tell me that they are indeed warranted, please do. I'd be particular interested in knowing what kind of prospects I might have as a 38 year old, having just finished his PhD in theoretical particle physics and looking to commence career in academia.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In my opinion staying general through your undergrad is better. It keeps more doors open. You specialize in grad school.

And it's a good idea to have a backup plan. I would not be too concerned about your age. Rather, the prospects in general for a physics PhD looking for a permanent position in academia are slim. Don't fall into the trap of thinking that it's just a matter of being "good." Most PhD graduates are very good. Most are very hard working. Most are very intelligent. At that point the process of who gets in becomes much more stochastic. So it's a good idea to have an escape plan... even if you're the best thing since sliced bread.
 
Choppy gives good advice. Being specialized with a BS can be a hinderance to your career prospects and being general with an MS or Ph.D. can also be a hinderance (although I'm not sure a general Ph.D. is possible... although I have seen a few "jack-of-all-trades" Ph.D programs).

Have you considered engineering graduate school? I work with Ph.D. experimental physicists and cosmologists (I'm a Ph.D. engineer) and I personally find my work much more interesting and fulfilling than I perceive theirs to be.

When you are practicing at a high level, Engineering is quite like "Very Applied Physics" to coin a phrase.
 
That all seems like very sensible advice and gives me something to think about.

analogdesign said:
Have you considered engineering graduate school?

I haven't considered engineering, although there are a number of students doing BSc/BE double degrees at my university and doing physics majors for their BSc. I've often thought that these guys will have really good career options. Not sure why I didn't think of it before, but it's definitely worth giving some thought.

As an aside, if I chose to stick with physics, but look for a job in industry rather than academia, would a PhD provide a significant employment advantage compared to an honours degree? i.e. would it be worth the extra four years studying if I didn't plan to go into an academic career?
 
I can tell you at my workplace we hire engineers with BS, MS, or PhD degrees or Physicists with PhD degrees (very rare to hire a physicist with an MS). Why is this? I'm not sure, but I suspect an engineer with an MS will have a lot more specific knowledge about how to design mechanical or electronic systems and software than an MS in Physics, so why not hire the engineer? There is brutal competition among PhD physicists so it seems an MS in physics would put you at a significant disadvantage either way. It wouldn't be a path I would choose to go down.

If you can get yourself set up in an internship where you show yourself valuable all bets are off. That first job is the toughest.

In all honesty, if you want a Ph.D. but don't plan on an academic career, study Electrical Engineering or Materials Science. Many of the projects overlap very much with projects in physics (especially in the areas of condensed matter and EM).
 
Thank you very much for all your advice. It has clarified my thinking a lot.

I've decided that I'll compete a double major in physics this year, which will take 6 out of my 8 units. With the other two I'll do computational math and complex analysis. My course requires me to do an honours year next year, which I'll do in physics. Between now and the end of next year I can decide for certain about what direction I want to take after that, but at least this path leaves both academic and industry paths open.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K