Courses Is switching to astrophysics a better option for my future career?

[ergospherical]

I've recently become curious about switching to an astrophysics course for my third and fourth years of undergrad. This course is available to students who have completed two years of either mathematics or physics, and is said to be more mathematically demanding than the standard physics course as a result.

During the first term one studies four courses; 'principles of quantum mechanics' (maths dept.), 'relativity' (physics dept.), and then two further courses on 'stellar dynamics' and 'galaxies' (astrophysics dept.). There are further courses on statistical mechanics (maths dept.) and astrophysical fluid dynamics (physics dept.) available. If I continued on to do a fourth year, I'd be able to take the 'general relativity', 'black holes', 'quantum field theory', etc. courses offered by the maths dept., which appeals massively.

The course structure is a particularly exciting prospect because I'm much more enthusiastic about these topics than those offered on the standard physics course (solid state physics, quantum information, etc.). So I'm considering this seriously and will be attending an informational seminar soon. In the meantime I had a few questions:

1. What is, if any (!), the difference in employment prospects for astrophysics and physics graduates? Obviously if one decides to remain in academia then astrophysics is a little more restrictive, but what about other industries (finance/tech)?

2. What can I be doing in the next 6-7 months to prepare? I've self-studied a fair amount of general relativity and I'm trying to get to grips with Padmanabhan's problem book about structure formation. Should I focus on more general subjects like fluid dynamics, or spend my time studying specific astrophysical structures (stars & galaxies, etc.)?

Thanks.

 

[Astronuc]

1. What is, if any (!), the difference in employment prospects for astrophysics and physics graduates? Obviously if one decides to remain in academia then astrophysics is a little more restrictive, but what about other industries (finance/tech)?

If one is adept at analytics and numerical/data analysis, including solving both sets of linear and nonlinear ordinary and partial differential equations, then one can find a job in many areas, including finance and tech.

2. What can I be doing in the next 6-7 months to prepare? I've self-studied a fair amount of general relativity and I'm trying to get to grips with Padmanabhan's problem book about structure formation. Should I focus on more general subjects like fluid dynamics, or spend my time studying specific astrophysical structures (stars & galaxies, etc.)?

Probably look at the course syllabi and talk to professors, and determine a few key textbooks to peruse. One might find a copy in the university library, and one could also browse relevant journals in the field(s) of interest.

Ultimately, one must decided for oneself in what areas one might wish to contribute.

 

[ergospherical]

If one is adept at analytics and numerical/data analysis, including solving both sets of linear and nonlinear ordinary and partial differential equations, then one can find a job in many areas, including finance and tech.

I have also heard this, that the choice of degree specialisation is not of importance to technical, non-physics related industries so much as the broader underlying mathematical and problem-solving skills evidenced by said degree.

 

[CrysPhys]

I have also heard this, that the choice of degree specialisation is not of importance to technical, non-physics related industries so much as the broader underlying mathematical and problem-solving skills evidenced by said degree.

Oftentimes the greatest obstacle is the extreme reluctance by a freshly minted physics PhD to consider a "non-physics" position.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Culturally, astrophysics is more collaborative than pure mathematics.

 

[ergospherical]

Culturally, astrophysics is more collaborative than pure mathematics.

It does indeed seem like a field with a very high degree of collaborative work, even within physics. No doubt because the data available to astrophysicists come from really big & expensive things.

I might try to find a selection of research papers produced by the department to better understand the sorts of projects which an astrophysics student would be likely to help out with. I'd imagine that numerical & computational modelling, data analysis, etc. would be pretty common underlying themes for grad-student projects, and purely-theoretical work is much less common. Is that roughly correct in your experience?

 

[Astronuc]

I might try to find a selection of research papers produced by the department to better understand the sorts of projects which an astrophysics student would be likely to help out with. I'd imagine that numerical & computational modelling, data analysis, etc. would be pretty common underlying themes for grad-student projects, and purely-theoretical work is much less common. Is that roughly correct in your experience?

When I was at university, I would read trade press (see what companies are doing what in the industry) and scientific/technical journals to explore the major areas of research, and what interesting or perplexing problems the field of nuclear energy, nuclear fuel and structural materials were facing. I read historic articles as well as concurrent articles, which I do to this day, in order to understand how the thinking/understanding evolved. Some experimental work has not been repeated since the 1950s - 1970s, but one can still learn by digging into the weeds (details).

 

[hutchphd]

I'd imagine that numerical & computational modelling, data analysis, etc. would be pretty common underlying themes for grad-student projects, and purely-theoretical work is much less common. Is that roughly correct in your experience?

I think that is true unless you are involved closely with some experimental project which carries an entirely different set of problems. In my experience the grad student research projects in astrophysics were not all that interesting usually some galactic model or other..
On the bright side one of my best friends at grad school got his doctorate in astrophysics. After a stint at AT@T / Bell Labs he founded a series of companies. The first two went belly-up. The third one (Finisar) made his on-paper worth more than 2 gigadollars at one point. It makes fast optoelectronics. So something worked out OK.