Particle or Structure Physics: Which Career Path is Best for You?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the career prospects for physics graduates, specifically comparing paths in particle physics and atomic/molecular (AMO) physics. Participants explore the implications of their choices on future job opportunities in academia and industry, as well as the importance of computational skills in both fields.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Career-related
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses a strong preference for particle physics but is concerned about job prospects compared to AMO physics.
  • Another participant notes that while academic positions in AMO physics may be slightly more available than in particle physics, both fields face significant challenges in securing academic jobs.
  • There is a suggestion that industry opportunities exist for particle physicists, particularly for those with strong computational skills, despite the jobs not directly involving theoretical physics.
  • Participants discuss the importance of gaining computational experience during graduate studies, as it may lead to various job opportunities outside of academia.
  • One participant questions how a particle physicist could be useful in industry, seeking clarification on the applicability of their skills.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the skills learned during physics education can be valuable across different industries, not limited to physics-related roles.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that academic career prospects are challenging in both particle and AMO physics, with some suggesting AMO may have a slight edge. However, there is no consensus on whether one should change their focus based on job availability, as personal interest in the subject matter is also emphasized.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the importance of computational skills but do not resolve the extent to which these skills can be applied in industry versus academia. The discussion reflects varying opinions on the value of pursuing a career in particle physics despite potential job market challenges.

laharl88
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hi everybody! I'm an italian student, I'm about to get my bachelor in physics, and naturally the next academic year I'm going to begin grad school. My problem is: starting with the fact that I'm with no doubt a theoretical physicist, i'd like to know if, as far as regards career, it will be better for me to study (and possibly get a PHD and so on) particle physics or structure (atomic and molecular, i don't really know how to call it) physics.
I think I'm really fond of particle physics, and that's what i really prefer, on the other side some people keep telling me that it's far more difficult to find job as a particle physicist than as a structure one.
I'm sort of going crazy, since when I decided to study physics I just thought "I want to do what i like most, screw job possibilities" but as far as i was told, the situation for particle physics, especially theoretical, is quite desperate.
I'd like to know if you're of the same advice, thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
laharl88 said:
I think I'm really fond of particle physics, and that's what i really prefer, on the other side some people keep telling me that it's far more difficult to find job as a particle physicist than as a structure one.

The jargon that I've heard is AMO physics as opposed to HEP physics. The demand for academics in AMO is somewhat better than HEP, but it's still very hard to get a job there. The google keyword search term that you want is "rumor mill."

I'm sort of going crazy, since when I decided to study physics I just thought "I want to do what i like most, screw job possibilities" but as far as i was told, the situation for particle physics, especially theoretical, is quite desperate.

It's desperate if you want an academic position. There is no jobs problem if you are interested in going into industry. The important thing there is to make sure that you get lots of computational experience while doing a Ph.D., at which point there are just tons of jobs in high-end computer programming.
 
So you're basically telling me that academic career is desperate in both cases, although in AMO is slightly better? Speaking about industry, i can hardly think of the way a particle physicist could be useful in industry, could you explain me this point?
I already knew that computational experience is very important, and luckily for me that is not a problem, in fact i like that pretty much
 
laharl88 said:
So you're basically telling me that academic career is desperate in both cases, although in AMO is slightly better?

Yes. But I don't think it's so much better that it's worth changing your career goals. Your first priority is to finish the Ph.D. and it's easier to do it if you like the topic.

Speaking about industry, i can hardly think of the way a particle physicist could be useful in industry, could you explain me this point?

It depends on the amount of computer experience that you have. If you have a lot of experience programming lattice gauge theory simulations or doing numerical relativity, then there are a lot of jobs that are available that require high performance computing experience. I've worked in the oil industry, logistics, and Wall Street babysitting supercomputers.
 
twofish-quant said:
It depends on the amount of computer experience that you have. If you have a lot of experience programming lattice gauge theory simulations or doing numerical relativity, then there are a lot of jobs that are available that require high performance computing experience. I've worked in the oil industry, logistics, and Wall Street babysitting supercomputers.

So all these industry jobs are all not about physics. I know i'll probably sound naive, but being young, i really hope i'll always be able to do what i had been studying for.
If i got it right, you're suggesting me to stick with particle physics, with the drawback that probably my job won't deal with physics, but it will require lots of programming
 
laharl88 said:
If i got it right, you're suggesting me to stick with particle physics, with the drawback that probably my job won't deal with physics, but it will require lots of programming

Well, the jobs available are unlikely to deal with theoretical particle physics anyway. You should think of your undergraduate and post-graduate study as being a sort of preparation - you're learning a vast set of skills that can be applied to different subject areas. I'm sure you know many industries like to attract physics graduates- because they're good at solving problems/modelling/writing reports etc - this is why twofish mentions this.
 
twofish-quant said:
It depends on the amount of computer experience that you have. If you have a lot of experience programming lattice gauge theory simulations or doing numerical relativity, then there are a lot of jobs that are available that require high performance computing experience. I've worked in the oil industry, logistics, and Wall Street babysitting supercomputers.

Twofish, what did you do your PhD in? I know it was Physics but what area was it in? So most of your jobs were programming related? Not trying to hijack the thread just curious for sake of knowledge. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K