PhD Physics vs. PhD Materials Science

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the considerations of pursuing a PhD in Physics versus a PhD in Materials Science, particularly in relation to career prospects in industry, the nature of the work involved, and the relevance of the degree title. Participants share personal experiences and insights regarding their academic paths and the implications for future employment.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the title of the PhD may depend more on the department than the actual work done, suggesting that interdisciplinary work is common.
  • Another participant emphasizes that having a PhD is important, but the specific title is less relevant to HR departments.
  • Concerns are raised about job prospects, with one participant mentioning that companies often prefer engineers over physics PhDs, although performance is what ultimately matters once employed.
  • Some participants argue that the choice of PhD should be driven by personal interest rather than job prospects, with one stating that the type of work one does is more significant than the degree title.
  • One participant shares their decision to pursue a PhD in Materials Science, citing greater interest in the projects available in that field.
  • Another participant reflects on their experience in a physics department, describing a gloomy atmosphere regarding career opportunities and a preference for the more applied nature of materials science.
  • Discussion includes potential career paths from materials science to the energy industry, with one participant outlining their transition from materials science to IT security and renewable energy systems.
  • There are mentions of specific applications of materials science, such as thin films and their relevance to emerging technologies in energy generation and transmission.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views regarding the relevance of the degree title to industry jobs, with no clear consensus on whether a PhD in Physics or Materials Science is superior for employment opportunities. The discussion remains unresolved on the best path forward for those considering these degrees.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various factors influencing their decisions, including personal interests, departmental atmospheres, and the nature of work in industry. There is an acknowledgment of the interdisciplinary nature of both fields and the evolving job market.

Laurentiu
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hello everybody,

I've just graduated ( this summer ) from the University of Bucharest with a BEng degree in Technical Physics. I'm currently pursuing a masters degree in the physics of atomes and molecules at the same university. I'm also working in a research institute part of a group studying thin films deposition and characterisation. We publish most of our papers in materials science journals, however we are all physicists.

As the title suggests, I'm interested in doing a PhD at good european university. After that I might remain in western europe, possibly in industry. What would you advise with regard to:\

1) The relevance of the degree to getting a job in industry;
2) The amount of theory I would have to master ( my work so far has been solely experimental);
3) The general career outlook in materials science vs. physics in europe.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
With a Phd the title depends more on which department you end up in rather than what work you do.
A friend of mine was doing a Phd mathematical modeling surface plasmon resonance - but because the effect was going to be used for protein structure it was in the biochemstry dept. So the PhD says school of LifeSciences - but he would still call himself a physicist.

Depending on the country/institution you might have to take some lecture courses, some of these might be more theoretical than your research. My PhD was in astronomical interferometers, entirely experimental work - total theory amounted to high school maths.
 
Perhaps i should rephrase: Which one of the 2 PhD's would :
a) be better with regard to getting a job in industry
b) involve more experimental work

As I understand from your reply, it wouldn't really matter which one I choose
 
I don't think it does. Having a Ph.D. matters, and the particular work you have done to get it matters. No one who is in an HR department cares about exactly what the wording on your degree is though.
 
A friend of a professor I know of who now works in industry told me that companies tend to hire engineers over physics phD's. However, once you get 'in the door', its performance that counts
 
One does a PhD for interest, not because of job prospect. Engineers won't be rich, they just make a living. In the industry, there are two types of people - either you are a tool or you are a wielder. If you want to be a wielder, it all boils down to how much money you can bring in for the company. BS, MS, PhD, it really doesn't matter.
 
I finally did it ! Went or the materials science PhD, I find the projects more interesting !
 
Laurentiu said:
I finally did it ! Went or the materials science PhD, I find the projects more interesting !

Thanks for letting us know!

I have not read the thread before - but I probably would have voted for materials science as well. I am a physics PhD, but actually the work as such could have been tagged with "materials science" as well. I had been working on the optimization of thin superconducting films.

And it was the materials science part that helped me to find my first job after the university (national lab, materials characterization for steel industry).
 
Thank you or letting me know. While doing a masters in Physics, ( Universite Pierre et Marie Curie ) I found the atmosphere inside of physics departments a bit too much on the gloomy side, with everyone having come to accept the limited professional opportunities, that is nobody even considering another route except for PhD - post-doc - post-doc - ...
And I found most topics to be overly fundamental and theoretical. So, when I had the offer from the department of materials science at Imperial College, there was no turning back.

Still, your profile box (?) says you are now doing an energy engineering master post-PhD. I know there is an active society at Imperial discussing energy issues, and I've always been terribly interested in the topic. How would you see the progression from materials science to the energy industry ? I should add, my project will be about functional oxide thin films (applications might be electro- or magneto-caloric, electro-optical ... transparent conductive oxydes ), working with electron-beam lithography and Ion-beam etching and time-of-flight spectrometry ...
 
  • #10
Laurentiu said:
Still, your profile box (?) says you are now doing an energy engineering master post-PhD. I know there is an active society at Imperial discussing energy issues, and I've always been terribly interested in the topic. How would you see the progression from materials science to the energy industry ?

Actually the progression is even wider as I turned from materials science and more hands-on stuff to information technology and my most recent area of expertise has been / is related to IT security.
I am most interested in planning of renewable energy systems and related consulting. I rather consider this sector a diverse and interdisciplinary field that would allow me to utilize different things I had ever learned or gained experience with - incl. IT security (due to the convergence of classical IT infrastructure and energy networks) but also some non-science specific skills such as project management.

I should add, my project will be about functional oxide thin films (applications might be electro- or magneto-caloric, electro-optical ... transparent conductive oxydes ), working with electron-beam lithography and Ion-beam etching and time-of-flight spectrometry ...

But I think there are more straight-forward transition paths of course - if you have experiences with thin films you might turn to working on solar cells for examples. I think with any emerging technology related to energy generation or transmission materials need to be optimized. In order to meet climate protection goals set forth by governments huge efforts in R&D will be required to make all those "low carbon technologies" really efficient.

The materials department at research center that I had worked with had actually emerged from a department that used to investigate materials utilized in nuclear power plants.

Hypothetically... I could also imagine that I might have moved from the research center to steel industry and then I maybe might have worked on the optimizing the materials used in turbines.

When I did my first transition (superconductors --> steel), the type of materials changed and I was not involved in the fabrication of steel directly - but the constant part of the job decriptions was: Investigation of the microstructure of some hightec materials --> correlation to other properties (which are interesting with respect to applications) --> proposing changes to the fabrication process.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K