Physics Possible to become a physicist these days?

[ParticleGrl]

What I'd like to know is, are there really phenomenal physicists with phd's not getting academic jobs?

Yes, absolutely. If we judge "quality" simply by total citation count (certainly not the best metric, but its easy to grab), the five highest cited graduate students who were in my cohort have all left not just physics but science in general. Some of this was probably by choice, but I know for a fact all of them wanted academic careers when they started.

The HEP theory rumor mill has a section called "where are they now" (http://particle.physics.ucdavis.edu/rumor/doku.php?id=where_are_they ) that has a selection of people with a thousand+ citations who failed to get academic jobs in the crowded market of the 90s. I imagine there are similar stories now.

suppose I got lots of good to great publications throughout my undergraduate/graduate career. Am I really going to be transitioning to finance?

It depends on things beyond your control, mostly the funding climate. The other problem is that there are more and more programs dedicated to producing finance graduates then there used to be. Ten years down the line, it might not be that easy to transition. Right now, its pretty easy to break into big data, because its hard to find good people. I imagine in a few years, undergrad CS majors will routinely graduate having seen some of the relevant algorithms.

 

[jesse73]

I hope you don't run into problems 5 years post-PhD. It can happen.

I went to a pretty good school. I don't know if it's top 10 or whatever you guys always talk about, but I suspect it's up there. Most of the people from my cohort are not only employed in a tech field, but are still employed in our field. A few went to banks. A few went directly into industry. 5 years out and everyone looked good. That's when the postdocs started end, etc. That's when I stepped off the train, and I'm finding it very difficult to get industry interested in me in my location, even though I have applicable skills. Several of my other friends are thinking of exiting the field and I suspect are going to find similar types of issues making the transition. Not that they aren't fully capable of making that transition, but they do need to be given the chance to.

It's good that you are making contacts in industry through your research groups. Not all types of physics research has those kinds of connections, even non-esoteric ones.

Exactly.

Postdocs are easier to get than assistant professorships so people are going to drop off even after phD. You need to wait 5+ years after graduation once the postdoc are going to dry up to really consider how transitioning is working out.

 

[Arsenic&Lace]

I wonder if this is merely a symptom of the fact that there simply isn't that much to do in modern research physics, and that much that is done is little more than a rehash of that which was done before, or extremely incremental; thus, even those with apparently engaging ideas cannot find careers within the field.

I think this thread is clearly pointing in the direction of an engineering phd or masters as a good career choice, since they seem to have an easier time of things.

It would also be interesting to see some sort of para-academic association of physicists eventually spring up, since it is inconceivable to me that such a large number of phd's outside academia aren't getting any good ideas (although it's clearly a challenge to be an unfunded experimenter).

 

[jesse73]

I wonder if this is merely a symptom of the fact that there simply isn't that much to do in modern research physics, and that much that is done is little more than a rehash of that which was done before, or extremely incremental; thus, even those with apparently engaging ideas cannot find careers within the field.

I think this thread is clearly pointing in the direction of an engineering phd or masters as a good career choice, since they seem to have an easier time of things.

It would also be interesting to see some sort of para-academic association of physicists eventually spring up, since it is inconceivable to me that such a large number of phd's outside academia aren't getting any good ideas (although it's clearly a challenge to be an unfunded experimenter).

There are tons of unsolved problems in physics but nobody researches them for free and there isn't a ton of money for researching physics.

There is a billion dollar initiative for brain science and an absurd amount of money for renewable energy. Physics isn't considered a priority by the powers that be.

 

[ModusPwnd]

Physicists are leaving physics departments too. There is research opportunity outside of physics for the skills physicists have. My undergrad adviser left physics for biology and my graduate adviser left physics for chemistry.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I wonder if this is merely a symptom of the fact that there simply isn't that much to do in modern research physics, and that much that is done is little more than a rehash of that which was done before, or extremely incremental; thus, even those with apparently engaging ideas cannot find careers within the field.

Do you have any evidence for this?

 

[Arsenic&Lace]

Do you have any evidence for this?

No, it is mere speculation, I neglected to include the appropriate words to indicate this. One does continually hear that there is "nothing left to do" in particle physics, however.

 

[atyy]

I wonder if this is merely a symptom of the fact that there simply isn't that much to do in modern research physics, and that much that is done is little more than a rehash of that which was done before, or extremely incremental; thus, even those with apparently engaging ideas cannot find careers within the field.

I think this thread is clearly pointing in the direction of an engineering phd or masters as a good career choice, since they seem to have an easier time of things.

It would also be interesting to see some sort of para-academic association of physicists eventually spring up, since it is inconceivable to me that such a large number of phd's outside academia aren't getting any good ideas (although it's clearly a challenge to be an unfunded experimenter).

It's the same in mature fields like computer science.
http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer-science/6-042j-mathematics-for-computer-science-spring-2005/lecture-notes/l12_recur2.pdf (Section 2)

The thing is if for some forseen or unforseen reasons your PhD/postdoc/faculty plans are derailed at some stage, it may be easier to transition out into industry in some fields than others.

 

[StatGuy2000]

It depends on things beyond your control, mostly the funding climate. The other problem is that there are more and more programs dedicated to producing finance graduates then there used to be. Ten years down the line, it might not be that easy to transition. Right now, its pretty easy to break into big data, because its hard to find good people. I imagine in a few years, undergrad CS majors will routinely graduate having seen some of the relevant algorithms.

I think this quote further underscores in my mind that a physics PhD is a waste (at least for many if not most branches of theoretical physics PhD -- things may be different for experimentalists), since in a few years time, one avenue (finance) in which a physics PhD could transition to is shut out. Other areas such as data mining/big data will also likely close as CS and stats majors will become better acquainted with the relevant algorithms for the analysis of big data.

Over time, what will then be left for physics PhDs who are unable to find a position in academia or national labs?

As an aside, during my days as an undergraduate student I had at one time seriously considered pursuing a BS in physics with the ultimate aim of pursuing a PhD (I had also considered studying CS or pure math); I wonder to myself how my career would have evolved had I gone down that route, instead of pursuing graduate studies in statistics.

 

[atyy]

I think this quote further underscores in my mind that a physics PhD is a waste (at least for many if not most branches of theoretical physics PhD -- things may be different for experimentalists), since in a few years time, one avenue (finance) in which a physics PhD could transition to is shut out. Other areas such as data mining/big data will also likely close as CS and stats majors will become better acquainted with the relevant algorithms for the analysis of big data.

Over time, what will then be left for physics PhDs who are unable to find a position in academia or national labs?

As an aside, during my days as an undergraduate student I had at one time seriously considered pursuing a BS in physics with the ultimate aim of pursuing a PhD (I had also considered studying CS or pure math); I wonder to myself how my career would have evolved had I gone down that route, instead of pursuing graduate studies in statistics.

As a non-physicist, I feel not too worried about this. Theoretical physics, although the most widely appreciated by the non-physicists like me, seems to have always been done by a relatively fraction of the physics community. The core of physics, surely, is experimental and observational physics. Obviously for those to remain healthy, their graduates must be able to get non-academic jobs.

 

[Arsenic&Lace]

As a non-physicist, I feel not too worried about this. Theoretical physics, although the most widely appreciated by the non-physicists like me, seems to have always been done by a relatively fraction of the physics community. The core of physics, surely, is experimental and observational physics. Obviously for those to remain healthy, their graduates must be able to get non-academic jobs.

Well, I don't think many art history phd's have jobs lined up for them after grad school, although I would not know. for sure.

I think this quote further underscores in my mind that a physics PhD is a waste (at least for many if not most branches of theoretical physics PhD -- things may be different for experimentalists), since in a few years time, one avenue (finance) in which a physics PhD could transition to is shut out. Other areas such as data mining/big data will also likely close as CS and stats majors will become better acquainted with the relevant algorithms for the analysis of big data.

Over time, what will then be left for physics PhDs who are unable to find a position in academia or national labs?

As an aside, during my days as an undergraduate student I had at one time seriously considered pursuing a BS in physics with the ultimate aim of pursuing a PhD (I had also considered studying CS or pure math); I wonder to myself how my career would have evolved had I gone down that route, instead of pursuing graduate studies in statistics.

I don't think it's a waste; most theorists do computational work. A condensed matter theorist working at my local school wound up changing careers and leaving the department for a job making well into the six figures for an oil company of all things. Frankly if you're clever enough to get a theory phd from a good school (and you'd be a fool to get one somewhere else, as far as I can tell) it seems greatly implausible that you will not be able to employ yourself afterwards.

The evidence seems to suggest that, as anybody should have expected, there's only room for extraordinary geniuses in particle theory, given the list of individuals with high citations out of academic work posted earlier in this thread. If you are not incredibly brilliant, perhaps you should not pursue one of the most competitive and challenging disciplines on earth? I doubt I will, unless I am struck by lightning and an ingenius idea falls out of my head (hint: nobody believes it happens that way).

The question is, if you're doing something more down to earth, what happens to you when you jump ship? It looks like you do generally fine, but some anecdotes in the thread suggest otherwise. I'd like to see a similar citations list for, say, condensed matter experimentalists or people in optics or something of that sort.

 

[kinkmode]

The question is, if you're doing something more down to earth, what happens to you when you jump ship? It looks like you do generally fine, but some anecdotes in the thread suggest otherwise. I'd like to see a similar citations list for, say, condensed matter experimentalists or people in optics or something of that sort.

While I may or may not be one of the anecdotes that suggest otherwise, I'm sure in the long run, something will work out for me reasonably well. There just might be a year or two of uncomfortable times, soul searching, etc.

Frankly, getting the Ph.D. (in experimental physics) made me a WAY more competent person. If companies would just realize that, they'd get an amazing employee out of it. It's not that I'm not capable of doing the work, it's that it's tough breaking through the barrier.

Though if you want an easier path to employment, an engineering degree or something would probably be a wiser choice.

 

[jesse73]

A condensed matter theorist working at my local school wound up changing careers and leaving the department for a job making well into the six figures for an oil company of all things.

This is deceptive (although not on purpose) to pretend an oil company is an unlikely place for a condensed matter theorist to end up. Condensed matter researchers work on topic related to materials ,fluid flow , and phase transitions. This is why for a condensed matter theorist working on these topics oil companies is on a very short list of industries that would be the first place to look if you are transitioning out. Most oil companies are in based out of Texas so don't expect much flexibility.

 

[jesse73]

While I may or may not be one of the anecdotes that suggest otherwise, I'm sure in the long run, something will work out for me reasonably well. There just might be a year or two of uncomfortable times, soul searching, etc.

Frankly, getting the Ph.D. (in experimental physics) made me a WAY more competent person. If companies would just realize that, they'd get an amazing employee out of it. It's not that I'm not capable of doing the work, it's that it's tough breaking through the barrier.

Though if you want an easier path to employment, an engineering degree or something would probably be a wiser choice.

In the long run 92% of people regardless of major will find a job even art history phDs.

 

[Corpuscule]

In the long run 92% of people regardless of major will find a job even art history phDs.

The question is which job and where?

From my anecdotal experience, all recent applied physics PhD graduates who I know (mostly optics and condensed matter) can be divided into two groups:
1. Those who have a couple of years of corporate experience (obtained before PhD and before GFC).
2. Those who don't.

All PhD graduates from the first group managed to get non-academic jobs at least marginally relevant to their expertise, although all had to spend a few months searching, and most ended up in entry-level positions.

All PhD graduates from the second group without exception ended up in one of the following sub-categories:
a. Postdocs.
b. Unemployed / unskilled labour.
c. Moved to Asia.

I myself will try really hard to become an exception to this "rule", but I know that it is not going to be even remotely easy.

 

[Locrian]

In the long run 92% of people regardless of major will find a job even art history phDs.

I don't think this means what you think it means.

 

[jesse73]

I don't think this means what you think it means.

Im not sure I understand what you mean. Doing something like the following might make it clearer and less of a one way comment.

"I don't think this means what you think it means. Do you mean ..."

 

[ParticleGrl]

The evidence seems to suggest that, as anybody should have expected, there's only room for extraordinary geniuses in particle theory, given the list of individuals with high citations out of academic work posted earlier in this thread. If you are not incredibly brilliant, perhaps you should not pursue one of the most competitive and challenging disciplines on earth?

I think you missed the point I was trying to make. Some of those people are MORE cited than established professors. Look at the example in biology of Doug Prasher that was brought up.

The point is that ITS NOT ENOUGH TO BE GOOD. You have to be good AND lucky, and the luck element is the more crucial of the two.

 

[AccAcc]

The question is which job and where?

From my anecdotal experience, all recent applied physics PhD graduates who I know (mostly optics and condensed matter) can be divided into two groups:
1. Those who have a couple of years of corporate experience (obtained before PhD and before GFC).
2. Those who don't.

All PhD graduates from the first group managed to get non-academic jobs at least marginally relevant to their expertise, although all had to spend a few months searching, and most ended up in entry-level positions.

All PhD graduates from the second group without exception ended up in one of the following sub-categories:
a. Postdocs.
b. Unemployed / unskilled labour.
c. Moved to Asia.

I myself will try really hard to become an exception to this "rule", but I know that it is not going to be even remotely easy.

What do you consider unskilled labor? What category do the giant boatload of physicists that have gone into Finance/Data Science/Consulting/Insurance fall under?

 

[ZapperZ]

No, it is mere speculation, I neglected to include the appropriate words to indicate this. One does continually hear that there is "nothing left to do" in particle physics, however.

The last time someone said something similar, it was about superconductivity circa 1985. Then all hell broke loose and no one in their right mind will want to be caught with their pants down by saying such a silly thing again.

Obviously, some people have never learned.

Zz.

 

[Corpuscule]

What do you consider unskilled labor? What category do the giant boatload of physicists that have gone into Finance/Data Science/Consulting/Insurance fall under?

By unskilled labour I mean jobs that require very little training, i.e. waiters, shop assistants etc.

I know a lot of physicists who transitioned to Programming/Finance/Engineering, but they all either made a transition a few years ago or (in case of recent transitions) had some corporate experience before starting a PhD.

I understand that there are Physics PhDs without corporate experience who manage to get good non-academic jobs these days, but I personally don't know such people. I guess my sample it too limited.

 

[jesse73]

By unskilled labour I mean jobs that require very little training, i.e. waiters, shop assistants etc.

I know a lot of physicists who transitioned to Programming/Finance/Engineering, but they all either made a transition a few years ago or (in case of recent transitions) had some corporate experience before starting a PhD.

I understand that there are Physics PhDs without corporate experience who manage to get good non-academic jobs these days, but I personally don't know such people. I guess my sample it too limited.

Unless they immediately got those jobs without needing to retrain themselves what they did is better described as "retooling" yourself. If you take a year after graduating or even before graduating to learn a different set of skills than those used directly in your research than what you are doing is "retooling" yourself. Anyone can retool themselves to do better in the job market.

Same goes for getting a masters in engineering.

 

[atyy]

Not in physics, but in biology, an example is Douglas Prasher.

In other times there are stories like those of Schwarzschild and Gentzen. In an interview, Jocelyn Bell said that Rosalyn Yalow taught high school because she couldn't get a faculty position. (Edit: a quick search indicates my memory may be faulty about Yalow.)

Yes, my memory about Yalow was wrong in all details. The right information I meant to refer to is given by Dresselhaus in an interview with Jenni Murray of the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p012bp6b (10:00 - 13:00).

 

[HPagelsfan]

The great inequality

In the end, work is nothing but a trade off - trading a little infinitesimal piece of your time for an infinitesimal bit of money - sum up all the intervals of time, it becomes years, decades of your life. sum up all the money you earned, and in the end it becomes a number not too far away from zero!

So my advice - Study physics because you love it. Most companies love people who are trained thinkers and know how to break down a problem & solve it (whatever it may be). If your money making gig happens to be something different, so be it.