Physics Possible to become a physicist these days?

[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.