Programs Should You Pursue a Physics PhD? Advice from Brian Schwartz

[ZapperZ]

If it's any encouragement, I'm one person who's been following this thread, and who has no intention to alter his plan to become a physics professor. Those of us who've finished our BS degrees in physics have a small taste of the ardurous nature of the PhD program, and if that didn't dissuade us, then a thread on an Internet forum won't do so either. Heck, just studying for my PhD qualifying exam is driving me crazy right now. If I didn't like physics so much, I'd have ditched it a long time ago, thread or no thread.

Or you can look at it this way. With people being scared away from doing Physics and/or pursuing a Ph.D in physics due to this thread, there's an even greater chance of you finding a suitable job.

Zz.

 

[J77]

Or you can look at it this way. With people being scared away from doing Physics and/or pursuing a Ph.D in physics due to this thread, there's an even greater chance of you finding a suitable job.

If you browse the thread... however, I can see no definite reason -- other than some personal opinions -- as to why one should not Do PhD In Physics!

Having just written that, I now see one very good reason to bin this thread...

...an ungrammatical title

 

[fasterthanjoao]

...bin this thread...

yep. All going well, I'm still going to do my Ph.D.

 

[Ki Man]

I think we should go with ZZ and change this from "dont do a phd in physics" to "the challenges of getting a science phd"

I'm still going to go into physics. the only thing this thread made me do is consider tutoring for some extra cash but no way I'm not doing physics

 

[mathwonk]

this a strange thread. as i have said, i was a meat lugger in south boston before doing a phd in algebraic geometry and becoming a prof.

i can tell you doing a phd and becoming a prof is easier than curing the cuts on your arms every night from the hooks in the meat, and wondering when you are going to get stabbed.

the academic life is a wonderful life, a dream world of learning and teaching and sharing knowledge.

if you want an internship in a lucrative field, go on "apprentice" and kiss donald trump's ass.

phds are not for sissies. Listen to Zz, not the hangers on.

 

[Ki Man]

So what kind of person would it take to be the one out of the group of aposers to make it as a PhD. Is love for the science and determination enough to get you somewhere?

 

[TMFKAN64]

How many PhD scientists do you know of that have worked at theSAME job at the SAME company for 10-15+ years?

Maybe this is just the computer industry, but I don't know *anyone* who has worked at the SAME job at the SAME company for 10-15+ years.

And maybe this is just me, but I'd find doing the same thing day after day incredibly boring.

 

[mathwonk]

what do you mean by get somewhere? spending your time thinking about what you love is alredy getting somewhere pretty nice.

 

[ZapperZ]

Maybe this is just the computer industry, but I don't know *anyone* who has worked at the SAME job at the SAME company for 10-15+ years.

And maybe this is just me, but I'd find doing the same thing day after day incredibly boring.

... and maybe that's the difference between research work, especially in physics, and the computer industry. Someone could be at a particular job for 20, 30 years, and would not be doing the "same thing". No one in that position is hired to do the same, repeated work. The whole point of being a research scientist is to work on things that are not well-known, not discovered, not explained, and beyond our present understanding. In my 10+ years doing research, I've gone from doing tunneling spectroscopy to photoemission spectroscopy to accelerator physics. Many people here at Argonne who have been here 15, 20 years (we have an rf engineer here in our group who will be at Argonne for 45 years this Sept.) who have a huge variety of work that they have done that it'll make your head spins.

I can say without a single shread of doubt that each of my day at work is never routine, mindless grind.

Zz.

 

[mathwonk]

I am going out on a limb here, but I will suggest that last comment is partly Zapper's attitude toward his work. If you look for something interesting everyday to think about and discuss, you will be more likely to find it than if you do not. All jobs are like that.

You can just grade calc papers and complain, as a prof, or you can think about how to make the material more interesting, and think of ways to make it more clear, or more connected to other subjects.

You can attend seminars in other areas and stimulate your mind or just hole up in your office. Take an interest in your work and in that of others and it will become more interesting.

 

[ptabor]

Thank you to wonk and Zz for providing some shred of insight in this otherwise convoluted rant.

 

[muppet]

Seconded

 

[G01]

It seems this thread may be turning around. If it doesn't I vote that we just let it die already.

 

[zcapa91]

a few people at least are also from the UK and it seems that prospects here are better.

one major difference is that it is standard here to complete a bsc in 3 years and a phd in 3-4 years with the possibility of 'skipping' the msc which only takes 1 year here anyway. in the usa i believe a bsc takes 4yrs and that a phd takes 5 years where you complete an msc dissertation after 2 years. In terms of entering industry i think this 'saved' time is very important.

purely financially things seem more favourable aswell. There is a TAX FREE stipend available of at least £12k (~$24k) plus any teaching work etc you take on. Although you are still paying interest on student debts and you are not earning as much as peers who may have directly entered employment the financial gap between phd students and those who are not should be narrower.

 

[littlephoenix]

Or you can look at it this way. With people being scared away from doing Physics and/or pursuing a Ph.D in physics due to this thread, there's an even greater chance of you finding a suitable job.

Zz.

explain what a suitable job is, where we can find such jobs, city, state, working for boeing etc. ?

 

[Norman]

please close this thread...

Why is it constantly being resurrected?

What ZapperZ means by a suitable job is a job for which your Ph.D. in physics has prepared you. Is a person in geophysics going to work for boeing... maybe, probably not.

 

[imy786]

what kind of salary do you get if you do a PHD in physics or maths?

 

[arunma]

what kind of salary do you get if you do a PHD in physics or maths?

Here's some figures from my department:

My advisor, who is tenured faculty, makes $90,000/year. My quantum professor (also tenured) makes approximately the same. One of the other professors in my research group, who I think is non-tenured, makes $80,000/year. Our department's chair and the other three distinguished professors make $136,000/year. The lecturer I TA for makes only $30,000/year. She has a PhD in physics, but she only lectures for the intro-level courses, and doesn't do research. The other lecturers in my department make about the same. Interestingly though, all of them but one are married to professors. I think when a professor who's married to another physicist gets employed at my department, they'll also offer a lecture position to his (or her, in one case) spouse.

So why the disparity? I guess that the PhD itself won't guarantee a specific salary, since this is determined by what you choose to do afterwards. Maybe someone on the other side of graduate school can explain this to me.

Oh incidentally, if you're wondering how I know all my professors' salaries, it's because a newspaper in our state put together an online database of all state employee's earnings. It was really fun when another TA and I were proctoring an exam with one of the researchers. We got on my laptop and literally looked up his salary behind his back.

 

[imy786]

lol that's really useful advice...but the salary will vary compared to UK.
if the TA is getting $30,000/year.thats about 15,000 pounds.
so after all those years of study and to gain a PHD receiving only 15000 pounds in first job is not ideal...i would think/assume they would get about at least 25,000 pounjds to lecutre= $50,000.

 

[arunma]

lol that's really useful advice...but the salary will vary compared to UK.
if the TA is getting $30,000/year.thats about 15,000 pounds.
so after all those years of study and to gain a PHD receiving only 15000 pounds in first job is not ideal...i would think/assume they would get about at least 25,000 pounjds to lecutre= $50,000.

Just some clarifications.

First, it's not the TAs who make $30,000/year. This is the lecture professors' salaries (actually most of them make $40,000). Us TAs make about $19,000/year, and that's only if you include the salaries from our summer research positions. Also I should point out that the lecturer position isn't a first job. Typically grad students will become postdocs after they graduate, which will give them an approximate salary of $40,000/year. After that comes a tenure-track faculty position, which at my school pays about $60,000 to $80,000/year at my department. The lecture position seems to be more of a job for wives and husbands of faculty, since it isn't tenure-track.

Well, hope that helps!

 

[Astronuc]

what kind of salary do you get if you do a PHD in physics or maths?

That probably depends on the area of one's research and dissertation. Twenty years ago, one of my colleagues got job offers on the of $50-60K (US) with his PhD. Nowadays it's 60K and above just coming out of school.

Someone who does sophisticated analyses could probably get $70K (US) and above.

Fields where there is heavy demand and short supply could conceivably get $80-100 K.


A young employee with a MS degree and about 3 years experience was able to get offers of ~$80K, because there is a shortage in the industry in which he is working.

 

[imy786]

1.what industry is that?

also 2.what industry is most profitable right now?
and.
3. what would be best advisable to go to after a BSC in Physics

3 questions

 

[Astronuc]

1.what industry is that?

also 2.what industry is most profitable right now?
and.
3. what would be best advisable to go to after a BSC in Physics

3 questions

Answer to 1. is nuclear industry.

Even the most profitable industries are cyclical.

I'm not sure what is meant by the 3rd question.


At the moment, I would recommend a diverse academic background. Certainly cover as many areas in physics as possible, e.g. QM, solid state, EM, . . . . But I would recommend getting some experience in computational physics and simulation. The hot thing now is Multiphysics codes and the ability to do simulations of complicated systems. Of course, if there is a particular area of interest, one can specialize in that area, while developing a diverse experience.

I should point out that my company prefers to hire MS/PhD's, but we'd consider someone with a BS if they had talent and were interested in pursuing MS/PhD.

 

[imy786]

q3 what would be the best advisable career.

a. money wise
b. most enjoyable
c. not sooo stressful

 

[Astronuc]

For a and b go hand in hand. I wouldn't stay in a job if I didn't like it. My salary is excellent.

The work can get stressful at times because what I do is very challenging - pushing the envelope and going beyond the state-of-the-art.

But then I have a lot of fun too.

 

[imy786]

ok. so your talking about working in the uni/resarch lecturer.

apart from university/academaic what about other fields. finance, engineering, science.

 

[Astronuc]

ok. so your talking about working in the uni/resarch lecturer.

No, I talking about working in industry, doing engineering and research.

 

[imy786]

ow..what kind of enginerring...

what type of enginerring earns the most?
even after having no expertise in engneering but doing Physics only...would a physicist do alright in engineering?

 

[Oerg]

please close this thread...

Why is it constantly being resurrected?

What ZapperZ means by a suitable job is a job for which your Ph.D. in physics has prepared you. Is a person in geophysics going to work for boeing... maybe, probably not.

On the contrary, why not sticky this? I think there are a lot of useful inputs on the subject matter here. I think we should change the title and sticky this.

 

[Astronuc]

ow..what kind of enginerring...

what type of enginerring earns the most?
even after having no expertise in engneering but doing Physics only...would a physicist do alright in engineering?

Various kinds of engineering.

Engineering salaries depend on the company and type of engineering, and it can be somewhat cyclical, as many industries are now these days.

How well a physicist does pretty much depends on the individual, which is one of the reasons I stress diversity in physics. One can also engineering courses in addition to physics. Some engineering is essentially applied physics.

 

[imy786]

yea stickey this thread...

and its my thread...wicked innit guys...so end of it if you aint wealthy don't do a PHD in physics...if you got enough money and brains go for it...it will be one of the best acheivements..but remeber how hard you gona have to work

 

[fizziks]

yea stickey this thread...

and its my thread...wicked innit guys...so end of it if you aint wealthy don't do a PHD in physics...if you got enough money and brains go for it...it will be one of the best acheivements..but remeber how hard you gona have to work

True scientists aren't in it for the money and it sometimes takes loads of money to become one too. To them, fame is more important than fortune. So don't expect to get paid half a million a year because you spent 8-10 years for a doctoral or be in high demand for positions around the world.

If you're seeking for a job that pays well and are in high demand, go do business, marketing, finance, pharmacy, medicine, etc. There are so many other majors and fields where you work less but get paid more at the end (well, except a doctor and pharmacist obviously, but they are greatly rewarded at the end).

Some people need to open their eyes and see how the real world is. Talk to anyone in general and they would give jack about how a CPU works, all they care about is that it runs fast and doesn't overheat when overclocked. The majority of the world doesn't care much about science, instead they are more interested and worried about other things. If they were really interested about science, then it should be nerds, physicists, scientists on the red carpet, not actors, CEOs, directors, etc. It's sad, but that's the real world for ya. Welcome to the United States of America, where ignorant is bliss.


Go do a PhD because you are in love with it, not because you expect high in-demand positions and high pay at the end. If you are so concerned with what job you get at the end, then you should not work on a doctoral. The reward you get is self-satisfaction and that you can successfully write a 300 page paper and defend it.

 

[Locrian]

True scientists aren't in it for the money

Some are. The above phrase is tossed around in this forum a lot, and it shouldn't be.

 

[gravenewworld]

People who have PhDs definitely are in it for the money. There are PhDs who charge $300 per hour to do consulting for lawyers to talk to juries about evidence during a trial. There are also many many scientists out there who start up their own companies hoping to eventually cash in big time.

 

[Astronuc]

True scientists aren't in it for the money and it sometimes takes loads of money to become one too. To them, fame is more important than fortune. So don't expect to get paid half a million a year because you spent 8-10 years for a doctoral or be in high demand for positions around the world.

If you're seeking for a job that pays well and are in high demand, go do business, marketing, finance, pharmacy, medicine, etc. There are so many other majors and fields where you work less but get paid more at the end (well, except a doctor and pharmacist obviously, but they are greatly rewarded at the end).

Not necessarily true.

Look at folks like Andrew (Andy) Grove or Robert Noyce of Fairchild Semiconductor and Intel. Both PhD's, and very successful businessmen.

Grove had a PhD in Chem. Eng., and Noyce in Physics. Noyce co-founded Fairchild Semiconductor in 1957 (at age 30) and Intel in 1968 (at 41). Grove was a co-founder of Intel.

It really depends on the individual, and perhaps the subject or field. A PhD in applied physics might get one further than one in theoretical physics.

I know several PhDs who either started their own companies or provide consultation. Many of the top managers, especially those heading up the R&D groups, have PhDs.

 

[mathwonk]

although astronuc is one of those people who can give hope by providing good answers to poor questions, i tend to agree with Norman.

 

[RufusDawes]

i think all fields today... engineering, conmmerce, science, law... etc. have this problem of "over-production" where there are more graduates than job positions... exception: GPs and medical practitioners are short in supply. Govt.'s wish to push for a "knowledge nation" and that 90% or more of population should go to college or is encouraged to go, as a result, standard at uni/college is falling and usually only the better graduates will get a job.

every year we get yet another "record high" enrolment numbers to gradute school, does that mean PhD gives ppl a better a career flexibility or better future? Does that means now we have more reserach/academic jobs available? ...doubtful... more like faculty wanting more money and down grading requirements.

Exactly but the problem is if you do not do this employers won't want to locate in your country. The problem is not with the education system (well it is but not in this context), but in my opinion employers are the problem. They want a flood of entry level applicants but aren't willing to train any large number of people.

They demand 'quality' education that is painful, expensive, time consuming and very risky for the student.

The majority of degrees, business, humanities, commerce, economics, could be comopleted in one year. If you cannot grasp simple algebra by University you should not be there. First year courses are a total joke. The problem is if you cut down the time frame it exposes these degrees for what they are : less valuabe than an engineering or degree in the hard sciences.

I have been through an economics degree and my first year was a waste of time. My degree should have taken no longer than one and a half years. Exclude the useless finance and general business education subjects I was forced to take and my degree could easily be completed in 3 terms, summer and one full academic year. My general business education units could have been crammed into the one unit.

Pardon the rant I've had a few ,at the moment I am toying with the idea of postgraduate studies in economics, truck driving or other employment, or starting a degree in Civil Engineering.

 

[eastside00_99]

No, you do not speak "THE truth", because there is no such thing as ONE and only ONE version of it. And that is my main objection from the very beginning of your tirade. You have somehow create this illusion that YOUR version is the only prevailing standard that should be applied to ALL cases.
Zz.

Pluralism! I love it.

 

[moustafa]

hi, actually for me i am not thinking to have job after my phd, i want to study phd in physics coz i love physics and i want to do more research about it... i still don't have master in it yet but i want to know details about how steps are to be in the right path!
i am working right now and my work is in advertising agency working as flash developer i love math and physics and i want to continue in this... please guide me to that

 

[imy786]

now in the middle of the recession we are in.

Is it more useful or less to have a PHD in Physics?

 

[Astronuc]

I believe it is always useful to have a PhD. A PhD represents a certain level of aptitude and competency/proficiency.

See this - http://web.mit.edu/nse/education/grad/phd.html

Although it is from MIT, it reflects the expectations for a PhD candidate at any university.

The purpose of the oral exam is to test students' ability to think spontaneously and soundly, and to communicate, about a technical problem or area for which they should have the technical background. The examination committee will conduct the exam to lead a student to such new areas, loosely related to the original question. The committee may exercise a wide range of discretion in the particulars of each individual oral exam, and consequently, different committees may vary in the details of how the oral exam is conducted.

This is a key point, and it applies in academia as well as industry.

In addition to problem solving, one is expected to contribute to the field of one's study, or one can move orthogonally into another field, usually related somehow one's specialization.