Understand physics vs engineering

[sublime]

I understand physics vs engineering, is like thinking/solving vs applying. But what exactly does a physicist do? could I get a few examples? Also how is Ohio U. in terms of undergrad for bothy physics and engineering, I may be getting a full ride. Thanks for the help.

 

[chroot]

The majority of working physicists (as of 2006) are working in condensed-matter physics, which essentially is the physics of semiconductors and other solid-state materials. There are many, many other kinds of opportunities for physicists, but semiconductor technology is currently an extremely profitable enterprise and has the economic strength to employ a large number of physicists.

Keep in mind, however, that only ~4% (yes, fewer than one in twenty) of physics undergraduates ever go on to actually study pure physics. The majority end up working with engineers, and a significant minority end up doing financial analysis.

- Warren

 

[mathwonk]

i understand physics majors are prized in many fields, say medicine, because they are smart, have intuition, and know how to learn, reason and solve problems.

 

[quasar987]

Keep in mind, however, that only ~4% (yes, fewer than one in twenty) of physics undergraduates ever go on to actually study pure physics. The majority end up working with engineers, and a significant minority end up doing financial analysis.

And the condensed-matter industry hires people from those 4% or from undergrads too?

 

[franznietzsche]

And the condensed-matter industry hires people from those 4% or from undergrads too?

Both.

Really only 4%?

Wow. Half of our last graduating class went to grad school (out of thirty).

 

[chroot]

I no longer have the statistics nearby to show the 4% figure, but they were on a bulletin board in my university's physics department. People who work alongside engineers are no longer "pure" physicists, of course.

- Warren

 

[franznietzsche]

I no longer have the statistics nearby to show the 4% figure, but they were on a bulletin board in my university's physics department. People who work alongside engineers are no longer "pure" physicists, of course.

- Warren

Hmm. I took the 4% to mean "went on to physics PhD" but I suppose its probably narrower than that.

 

[chroot]

I guess the statistic just means people who end up being theorists or experimentalists, working on pure physics experiments.

- Warren

 

[Sneil]

Were those statistics based on PHD Graduates or both PHD and undergrads?

 

[chroot]

Just undergraduates. Don't quote me on it, I no longer have the source of the info.

- Warren

 

[robphy]

Possible useful statistical data: http://www.aip.org/statistics/
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q="what+does+a+physicist+do" [from various attempts to recruit physics majors].

 

[ZapperZ]

... or you could read an entry of my deleted journal that Greg had somehow rescued onto the PhysicsPost site.

http://www.physicspost.com/science-article-210.html

Zz.

 

[dontbesilly]

Wow, that statistic makes me deppressed. : (

 

[leright]

who says engineers don't think and solve problems? A better distinction is a physicist creates knowledge and an engineer applies this knowledge. Both solve problems, and both definitely have to think, and both are equally important.

 

[joelperr]

With the LHC coming online soon, you can expect the number of particle physicists to jump up a few notches (read: orders of magnitude). It'll be like the 1960's all over again...

 

[dontbesilly]

Ah wow you think? That would be nice.

 

[sublime]

what would an industrial physicist do?

 

[Gablar16]

With the LHC coming online soon, you can expect the number of particle physicists to jump up a few notches (read: orders of magnitude). It'll be like the 1960's all over again...

That sounds cool, but why? can you give me some links? It would help me a ton.