Main Question or Discussion Point
Hi can anyone tell me about he different pros and cons about pursuing different types of physics for a career? E.g. Quantum, Nuclear, String Theory, etc?
what is "really growing" is often hard to judge for someone who is not actually in the field. because you are simply ignorant to the real facts such as empolyment opportunities, govt fundings, frequency of journal papers appearing etc.... besides just like politics, things can change in a few years, what is stagnate now may be growing in a few years time when you graduate. Sometimes, that's luck of a draw. For instance, a few years ago, Information Technology in my country was really growing and no IT graduates are unemployed, but now many IT people are forced to change fields....Which fields are really growing, and which ones are stagnating or getting outdated?
Which fields have too many people interested in it due to the name (e.g. string theory) and which ones have potential but have fewer students applying?
:rofl: i never thought of it as people joining due to the cool name. Basically a few people became convinced they would become the next einsteins, made a cool name for the "theory" and got people to jump the bandwagonWhich fields have too many people interested in it due to the name (e.g. string theory) and which ones have potential but have fewer students applying?
That won't be for long, especially if the President's FY2008 budget is approved. The NIH will have a http://physicsandphysicists.blogspot.com/2007/02/more-on-us-research-funding.html" [Broken] for the next several years in order to get the physical science funding for NSF and DOE to double in 10 years.I met a guy, about twenty eight who is had his masters in chemistry and was within a year of getting his PhD in Quantum Chemistry. He worked in this field (which is esentially physics) and says that the key to getting gov't funding is linking what you want to study with some type of biology. That's the buzz word now.