Courses Which Course Offers Better Job Prospects: Physics or Engineering Physics?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on choosing between physics and engineering physics, particularly for aspiring researchers interested in organizations like CERN, ESA, and GSI. Key points highlight that employability is influenced by the degree, GPA, experience, and the institution's reputation. Engineering roles at these organizations are seen as more accessible due to less competition compared to physics positions, despite lower pay. Recommendations suggest considering straight engineering disciplines, such as Electrical or Mechanical Engineering, over Engineering Physics, which may not provide a strong commitment to either field. The importance of local job markets and specific program offerings is emphasized, with advice to consult local faculty and explore various programs to find the best fit based on course content rather than program name alone.
Jonheisen
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I am uncertain about what course to take, I was thinking about physics or Engineering physics. I wanted to work in an organization like cern, lux, esa, gsi (I know is really difficult), research also interests me a lot.
So, I would like to hear what you guys think about the courses in terms of employability and job prospects. Any help would be much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Job markets are usually local.

Marketability depends not only on the degree, but on the GPA, experience, and reputation of the institution at which it is earned.

I'd recommend visiting some local physics faculty and talking to them about it.
 
The back door into places like CERN, ESA, etc is engineering. This is because competition on the physics side is fierce, while competition on the engineering side is less because they pay their engineers significantly below market (but the engineers that work there get very interesting work in return).

Also, I would consider straight engineering (e.g. Electrical or Mechanical) over Engineering Physics which doesn't fully commit to physics or engineering.
 
  • Like
Likes Student100
analogdesign said:
The back door into places like CERN, ESA, etc is engineering. This is because competition on the physics side is fierce, while competition on the engineering side is less because they pay their engineers significantly below market (but the engineers that work there get very interesting work in return).

Also, I would consider straight engineering (e.g. Electrical or Mechanical) over Engineering Physics which doesn't fully commit to physics or engineering.
Thanks for the advice
 
analogdesign said:
Also, I would consider straight engineering (e.g. Electrical or Mechanical) over Engineering Physics which doesn't fully commit to physics or engineering.

That very much depend on which country you live and the specific program. My undergraduate degree is in engineering physics and the fact that I took a few engineering courses has always been a great advantage to me (I am an experimentalist). In Sweden (and some other countries) it is not at all unusual for physicists to have an undergraduate degree in engineering physics; people who study "straight" physics tend to end up as teachers etc and not as researchers or even R&D.
I know that the situation is different in the US (assuming that is where the OP is from) but as far as I understand there are quite a few "physics oriented" Engineering physics programs in the US as well.
Hence, my only advice would be to look at a few different programs; which courses you take is more important than the name of the program.
 
Hey, I am Andreas from Germany. I am currently 35 years old and I want to relearn math and physics. This is not one of these regular questions when it comes to this matter. So... I am very realistic about it. I know that there are severe contraints when it comes to selfstudy compared to a regular school and/or university (structure, peers, teachers, learning groups, tests, access to papers and so on) . I will never get a job in this field and I will never be taken serious by "real"...
Yesterday, 9/5/2025, when I was surfing, I found an article The Schwarzschild solution contains three problems, which can be easily solved - Journal of King Saud University - Science ABUNDANCE ESTIMATION IN AN ARID ENVIRONMENT https://jksus.org/the-schwarzschild-solution-contains-three-problems-which-can-be-easily-solved/ that has the derivation of a line element as a corrected version of the Schwarzschild solution to Einstein’s field equation. This article's date received is 2022-11-15...
Back
Top