[lawcat]

Sorry then. Do what you got to do.

[belovelife]

i'd suggest learning chinese and trying to go to china and get a physics degree there, then you diversify your cv,

besides that, you could learn c#

either that or start voulunterring at a community club to teach youths,
while i know money is an issue, if you love what you do, why stop on account of some job you have

talk about it at work, if they don't like it, who cares

i think it all depends on perspective

plus, there are many high schools with teachers that suck, you could replace them

[SaxonViolence]

I can't help but wonder if you couldn't find a position teaching High School or even Grade School Science at one of the Small Private Schools that are proliferating.

{Of course, most of these new Schools are owned and run by Christian Fundamentalists--If that is a Negative to you (wouldn't be to me).}

You might only make two or thee thousand more dollars a year more than you would flipping Burgers--but it would involve considerably less "Sweat of the Brow" and you'd be teaching--which presumably, you'd find rewarding.

What Kind of Physics did you Major in? Is there worthwhile Theoretical Work that could be done with Pencil, Paper and Imagination?

Don't laugh. That was how Einstein worked originally.....

And I am certain there are good Theoretical works yet to be written.

Another thing to think about is "Small Science".

Obviously, one isn't going to be able to build a Super Collider in the Basement--but apparently there is Good Science being done in Tiny Privately Funded Laboratories, in some one's Garage.....

Most of these seem to be Maverick Gene-Splicers; but there is nothing stopping someone doing Physics in one's Garage.....

Neither Small Science, nor Solo Theoretical Musing is likely to make you any money, it would be an opportunity to do Science.

Saxon Violence

[maddog]

Erasmus00, on 15 February 2012 - 03:34 PM, said:

Which is the smarter play. Yes, I got my phd, but I sacrificed a decade+ of earning potential and no one in any industry cares even the slightest about the degree. If I had spent a decade after undergrad working at McDonalds I'd be in exactly the same position in terms of career, but I'd be financially much better off.

I find it so ironic that you desire a past similar to mine and I desire greatly the Phd certificate you hold
and all the hard work that went it to it to get it. Why is it that humans want what they don't have.

Erasmus00, on 15 February 2012 - 03:34 PM, said:

Attempting a career in science is largely a low paying dead end- you spend 6+ years after undergrad training for jobs that largely don't exist, and you develop few transferable skills. Its a staggering waste, and it exploits the people who get suckered in. I feel physically ill when I think about the students I taught as a grad student who were implicitly encouraged to pursue a career in science.
We should tell young kids that science is a fun hobby, but a truly terrible career.

I don't know if I agree with this line of thinking - though I admit as I stated in my response to the first part. I
have on a tint to my glasses that is biased.

I don't know if you have considered this but there are a number of positions at the national labs like
Lawrence Livermore, Fermi Lab, Sandia Labs and in Europe there is CERN. Of course these would
depend on what specialty in your PhD work. A lot of the ones in the US are run by the DOE so may
involve getting a US Security Clearance. They pay is great, though your background has to be very
"squeaky clean". Good Luck!

maddog

[Qfwfq]

maddog, on 16 February 2012 - 01:25 PM, said:

I don't know if you have considered this but there are a number of positions at the national labs like...

I quite imagine he did consider them and so did all the others he has been competing with. I won't launch into anecdotes about my university cronies but I understand his point all too well.

It's easy to talk without knowing about the situation. The only thing is to find employment elsewhere that makes as much use as possible of mathy-physy stuff. Unforunately, industry values a physics curriculum less than it ought to, it's a matter of mentality. Not saying they should take in every physics graduate, however there are those who see the point and appreciate the type of training, especially when they seek innovation. Many others don't, they much prefer the run of the mill engineer who doesn't question assumptions and just turns the same old usual crank without a moment's thought.

All the same, if I had just done engineering, I cetainly would now regret not having learnt the things I wanted to know about and I doubt I would be much happier now. I might be wealthier but I can't even be sure. Hard to say.

[maddog]

Qfwfq, on 16 February 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

It's easy to talk without knowing about the situation. The only thing is to find employment elsewhere that makes as much use as possible of mathy-physy stuff.

I don't think I meant to imply that this was easy. If so, I did not mean that. I made those suggestions
as to other avenues to look. Some of which I have done - though I do not have a PhD in Physics.

Qfwfq, on 16 February 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

Unforunately, industry values a physics curriculum less than it ought to, it's a matter of mentality.

Sad yet true.

Qfwfq, on 16 February 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

All the same, if I had just done engineering, I cetainly would now regret not having learnt the things I wanted to know about and I doubt I would be much happier now. I might be wealthier but I can't even be sure. Hard to say.

I did end up in an engineering avenue of employment and as I said, I desire after all these years something
more academic. I have done well over the years. Sometimes I even got to use some of my Physics
discipline. I at the same time do not mean to represent that am sitting happily on a fat heap of cash.
I have financial obligations forcing me to keep employment at where I'm at or seek new ones when I don't.
I feel much age discrimination where my tasks can easily be satisfied by someone half my age or
willing to work for half of my wages. This is such that I am limited towards seeking that graduate
position where I can work (if even accepted) for a fourth of my wages just to earn a PhD. It is as I
said -- How Ironic...

maddog

This post has been edited by maddog: 21 February 2012 - 02:32 PM

[Erasmus00]

maddog, on 21 February 2012 - 02:31 PM, said:

I desire after all these years something
more academic.

But here is the thing- if you get a phd you WON'T get more academic work. You'll find yourself on the other side of a phd working the same job you are doing now, having sacrificed several years of earnings. A phd in theoretical physics doesn't open many doors, and the ones it does open tend to be pretty awful (adjuncting for 2k a class),

Most of my friends with phds in physics (myself included) are working for insurance companies doing stats work we could have done after undergrad. Do you think you would have been happier working in insurance than you were doing engineering work? Because thats the trade off- you get to learn a lot of stuff, but you won't be able to find a job that actually uses any of it.

Quote

The only thing is to find employment elsewhere that makes as much use as possible of mathy-physy stuff.

If only. The best I can find is a job that requires a moderate amount of undergrad level statistics. I feel like I've learned all this stuff just so that I can slowly forget it.

So whats the point of encouraging people to pursue science? Why not be open with people 'science is neat, and its a good way of looking at the world, but its an awful job so you shouldn't pursue it.' The only people I could potentially encourage to get a phd are people who don't care even a little about career prospects. If you are independently wealthy/retired and want something to keep your brain active and don't plan to make a full time job out of it, science is fun. If you want to feed a family, science is a huge, huge mistake.

[Qfwfq]

Erasmus00, on 25 February 2012 - 06:26 PM, said:

The best I can find is a job that requires a moderate amount of undergrad level statistics.

There's a bit more than actuary, but it depends on individual case I guess and it isn't easy to get into R&D anyhow. I did get an opportunity in software through contractors that was highly mathematical and much like R&D. My work was much appreciated, but when they wanted me back for a new assignment of a similar kind the complicated ritual of contract awarding took an unexpected twist and I later heard it was due to higher management in Rome. The unexpected new contractors ignored my CV despite the precedent. Go figure.

Erasmus00, on 25 February 2012 - 06:26 PM, said:

I feel like I've learned all this stuff just so that I can slowly forget it.

I understand your feeling. That's exactly why I bum around here, sometimes I do a bit of goofing with paper and pencil too. I don't want to have learnt these things only to slowly forget them, I learnt them because they're interesting. Then again, compared to when I started, nowadays many people learn the overall facts in some manner.

Erasmus00, on 25 February 2012 - 06:26 PM, said:

If you want to feed a family, science is a huge, huge mistake.

Well, it's like playing the national lotto. A few do win it but it ain't nothin' to count on. One of my old cronies became an associate professor and I'm 99% about a once roommate who I lost contact with. Like the lotto, it depends a lot on chance... er, well no, at least slightly less than the lotto.

[Erasmus00]

Qfwfq, on 26 February 2012 - 01:37 PM, said:

There's a bit more than actuary, but it depends on individual case I guess and it isn't easy to get into R&D anyhow. I did get an opportunity in software through contractors that was highly mathematical and much like R&D. My work was much appreciated, but when they wanted me back for a new assignment of a similar kind the complicated ritual of contract awarding took an unexpected twist and I later heard it was due to higher management in Rome. The unexpected new contractors ignored my CV despite the precedent. Go figure.

I understand your feeling. That's exactly why I bum around here, sometimes I do a bit of goofing with paper and pencil too. I don't want to have learnt these things only to slowly forget them, I learnt them because they're interesting. Then again, compared to when I started, nowadays many people learn the overall facts in some manner.

Well, it's like playing the national lotto. A few do win it but it ain't nothin' to count on. One of my old cronies became an associate professor and I'm 99% about a once roommate who I lost contact with. Like the lotto, it depends a lot on chance... er, well no, at least slightly less than the lotto.

I think part of my outlook is colored by the fact that most of my cohort finished a phd between in 2008 and today. Science took a huge beating in the recession.

Ultimately, the "first world" is shifting away from a manufacturing economy and more and more to a service economy. If you don't build stuff, you don't need scientists working to develop newer products. There seems to be plenty to do in economics, and still some to do in computer science, but knowing and understanding physics is a total career dead end. I imagine the crunch in physics will eventually spread to other fields. Its already spreading to biology and chemistry.

But the thing I still don't understand is why career counselors/academics/teachers all push students toward careers in science.

[Qfwfq]

Erasmus00, on 26 February 2012 - 11:04 PM, said:

Ultimately, the "first world" is shifting away from a manufacturing economy and more and more to a service economy. If you don't build stuff, you don't need scientists working to develop newer products.

This doesn't involve only science, it involves engineering first of all.

Erasmus00, on 26 February 2012 - 11:04 PM, said:

But the thing I still don't understand is why career counselors/academics/teachers all push students toward careers in science.

I get your point. I can understand encouraging someone to study science according to their personal interest but, if you mean they are actually pushing them to pursue a scientific career that's a different matter.

Students have a right not tobe misled about opportunities and when I was around high school graduation it was common perception that a "purely scientific" choice of university enrollment was for the idealist who cared little about money. There was however beginning to be talk about physics as a graduation that could be appreciated in industry and, at the time, this was so. Only it has became a bit less so now and unfortunately I never hurried much with my studies. Just to be anecdotal, back around then a customer of my father asked me about my studies and when I replied I was going to graduate in physics he smiled and said "Oh, so you're never going to make money." I kinda shrugged it off, like a few other remarks in those days, I just said it's what I'm interested in. I had previously been encouraged to do engineering but, as the end of high school approached, I became aware that it wasn't what I really wanted to do.