I’m starting physics at university in about 5 months. When I visiting one university to see how well I might like it there, I had a conversation with one of the professors about the employment value of a physics degree. He said something to the effect of “As a physicist you’re very desirable. the only one who knows more math than you is the mathematician, the only one who knows more engineering than you is the engineer, the only one who knows more computer science than you is the computer scientist.” This impressed me and made me more optimistic about my prospects, until afterwards I put on my economics hat and figured that by comparative advantage I’d be better off just doing math or engineering or compsci.
Physical theories represent pinnacles of human achievement
It’s intellectually stimulating
It has a reputation for being a subject that smart people do
3 biggest reasons I chose physics right there. Have I made a horrible mistake?
Disclosure: I have a degree in Physics (and Mathematics), and I’m in graduate school at a top 3 institution.
The hardest thing about getting a degree in Physics is that you don’t actually learn what it even means to be a Physicist until probably your junior year (or often later).
But this is a fairly broadly applicable statement—most college courses for your first two years are fundamentals, irrespective of degree. And The Real World (tm) is essentially nothing like an introductory college course.
But Physics is particularly bad in that almost the entire degree is comprised of ‘fundamentals’. You’ll be hella pro at solving differential equations and calculating forces, but not in any immediately marketable way.
Unless you independently seek out research opportunities, you won’t actually be exposed to what it’s like to be a physicist.
I’m saying all of this because “It’s intellectually stimulating” will only be a true statement if you’re intellectually stimulated by what Physics actually is. For example: are you comfortable with struggling to even come up with a problem to solve, struggling to actually solve that problem, struggling to make sense of the answer to that problem, and often finding that the answer to your initially posed problem is uninteresting?
Are you comfortable with probably having to complete more than one post-doc appointment before even starting a tenure track position (with extremely limited ability to choose where that position might be)?
Are you comfortable having your funding be at the mercy of the often schizophrenic grant process?
Because the practice of physics is a struggle. And it is manifestly unlike anything taught in a physics course.
Personally, I find this process intellectually stimulating. But that doesn’t stop me from intensely eyeing industry jobs as I get older. The nice thing about Physics is that you absolutely can get any number of different non-academic jobs, but you do have to be proactive about this—you have to develop programming skills, pursue internships, diversify your course-load. There’s no traditional non-academic path for a Physics major, and it’s often the case (as this article points out), you would have saved yourself a lot of trouble if you’d just majored in Engineering.
I’ve also found that a lot of physics is starting with a ridiculously hard problem, and looking at various simplifications, seeing whether they make the problem easier to solve, and whether one is willing to live with the error that the simplification that the simplification produces. In physics, problems aren’t so much solved, as an answer is found that is “close enough”. Solving for the first electron orbital of the hydrogen atom? Gravity doesn’t exist!
There was one class I took where eventually the students started asking the professor before starting a problem “In this problem, is c equal to 1, or infinity?”
Are you comfortable having your funding be at the mercy of the often schizophrenic grant process?
This is the big killer. And bears emphasizing- funding climate is the single biggest factor determining whether you get a job in physics, and it is totally outside your control.
Ask yourself a different question: what do you want to do? Treat it literally: every morning after you wake up and brush your teeth and have breakfast, what is it that you want to do? Build things? Write code? Ponder the imponderables? Direct minions? Solve puzzles? Earn piles of money?
the only one who knows more math than you is the mathematician, the only one who knows more engineering than you is the engineer, the only one who knows more computer science than you is the computer scientist
You can also just major in math, engineering and computer science and take supplementary courses in the other subjects. If one puts consumptive value aside, this is probably more efficient than learning math, engineering and computer science together with subject specific physics material.
3 biggest reasons I chose physics right there. Have I made a horrible mistake?
Not a horrible mistake in any case.
Whether or not it’s a mistake depends on your goals. What are they?
Are you locked into a physics major, or do you have the flexibility to switch?
I’m not sure. Although I can say with reasonable confidence that I don’t want to go into academia.
If you want to be a software engineer, you can supplement your physics major courses with programming courses. If you want to become a data analyst, you can supplement your physics major courses with statistics courses. etc.
As ahbwramc comments, prospects for physics majors don’t look so bleak. Rather, they seem somewhat (not radically) suboptimal for people who don’t intend to become physics majors.
The vast slow gears of the bureaucracy have started turning and nobody can stop them now.
How much confidence do you have in this? Are you at an American university? In American universities, it’s usually possible to switch majors through freshman year, and even through sophomore year in some cases.
UK, and I was talking about the application and admissions process itself; it’s not possible to change it. Once I’m there I can change degree, not before.
I double majored in physics and computer science as an undergrad at a pretty good school.
My observation is this:
The computer science students had a much easier time getting jobs, because getting a job with mediocre software engineering experience is pretty easy (in the US in today’s market). I did this with undeservedly little effort.
The physics students were, in general, completely capable of putting in 6 months of work to become as employable as the computer science students. I have several friends who majored in things completely non-technical, but by spending a few months learning to program were able to get employed in the field. The physics students from my classes were easily smart enough to do this, though most did not.
To maximize the ease of getting a job while in physics, take a few programming courses on the side. If you apply yourself and are reasonably talented it should be doable.
I think the ‘right’ approach (for maximizing happiness and effectiveness) is to major in what you find the most enjoyable and do the due diligence to become employable on the side. And maximize any synergies between the two (do programming in physics internships, etc).
Physical theories represent pinnacles of human achievement
Depends completely on what you value. There are a lot of interesting pinnacles of human achievement in all sorts of fields of knowledge.
It has a reputation for being a subject that smart people do
Which basically means that the competition that you face is very skilled.
I had a conversation with one of the professors about the employment value of a physics degree.
It’s not like he wouldn’t have a conflict of interest.
As a physicist you’re very desirable. the only one who knows more math than you is the mathematician, the only one who knows more engineering than you is the engineer, the only one who knows more computer science than you is the computer scientist.
Are you sure that your physics degree contains more computer science than the engineering degree?
I’m starting physics at university in about 5 months. When I visiting one university to see how well I might like it there, I had a conversation with one of the professors about the employment value of a physics degree. He said something to the effect of “As a physicist you’re very desirable. the only one who knows more math than you is the mathematician, the only one who knows more engineering than you is the engineer, the only one who knows more computer science than you is the computer scientist.” This impressed me and made me more optimistic about my prospects, until afterwards I put on my economics hat and figured that by comparative advantage I’d be better off just doing math or engineering or compsci.
3 biggest reasons I chose physics right there. Have I made a horrible mistake?
Disclosure: I have a degree in Physics (and Mathematics), and I’m in graduate school at a top 3 institution.
The hardest thing about getting a degree in Physics is that you don’t actually learn what it even means to be a Physicist until probably your junior year (or often later).
But this is a fairly broadly applicable statement—most college courses for your first two years are fundamentals, irrespective of degree. And The Real World (tm) is essentially nothing like an introductory college course.
But Physics is particularly bad in that almost the entire degree is comprised of ‘fundamentals’. You’ll be hella pro at solving differential equations and calculating forces, but not in any immediately marketable way.
Unless you independently seek out research opportunities, you won’t actually be exposed to what it’s like to be a physicist.
I’m saying all of this because “It’s intellectually stimulating” will only be a true statement if you’re intellectually stimulated by what Physics actually is. For example: are you comfortable with struggling to even come up with a problem to solve, struggling to actually solve that problem, struggling to make sense of the answer to that problem, and often finding that the answer to your initially posed problem is uninteresting?
Are you comfortable with probably having to complete more than one post-doc appointment before even starting a tenure track position (with extremely limited ability to choose where that position might be)?
Are you comfortable having your funding be at the mercy of the often schizophrenic grant process?
Because the practice of physics is a struggle. And it is manifestly unlike anything taught in a physics course.
Personally, I find this process intellectually stimulating. But that doesn’t stop me from intensely eyeing industry jobs as I get older. The nice thing about Physics is that you absolutely can get any number of different non-academic jobs, but you do have to be proactive about this—you have to develop programming skills, pursue internships, diversify your course-load. There’s no traditional non-academic path for a Physics major, and it’s often the case (as this article points out), you would have saved yourself a lot of trouble if you’d just majored in Engineering.
I’ve also found that a lot of physics is starting with a ridiculously hard problem, and looking at various simplifications, seeing whether they make the problem easier to solve, and whether one is willing to live with the error that the simplification that the simplification produces. In physics, problems aren’t so much solved, as an answer is found that is “close enough”. Solving for the first electron orbital of the hydrogen atom? Gravity doesn’t exist!
There was one class I took where eventually the students started asking the professor before starting a problem “In this problem, is c equal to 1, or infinity?”
This is the big killer. And bears emphasizing- funding climate is the single biggest factor determining whether you get a job in physics, and it is totally outside your control.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment. I’ll incorporate some of your points in a later writeup about physics as a major.
Ask yourself a different question: what do you want to do? Treat it literally: every morning after you wake up and brush your teeth and have breakfast, what is it that you want to do? Build things? Write code? Ponder the imponderables? Direct minions? Solve puzzles? Earn piles of money?
You can also just major in math, engineering and computer science and take supplementary courses in the other subjects. If one puts consumptive value aside, this is probably more efficient than learning math, engineering and computer science together with subject specific physics material.
Not a horrible mistake in any case.
Whether or not it’s a mistake depends on your goals. What are they?
Are you locked into a physics major, or do you have the flexibility to switch?
I’m not sure. Although I can say with reasonable confidence that I don’t want to go into academia.
The vast slow gears of the bureaucracy have started turning and nobody can stop them now.
Then definitely don’t go into Physics. You will be much better served by engineering or computer science.
If you want to be a software engineer, you can supplement your physics major courses with programming courses. If you want to become a data analyst, you can supplement your physics major courses with statistics courses. etc.
As ahbwramc comments, prospects for physics majors don’t look so bleak. Rather, they seem somewhat (not radically) suboptimal for people who don’t intend to become physics majors.
How much confidence do you have in this? Are you at an American university? In American universities, it’s usually possible to switch majors through freshman year, and even through sophomore year in some cases.
UK, and I was talking about the application and admissions process itself; it’s not possible to change it. Once I’m there I can change degree, not before.
I double majored in physics and computer science as an undergrad at a pretty good school.
My observation is this:
The computer science students had a much easier time getting jobs, because getting a job with mediocre software engineering experience is pretty easy (in the US in today’s market). I did this with undeservedly little effort.
The physics students were, in general, completely capable of putting in 6 months of work to become as employable as the computer science students. I have several friends who majored in things completely non-technical, but by spending a few months learning to program were able to get employed in the field. The physics students from my classes were easily smart enough to do this, though most did not.
To maximize the ease of getting a job while in physics, take a few programming courses on the side. If you apply yourself and are reasonably talented it should be doable.
I think the ‘right’ approach (for maximizing happiness and effectiveness) is to major in what you find the most enjoyable and do the due diligence to become employable on the side. And maximize any synergies between the two (do programming in physics internships, etc).
Depends completely on what you value. There are a lot of interesting pinnacles of human achievement in all sorts of fields of knowledge.
Which basically means that the competition that you face is very skilled.
It’s not like he wouldn’t have a conflict of interest.
Are you sure that your physics degree contains more computer science than the engineering degree?
Yes, that’s my point.
Wouldn’t it depend on the type of engineering degree?