So, I want to be a theoretical physicist...

[JonathanClement]

And I'm getting a little discouraged now because of 2 things.

1. I wonder if I'll even have time for dating, much less a family. I'm hoping to go in for a doctorate at the minimum which would put me in school for 12 years.

2. If I'm in school that long, I fear I'll get into a debt that I'll never be able to pay off. That nobody will hire me for the things I want to do. Primarily, Time travel research, but also things like string theory, relativity, extradimentional space, black hole, and warp drive. I'm scared that no woman will want me if I'm in debt, and by the time I pay it off, I may be an old man and could very well have passed child-bearing age. I know I'm a guy, but I still have fears about that if I wait too long, it'll never happen.

I could always abandon the idea, but I feel like I should use my talents to help humanity get out of the pointless struggle it's currently trapped in.

I DON'T want to do it to shut trolls up who bully and persecute me and complain that "You're boring and contribute nothing to society". I realize that doing anything for revenge is self-destructive. I want to do this stuff for me, but I feel like I'll be forsaking my greatest desire in order to be something more than a boring, miserable old man confined to a cubicle all day.

Is being a physicist really so hopeless?:(

[rwguinn]

And I'm getting a little discouraged now because of 2 things.

1. I wonder if I'll even have time for dating, much less a family. I'm hoping to go in for a doctorate at the minimum which would put me in school for 12 years.

2. If I'm in school that long, I fear I'll get into a debt that I'll never be able to pay off. That nobody will hire me for the things I want to do. Primarily, Time travel research, but also things like string theory, relativity, extradimentional space, black hole, and warp drive. I'm scared that no woman will want me if I'm in debt, and by the time I pay it off, I may be an old man and could very well have passed child-bearing age. I know I'm a guy, but I still have fears about that if I wait too long, it'll never happen.

I could always abandon the idea, but I feel like I should use my talents to help humanity get out of the pointless struggle it's currently trapped in.

I DON'T want to do it to shut trolls up who bully and persecute me and complain that "You're boring and contribute nothing to society". I realize that doing anything for revenge is self-destructive. I want to do this stuff for me, but I feel like I'll be forsaking my greatest desire in order to be something more than a boring, miserable old man confined to a cubicle all day.

Is being a physicist really so hopeless?:(
It's a problem that has gotten worse in recent years.
In the 1950's and 60's, when I was growing up and planning for college, we had much to dream of-the space race was a big motivator. There was something we could be a part of. In the 80's, there was all the computer technology and development. We could chase our dreams of being a part of something big, useful, and even lucrative.
Now, with government R&D at a low, and industry in what I term "survival mode" (Hunkered down, maintaining what they have) I don't have any answers for you. Wish I did...

[John Jones]

If you really want it, go for it.

1) There's always time for dating. At every age I've been, people have been seeking companionship.

2) Sure. You'll go in debt. I have been in major debt a couple or three of times. This too shall pass.

3) We need more physicists, chemists, and mathematicians. Learning physics (and perhaps teaching it) IS a help to humanity.

[TubbaBlubba]

Do you feel that you have a particular talent or passion for physics?


If you do, it would be a tremendous waste to pass the opportunity up.


Also, if you haven't read The Feynman Lectures on Physics yet, do so.

[drkitten]

And I'm getting a little discouraged now because of 2 things.

I wouldn't worry about those things.


1. I wonder if I'll even have time for dating, much less a family. I'm hoping to go in for a doctorate at the minimum which would put me in school for 12 years.

Not a problem. The nominal workload for a graduate student is between twenty and forty hours a week. You actually have more time in graduate school than you will have as a post-doc,... and frankly, than you would have at most "professional" positions. Ask a lawyer trying to make partner, a doctor doing his residency, or an accountant trying to make it at KPMG how many hours they work.


2. If I'm in school that long, I fear I'll get into a debt that I'll never be able to pay off.

Again, not a problem. If you're any good, schools will pay YOU to go there.

They'll either offer you fellowships (which are essentially no-strings-attached money) or they'll offer you some kind of teaching/research assistantship that demands about 20 hours a week working for someone else. That's one of the advantages of the hard sciences; that kind of money is still available.

I'd be more worried about the psychological reality. Are you prepared to spend twelve years working on that one problem purely because it interests you? Half of all graduate students leave before they get their Ph.D., not because they're not bright enough or can't afford it, but just because they lose interest.

[Nick Bogaerts]

I'd be more worried about the psychological reality. Are you prepared to spend twelve years working on that one problem purely because it interests you? Half of all graduate students leave before they get their Ph.D., not because they're not bright enough or can't afford it, but just because they lose interest.

I really wouldn't be. A degree in physics is rarely a waste of time, whatever your career path. It's not like it's a twelve year all-or-nothing. The degrees will be a little different depending on the country, but overall it's pretty similar. Get a BSc, then see how you feel. Then maybe go for an MSc, then an MPhil, that's several opportunities to re-evaluate before going for a PhD. All those degrees will open other doors if ever you feel that academia isn't for you after all.

[JonathanClement]

Would I really end up $500,000 in debt if I went for a PhD? (According to one guy)

[Dave Rogers]

And I'm getting a little discouraged now because of 2 things.

1. I wonder if I'll even have time for dating, much less a family. I'm hoping to go in for a doctorate at the minimum which would put me in school for 12 years.

I suspect there are women in graduate school with similar concerns. Who knows, you may meet a few, and they may be the kind of people who share your values and priorities. As a foundation for a long-term relationship, that's not exactly a handicap. Somehow, in the middle of my doctorate, I found time to get married, and I was an experimentalist so I had to plan my time round the availability of some major pieces of equipment. Last time I looked, the computer room was always open.

By the way, it's twenty-five years on and we're still married and have four amazing children. It's all possible.

2. If I'm in school that long, I fear I'll get into a debt that I'll never be able to pay off. That nobody will hire me for the things I want to do. Primarily, Time travel research, but also things like string theory, relativity, extradimentional space, black hole, and warp drive. I'm scared that no woman will want me if I'm in debt, and by the time I pay it off, I may be an old man and could very well have passed child-bearing age. I know I'm a guy, but I still have fears about that if I wait too long, it'll never happen.

We don't pass child-bearing age. A friend of my father remarried at sixty and had children. Debt is a worry, and you may find you have to compromise to clear it. There are jobs for theoretical physicists that pay well, but they're not likely to be closely related to the subjects you're interested in. Your figure of half a million dollars debt sounds way over the top, though; even if you get no financial support whatsoever, are you really going to burn $40K a year?

I could always abandon the idea, but I feel like I should use my talents to help humanity get out of the pointless struggle it's currently trapped in.

Actually, I'd say that, rather than the other two, is the one you want to worry about. You're putting yourself under far too much pressure if you take that as your motivation. I'm a physicist because I like playing with big toys, and the Universe is the biggest one there is. Don't so it because you need to be the saviour of mankind; do it because it's fun.

Is being a physicist really so hopeless?:(

Absolutely hopeless. Just ask my kids about my sense of humour.

Dave

[drkitten]

Would I really end up $500,000 in debt if I went for a PhD? (According to one guy)

Almost certainly not. Physics, as a field, is well-funded. The NSF (as well as DARPA, ONR, et cetera) gives a lot of money to physicists and one of the standard categories of money is "support for graduate students," including both tuition and a living stipend.

If your professor and school think you've got the talent and ability to be successful as a physicist, then you should be able to complete your graduate education without taking a dime from your pocket.

They'll even pay you a (small) salary. Not much -- get used to rice and beans -- but enough to cover housing, food, clothing and such.

[Lothian]

And I'm getting a little discouraged now because of 2 things.

1. I wonder if I'll even have time for dating, much less a family. I'm hoping to go in for a doctorate at the minimum which would put me in school for 12 years.

2. If I'm in school that long, I fear I'll get into a debt that I'll never be able to pay off. That nobody will hire me for the things I want to do. Primarily, Time travel research, but also things like string theory, relativity, extradimentional space, black hole, and warp drive. I'm scared that no woman will want me if I'm in debt, and by the time I pay it off, I may be an old man and could very well have passed child-bearing age. I know I'm a guy, but I still have fears about that if I wait too long, it'll never happen.
I say do it and don't worry. Once you have discovered time travel you can come back in time and give yourself some stock market tips that will sort out your finances.

[Skwinty]

Dave Rogers gives the best advice.
Do it because it is fun, otherwise you will end up hating your job.

[drkitten]

Your figure of half a million dollars debt sounds way over the top, though; even if you get no financial support whatsoever, are you really going to burn $40K a year?


I think it's at the outside edge of reasonable. If you assume he will get no financial support whatsoever, that he'll do a very slow (12+ year) degree, and that he's picked a very expensive school to dawdle at, then he could hit the half million dollar mark. I've known many people who've done one of the three, and a few who've done two.

I've never known anyone who did all three -- partly because graduate students tend to be brighter than that.

Seriously, though. One doesn't have to go to MIT, and in-state tuition at University of Pittsburgh (which is still an AAU school) is only something like $15,000/year. (Ditto Rutgers -- in fact, that's about average for in-state tuition at the local state schools.)

Most importantly, nothing is keeping one from applying to lots of schools. So if MIT says "yes, you can come, but we won't offer you any money," and if Pitt or Rutgers says "yes, you can come, and we'll give you tuition remission and $15,000/year stipend in exchange for twenty hour of teaching," and if the University of New Hampshire says "Yes, we'll give you a fellowship with a $30,000 stipend," you can decide for yourself how much debt you're willing to take on. At that point, you can go to MIT knowing you're paying through the nose (and hopefully do a really fast degree) but having decided it's worth it for the MIT experience, or you can go to New Hampshire and actually make money,... but you might have a harder time getting a job down the line.

Your call.

[Dave Rogers]

I think it's at the outside edge of reasonable. If you assume he will get no financial support whatsoever, that he'll do a very slow (12+ year) degree, and that he's picked a very expensive school to dawdle at, then he could hit the half million dollar mark. I've known many people who've done one of the three, and a few who've done two.

I didn't want to hazard too much of an opinion there. My University career took place in 1980's Britain, when I even got a student grant for my undergraduate degree. Student debt is rather an unfamiliar area to me.

Dave

[JonathanClement]

I suspect there are women in graduate school with similar concerns. Who knows, you may meet a few, and they may be the kind of people who share your values and priorities. As a foundation for a long-term relationship, that's not exactly a handicap. Somehow, in the middle of my doctorate, I found time to get married, and I was an experimentalist so I had to plan my time round the availability of some major pieces of equipment. Last time I looked, the computer room was always open.

By the way, it's twenty-five years on and we're still married and have four amazing children. It's all possible.

Well, according to this guy, "Women don't want to marry a guy burried in debt."

"We don't pass child-bearing age. A friend of my father remarried at sixty and had children. Debt is a worry, and you may find you have to compromise to clear it. There are jobs for theoretical physicists that pay well, but they're not likely to be closely related to the subjects you're interested in. Your figure of half a million dollars debt sounds way over the top, though; even if you get no financial support whatsoever, are you really going to burn $40K a year?"

According to this one guy, I will. Between the cost of school and the cost of interest, and maybe assuming I don't get a job as well. Plus, I want to go in Canada (Where I'm from). Would that be a factor?

"Actually, I'd say that, rather than the other two, is the one you want to worry about. You're putting yourself under far too much pressure if you take that as your motivation. I'm a physicist because I like playing with big toys, and the Universe is the biggest one there is. Don't so it because you need to be the saviour of mankind; do it because it's fun."


Yeah, you're probably right. I WOULD like to help humanity out, but a big part of this is that I find physics genuinely interesting as well.

[drkitten]

Well, according to this guy, "Women don't want to marry a guy burried in debt."

Have you considered the possibility that "this guy" might not know what he's talking about?

I mean, if he's telling you that the only way to pay for a physics Ph.D. is with student loans, then he's underpants-on-head wrong.

[Mark6]

For a theoretical physicist, to end up with $500,000 in student dept is flat-out impossible. $200,000 is possible if you make incredibly bone-headed decisions. $100,000 is entirely plausible -- and most of it you would accrue as an undergraduate.

[JonathanClement]

For a theoretical physicist, to end up with $500,000 in student dept is flat-out impossible. $200,000 is possible if you make incredibly bone-headed decisions. $100,000 is entirely plausible -- and most of it you would accrue as an undergraduate.

In this guys own words...

The average annual cost of College is 27,677 dollars. If we multiply that by twelve that is 332,124 dollars before taxes. Now let's just use the taxes for my state which is 7.50 cents for every dollar. 357,033 dollars with taxes if I'm not mistaken. If taking out a student loan with an interest rate of 3% that will be about 10,710 dollars more. Not counting penalty rates and the fact that the interest rate will probably fluctuate. We're looking at 367k dollars...

Is he right? If not, how should I respond?

[Mark6]

"This guy" assumes you will be paying 100% of tuition. No graduate student ever does, and not many undergrads do. To lose out on scholarships, fellowships and grants... you'll have to be either incredibly lazy or bone-headed.

[Cuddles]

1. I wonder if I'll even have time for dating, much less a family. I'm hoping to go in for a doctorate at the minimum which would put me in school for 12 years.

Are you seriously suggesting that university students, one of the most sexed up and promiscuous groups known to man, don't have time for dating?

Also, how come it would be 12 years? I know there are differences between the UK and US, but here it would only take 6 or 7 years to go from nothing to a PhD, although it often ends up being a year or two longer for the dissertation to actually be accepted as finished. 12 years seems rather excessive.

2. If I'm in school that long, I fear I'll get into a debt that I'll never be able to pay off.

Generally you get paid, albeit not usually especially well, for postgrad work, so it would only be the few years of undergrad work that you'd get in debt for. I'm not sure exactly how it works in the US, but I'm pretty sure no-one would ever go to university if there was no way of paying it off.

That nobody will hire me for the things I want to do. Primarily, Time travel research, but also things like string theory, relativity, extradimentional space, black hole, and warp drive.

This is certainly possible. Time travel, faster than light travel, and related ideas are unlikely to get you a job because they really don't fit in with established physics. People end up looking at them as a sideline to their main work when something happens to pop up related to them. As a main research topic, you'd definitely struggle to get funding to look into such subjects and nothing else.

I could always abandon the idea, but I feel like I should use my talents to help humanity get out of the pointless struggle it's currently trapped in.

A noble goal, but not one you're likely to see fulfilled from a career in theoretical physics. Remember, most physicists (most scientist for that matter) don't make world changing breakthroughs.

Is being a physicist really so hopeless?:(

I rather enjoy being one, so no.

I really wouldn't be. A degree in physics is rarely a waste of time, whatever your career path.

It depends on the level. A BSc or MSc in physics will never be a waste, since it will open up all kinds of careers even if you decide not to go into academia after all. A PhD, on the other hand, can often be completely useless if you don't carry on working on exactly the same subject. I'd say it's still not a waste of time if you enjoy doing it, but it may not be as beneficial for the future as some people think.

Do it because it is fun, otherwise you will end up hating your job.

This. What's better - being in debt for a while while doing something you enjoy, or being rich and hating most of your waking life?

[JonathanClement]

"This guy" assumes you will be paying 100% of tuition. No graduate student ever does, and not many undergrads do. To lose out on scholarships, fellowships and grants... you'll have to be either incredibly lazy or bone-headed.

In his own words...

I highly doubt they will hand out a 367,000 dollar scholarship to some Middle School drop out that thinks he can create the Matrix and a time travel device.

Which is a distortion anyway, since I don't expect to "create" anything. Merely help to advance such technology.

Are you seriously suggesting that university students, one of the most sexed up and promiscuous groups known to man, don't have time for dating?

I dunno, I WOULD like to put a lot of effort into my studies.

Also, how come it would be 12 years? I know there are differences between the UK and US, but here it would only take 6 or 7 years to go from nothing to a PhD, although it often ends up being a year or two longer for the dissertation to actually be accepted as finished. 12 years seems rather excessive.

Well, I'm just assuming a worst case scenario. HOWEVER, I'm from Canada, not the US.

Generally you get paid, albeit not usually especially well, for postgrad work, so it would only be the few years of undergrad work that you'd get in debt for. I'm not sure exactly how it works in the US, but I'm pretty sure no-one would ever go to university if there was no way of paying it off.

Would it matter if I have eccentric ideas in mind?

This is certainly possible. Time travel, faster than light travel, and related ideas are unlikely to get you a job because they really don't fit in with established physics. People end up looking at them as a sideline to their main work when something happens to pop up related to them. As a main research topic, you'd definitely struggle to get funding to look into such subjects and nothing else.

Yeah, it probably wouldn't be the main thing I'd be working on. But how about things closely related?

A noble goal, but not one you're likely to see fulfilled from a career in theoretical physics. Remember, most physicists (most scientist for that matter) don't make world changing breakthroughs.

I think most scientists in general don't. But that's okay.

I rather enjoy being one, so no.

How much do you make a year, anyway?

It depends on the level. A BSc or MSc in physics will never be a waste, since it will open up all kinds of careers even if you decide not to go into academia after all. A PhD, on the other hand, can often be completely useless if you don't carry on working on exactly the same subject. I'd say it's still not a waste of time if you enjoy doing it, but it may not be as beneficial for the future as some people think.

Okay, that's something to think about.

This. What's better - being in debt for a while while doing something you enjoy, or being rich and hating most of your waking life?

Well, the former of course, but if being in debt or whatever else conflicts with my desire to have a family, then I just don't know...

[W.D.Clinger]

How much do you make a year, anyway?
On your way to becoming a theoretical physicist, you might learn that single data points are generally less useful than the results of a more comprehensive survey.

Start here:

http://www.aps.org/careers/student/economics.cfm

Follow the links.

[drkitten]

Is he right?

Not, as far as I can tell, in the slightest.

If not, how should I respond?

Probably by ignoring him. He seems to be the educational equivalent of one of those late night infomercials telling you about how the secret to financial success is to call this 800 number and buy gold bullion.

Seriously,...

First, he's giving you the "average" cost of a year of school -- no one compels you to go to a school of "average" cost. If you're worried about price, shop around and buy cheap.

Second, he assumes you'll take twelve years for the degree. This is an extremely long time for a Ph.D.; in fact, most schools will start counselling you out at about the seven year mark.

Third, and most important, he assumes you'll be paying the entire price yourself. Almost no graduate student in the hard sciences does this. More than 50% of the graduate students in the hard sciences are on full-tuition-plus-stipend support.

And, finally, he also assumes that you'll be paying full tuition for all twelve years. Once you're past coursework (which usually takes no more than two or three years) and have passed your quals, you can usually sign up for thesis-credits-only and your tuition costs drop to a grand or two.

[JonathanClement]

Not, as far as I can tell, in the slightest.



Probably by ignoring him. He seems to be the educational equivalent of one of those late night infomercials telling you about how the secret to financial success is to call this 800 number and buy gold bullion.

He says he's going in for psychology. He also says...

A fellowship is a merit based scholarship. You have no merit when it comes to the field of theoretical physics. You have nothing to contribute at all. You're under the impression you'll "learn everything" in the university. I'm going to college to be a Psychologist, but I actually know things about psychology before I even take courses.

It has bearing because they do look at things such as that when you go to apply for a scholarship, fellow, grant what ever label you wish to apply to it. If you do not even have the courage or the will power to stay in Middle School why would they believe you can stick it out through twelve years of College?

What do you make of this? Yes, I did drop out of highschool with homeschooling, but only because I saw little point or motivation. I am of course continuing where I left off. But would this really have any bearing on anything?


Seriously,...

First, he's giving you the "average" cost of a year of school -- no one compels you to go to a school of "average" cost. If you're worried about price, shop around and buy cheap.

Not really something I'm concerned with, though.

Seriously,...Second, he assumes you'll take twelve years for the degree. This is an extremely long time for a Ph.D.; in fact, most schools will start counselling you out at about the seven year mark.

Actually, that was MY assumption. I assumed 4 years for the Bachelors, 4 for the Masters and 4 for the PhD. I'm kin of illiterate when it comes to this kind of stuff.

Third, and most important, he assumes you'll be paying the entire price yourself. Almost no graduate student in the hard sciences does this. More than 50% of the graduate students in the hard sciences are on full-tuition-plus-stipend support.

See the quote above.

And, finally, he also assumes that you'll be paying full tuition for all twelve years. Once you're past coursework (which usually takes no more than two or three years) and have passed your quals, you can usually sign up for thesis-credits-only and your tuition costs drop to a grand or two.

Oh, I see. Thanks.

Just so you know, I talked about some transhumanist ideas with him, such as mind uploading into a "matrix" for lack of a better word, and he thinks it can't happen. He claims I want to "create" it, but that's hardly the case. I simply want to help advance the technologies to let it happen, even if it's indirect. Now he seems hell-bent on talking/harassing me out of it.

[Dave Rogers]

Second, he assumes you'll take twelve years for the degree. This is an extremely long time for a Ph.D.; in fact, most schools will start counselling you out at about the seven year mark.

I think he was suggesting it would take about twelve years including a first degree. I'm not sure how these things work in North America, but even that sounds excessive; ten is maybe an upper limit over here. I took seven years from starting my first degree to starting my first job, and I didn't exactly hurry.

Jonathan, I've just seen the post you made after I started typing this. It looks to me like this guy is an obnoxious, egotistical know-it-all who's trying to make you feel small. I would advise you to ignore him, on this and any other subject, and without corroborative evidence I would be extremely skeptical about his college plans. Also, he seems to be forgetting that universities are there to teach people.

Dave

[drkitten]

What do you make of this? Yes, I did drop out of highschool with homeschooling, but only because I saw little point or motivation. I am of course continuing where I left off. But would this really have any bearing on anything?


Ah. My mistake; I had assumed you already had your B.S. in hand.

Don't worry about it at this point. Something like 90% of undergraduates in the North American system change their majors at least once; the odds strongly suggest that the degree you get will not be the degree you think you want now -- and that you'll be happier with the new degree. If four years from now, you still want a physics Ph.D., you'll be in a much better position to gauge whether or not you're qualified for it.

If you've not even taken your B.S., then neither you, nor he, nor anyone else has any idea whether or not you have any substantial talent for physics. Four years from now, the various universities will look at your grades and the letters of recommendation you have earned from your professors and make their decision. So just be prepared to work your arse off for four years and blow the socks off the physics faculty.

ETA: Basically, you're not even qualified to apply for a Ph.D. program at this point, so it makes little difference how much or how little time/money such a degree takes. I'd worry more about the B.S.; from a financial point of view, getting a B.S. is one of the best investments you can make even if you never go any further, and it's also a requirement for going any further anyway (it's not like you can skip it).

[W.D.Clinger]

What do you make of this? Yes, I did drop out of highschool with homeschooling, but only because I saw little point or motivation. I am of course continuing where I left off. But would this really have any bearing on anything?
Possibly.

Actually, that was MY assumption. I assumed 4 years for the Bachelors, 4 for the Masters and 4 for the PhD. I'm kin of illiterate when it comes to this kind of stuff.
If you know you want a PhD, you should skip the master's degree and go straight from the BS to a PhD.

If you wash out of a PhD program after taking the number of courses required for a master's degree, the university may give you a master's degree as a consolation prize. In any event, most MS degrees can be completed in 2 years.

For now, you should concentrate on your undergraduate education. Better yet, concentrate on your high school education.

[Almo]

I have a master's in Physics, and I now design and program both board games and video games. But I would not go back and choose not to do the Physics. It's a great skill to have, and teaches you how to think in very useful ways. It will also give you a pretty good BS detector. :)

Don't worry about dating. If you take your courses at a reasonable rate, you'll be able to maintain a decent life outside school. Things will be tight as it's a lot of work, but it won't be impossible.

[Cuddles]

I dunno, I WOULD like to put a lot of effort into my studies.

For a normal, well adjusted person, "a lot of effort" is not equal to "every single waking hour leaving no time for anything else". Even the hardest working students will rarely match jobs like lawyers, doctors, or pretty much any kind of city job for the hours put in, yet people in all those kinds of jobs somehow manage to have lives. To give a more concrete example, my scheduled time during my degree was between 25-30 hours per week. Throw in 10-20 hours extra as study time, and you still have plenty of time in the evenings and weekends for doing things that aren't physics.

Well, I'm just assuming a worst case scenario. HOWEVER, I'm from Canada, not the US.

Canadia is part of the US, isn't it?:)

Seriously though, I can't imagine anyone taking four years for a masters. Four years is what it takes to get an MSci starting from scratch, to do an MSc having already got a BSc should be one or two years.

Would it matter if I have eccentric ideas in mind?

For a PhD, you generally get either the university or some company to sponsor you for a research proposal. If you have something that sounds interesting, or fits in well with an existing research program, that may not be too hard. If all you have is "I want to invent time travel" or something similar, you're going to struggle. But as Drkitten says, you're really not qualified to be thinking about this sort of thing yet. Get the undergrad degree, and you can start thinking about all this once you know a lot more about both physics and how the graduate system works.

Yeah, it probably wouldn't be the main thing I'd be working on. But how about things closely related?

What things do you think are closely related? There's certainly plenty of work to be had in high energy physics, particle physics, and so on. Assuming you manage to qualify as a physicist there's no reason you shouldn't be able to get job in one of these areas.

I think most scientists in general don't.

I'm pretty sure that's what I just said.

How much do you make a year, anyway?

Enough.

Okay, that's something to think about.

Unfortunately I can't find any of the articles I've read about this before. However, physics is one of the higher rated degrees for earnings. If I remember correctly, it comes below law, medicine and various bits of engineering, but above computing, maths, biology, chemistry and well above all arts degrees. Certainly much better than not having a degree, which turns out not to be the case for quite a few degrees.

Well, the former of course, but if being in debt or whatever else conflicts with my desire to have a family, then I just don't know...

Not having the same problems with debt over here I can't really say too much about this, but it certainly appears that many people in the US and Canada manage to have families after going to university, so I'm pretty sure it can't be all that bad.

If you know you want a PhD, you should skip the master's degree and go straight from the BS to a PhD.

Not sure I agree with this. A BSc is still very much a taught program, usually with somewhere between very little and zero actual research. A masters will usually give much more of a feel of what a PhD will be like, while being shorter and with more support and guidance. If you're really interested in the work and planning on going into academia, getting a masters certainly won't be detrimental in any way, but it can be a very good way to find out if that's really the route you want to go.

[TubbaBlubba]

Hey, kid, started reading Feynman Lectures on Physics yet? You'll never be a real physicist if you don't!

[ingoa]

I am a physicist too. Particle & nuclear physics with some strolling into astrophysics and General Relativity.

If you are really interested in these fields: start studying!

Do not worry about money in the beginning.
About 50% of the students discover during the first year that physics is not what they thought. This 50% cut applies approximately at every other stage. From BS to MS and from MS to PhD. Of the PhDs about 80% leave science after their first stint (if any) as PostDoc.
This is often not due to lack of brains but lack of interest.

Physicists have no more dating problems than other people. If you do not have problems now, you will not have more problems later.

I switched my main focus of interest in physics at least 5 times. I started geophysics (BS), I went to nuclear physics (MS) to particle physics (PhD) to hardware (1st PostDoc) to CP violation (2nd PostDoc) to high performance computing (3rd PostDoc and staff member of an international lab) to senior scientist in another international lab (now it is more and more science management). None of these career choices were done intentionally. Except for the last one it just happened. These were only the longer jobs. Shorter stints involved institutes in the USA, NL, UK, Italy and Sweden.

If you choose physics as an scientific career be prepared to move a lot. If you are glued to a certain Canadian province... Forget it. :o

Be also aware that most likely half of your topics of interest might vanish as soon as you understand the physics behind them (or the lacking of physics behind them).

The salary is okay. It pays for my bills and some more. But I got the chance to visit 51 countries (in my current job alone during the last six years).

[Skwinty]

But I got the chance to visit 51 countries (in my current job alone during the last six years).

Way to go Ingoa, bet you are happy you did not become a theoretical physicist otherwise you may just have imagined you went to 51 countries in 6 years.;)

[ingoa]

Way to go Ingoa, bet you are happy you did not become a theoretical physicist otherwise you may just have imagined you went to 51 countries in 6 years.;)

Well, once in a while it would be better to be a theoretical physicist. This year I got stuck in Uppsala (Sweden) because the FSM decided to blow up a volcano in Iceland. Quite some adventure to get home. A colleague was stuck in South Korea. That was really a mess. I did not envy her...

But being stuck in Tbilisi (European Georgia) when Russia and Georgia start a pissing-contest is also not fun in real life.

But to address a point of the OP. The ladies of these eastern European countries are extremely pretty. The shortest mini-skirts I ever saw were in Kiev. In January! :jaw-dropp

[Skwinty]

Let it not be said that physicists lead boring mundane lives.
Sounds like loads of fun to me.:)

[twistor59]

1. I wonder if I'll even have time for dating, much less a family. I'm hoping to go in for a doctorate at the minimum which would put me in school for 12 years.


Well as an ex theoretical physicist myself, I can confirm that theoretical physics is second to none for pulling the chicks (or guys, up to you really). As soon as they hear you're working in the field, you get flooded with requests for you to examine their smooth manifolds !!


Primarily, Time travel research, but also things like string theory, relativity, extradimentional space, black hole, and warp drive.

In all seriousness, though, I'm not sure that "time travel research" and "warp drive" figure highly in the research profiles of theoretical physics departments. The other subjects, yes, though. Good luck !

[TubbaBlubba]

Honestly, I think you need to see if you have a passion for physics and not just sci-fi shows. Are you excited about the fundamentals of the electromagnetic field, how Euler's identity can be used describe changes in energy so well, why friction leads to entropy, how electrons can keep on spinning forever? Do you want to learn about the fundamentals of our world, and not just make up new cool things?

This is where Feynman's Lectures on Physics come in.

[BrewnSki]

I don't know where you got you cost estimates from. I am finishing my PhD thesis in Physics, and do not know a single graduate student that paid one cent for their MS/PhD work. Graduate studies in the sciences, in the US anyway, is very well funded through fellowships and research stipends.

The undergraduate work may cost you but in state tuition for a public university is very reasonable. If you are truly interested I say go for it.

ETA: As too becoming a shut in. Most graduate students I know have had time to date and some have even started families. Additionally I have found the time to take up rock climbing as a serious hobby. So there is life outside of your research.

[Cuddles]

Physicists have no more dating problems than other people. If you do not have problems now, you will not have more problems later.

Well, one thing to note here is that physics is still very much a male dominated field. As long as you're a normal person with hobbies and such, physics will not magically prevent you from getting dates. However, you're not likely to meet an awful lot of girls during your work.

[ingoa]

Well, one thing to note here is that physics is still very much a male dominated field. As long as you're a normal person with hobbies and such, physics will not magically prevent you from getting dates. However, you're not likely to meet an awful lot of girls during your work.

That is true. But at least here in Germany many fields require introducionary physics courses (medicine and biology for example). The exams are a tough cookie for these students for whatever reason. So they need extra tutoring. That is the reason why in Germany almost every second physicist is married to a physician. (Just a personal observation in my shops)
:cool:

[SusanB-M1]

Hey, kid, started reading Feynman Lectures on Physics yet? You'll never be a real physicist if you don't!
A physicist on the GH forums posted this link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/feynman/10700.shtml) which is to a set of BBC interviews. Prof Brian Cox referred to them in his BBC Radio 4 programme last week. However, I expect all the people posting here know about them!

[notsure]

If you have passion in Physics, go for it. If condering future living and supporting a family, it's not a good field to get into. I am a mathematician and teach at a university in US, know too many physicsts from graduate school and conferences, especially theoritical physicsts, high-energy physicsts, they normally spend years moving from one post-doctor to another.

It is a field of alomost impossible for landing a decent job after graduation.

[Cuddles]

It is a field of alomost impossible for landing a decent job after graduation.

As already noted several times, this is about as far from true as it is possible to get. Physics is one of the best degrees possible for getting a job. You may not be guaranteed to get a well paid, long term job in academia, but that's very different from not being able to get a job at all.

[Dave Rogers]

As already noted several times, this is about as far from true as it is possible to get. Physics is one of the best degrees possible for getting a job. You may not be guaranteed to get a well paid, long term job in academia, but that's very different from not being able to get a job at all.

To be fair, it's pretty rare to get a well-paid job as a theoretical physicist after graduation, just as it's fairly difficult to get rich as any variety of physicist. However, there are far more things than physics that a physics degree can lead to.

Dave

[drkitten]

To be fair, it's pretty rare to get a well-paid job as a theoretical physicist after graduation, just as it's fairly difficult to get rich as any variety of physicist. However, there are far more things than physics that a physics degree can lead to.


Absolutely. Almost any of those physicists chasing postdoc after postdoc could have a job on Wall Street doing quantitative analysis by simply picking up the phone.

In general, to do a Ph.D. in a subject is a money-losing proposition; you can almost always make more with a Master's degree and five years of experience. Successful Ph.D.'s are the ones who love what they do enough to put up with the years of toil in the wilderness because the theory of magnetic bottle separation in plasma (or hydrostatic shocks in bilipid membranes, or analytic and algebraic manifold topologies, or whatever) is just so unbelievably cool that "mere" money couldn't touch it.