4 ms·

I'm a physics phd student, but I did my undergrad in cs+physics at well known school in the midwest. I really regret going to grad school for physics, I gave u

by tmoot 10y ago

I'm a physics phd student, but I did my undergrad in cs+physics at well known school in the midwest. I really regret going to grad school for physics, I gave up a lot of earning potential, time to develop new skills and I've forgotten a lot of my CS background. Most methods in my area have already been developed and the pressure to publish (pushy advisor, several projects not producing the intended results, and proposal writing) has always been hampering away at my free time to think. I really dislike this system. At the same time, I'm sure exists in industry too (never had a real job). I'm not going lie, I feel a bit trapped, but I'm still a fairly positive person. In the sciences, grad school is sold as a necessity but I'm starting to think this is a way of fueling the ivory tower. I realize that this is a bit incoherent/ranty, but whatever. :)

ddavis 10y ago
Also a physics PhD student. I never touched CS as un undergrad, but I got very interested in writing software as an undergrad when I started in an experimental HEP group (I've never taken any formal programming courses). I don't completely regret going to grad school even though I often think about the likelihood that I leave physics when I graduate to get a job in software development. I also dislike the academic system - and that's the biggest contributor to that likelihood to leave for the software industry being high. The physics itself is no longer _incredibly_ interesting to me, but I can't shake the data analysis itch ;)
physcab 10y ago
I was a Physics undergrad+ Physics / Materials Science PhD and I ended up just quitting 4 years into my PhD. You can do it too. You don't owe your advisor anything and you've definitely put in your indentured servitude. I ended up getting a job as a data analyst / scientist and never looked back. You can work on interesting problems, use the same experimental design knowledge and methods, and get paid $100k more than a grad student.
- koolba 10y ago
  Four years? Is it common for a Physics PhD to take that long? I thought most fields are closer to two years.
  - loarake 10y ago
    People who go straight from undergrad to PhD often take 5+ years (in the states and Canada, at least), especially in the experimental fields
  - URSpider94 10y ago
    Four years would be on the very short end these days. Most doctoral programs in math and the sciences are a MINIMUM of four years, with average terms creeping up to 6. Never say never, but a 2-year doctorate is pretty much unheard-of. Some people think of this as 2 years for a Masters and 2 more for PhD, but in practice most hard science programs don't really offer a true Masters program. When I got my doctorate, a bunch of us figured out we could apply to get our MS diploma after we finished our coursework -- hardly anyone in the PhD program had ever bothered before. We all got them and put them on our desks as a kind of inside joke.
    - crazypyro 10y ago
      Don't some universities give MS diplomas out to people who make it so far in the program, but drop out before getting their PhD as a kind of "well, here's something for your work"?
      - whorleater 10y ago
        Yeah those are usually referred to as "terminal masters", meaning that you terminated your education with as MS.
        URSpider94 10y ago
        "terminal masters" more usually refers to a field where a Masters degree is the highest attainable degree, like a Masters of Fine Art (there is no Doctorate of Fine Art). Although searching Google - I can find references to the usage you're giving. But, I fully agree that a Masters in a hard science, especially from a top research school, is almost always a consolation prize for those who drop out. My program would not accept students into the program for a Masters, it was PhD only, unless you dropped out.
ddebernardy 10y ago
Don't feel trapped. There are lots of CS experts out there who are competent but have little domain knowledge expertise and therefor limited understanding of what they're writing software for. Just push ahead and see it through until you get bored with it. Being the person around who can write software and understand the underlying physics of this or that problem that you're seeking to model makes a world of difference and is a very valued skill in some fields.
fsloth 10y ago
I was 6 months into my PhD in physics - just been given assignment based on obscure Austrian codebase and a quick briefing based on nature article ("Let's discuss when you have something - seeya!") when an opportunity in software came about (a graphics gig - the last thing I wanted to do was write CRUD apps). Never looked back. I was ridiculously underequipped in theoretical as well as practical side beyond linear algebra and C++ but we had a great team and I had the chance to learn quickly. One thing - if you decide to move to industry, make sure the first years you can learn from someone more talented than you - even if informally. This is critical, software is a craft.
StClaire 10y ago
You don't have to stay. Look for development jobs or internships for the Fall semester. If you like it more than what you're doing now, don't go back. If you decide that you want to get into the physics, the go back. Plenty of grad students take a semester or two off and go finish their PhDs. If your advisor blows a gasket, well, you can probably do better somewhere else anyway. I know a lot of graduate students and early professors who have a fear of private industry. I think they all know they can make more money outside of academia, but they don't realize they can work fewer hours and not have worry about a bad tenure committee screwing up their careers. A bad boss can make my work life suck, but he'll need to work hard to completely nuke my career. Anyway, I understand how you feel. Despite my lackluster GPA, a couple professors want me to go on for a masters in math or statistics. You should see their faces contort when I tell them I don't want to go to graduate school or I don't want a career in academia. You spent your life in academia, surrounded by people who spent their lives in academia, who have surrounded themselves with people who spent their lives in academia. Get some fresh air, fill your bank account, and then decide.
- mng2 10y ago
  I agree, I realized the truth of your second-to-last sentence sometime during grad school. These people have played the academia game and it worked out for them, and their sense of self-worth and prestige is tied to their standing inside the system. Of course, the academia game is a lot more difficult to play these days.
avn2109 10y ago
We hire people with your exact profile for data science jobs all the time. You should be applying to DS jobs like there's no tomorrow.
tossractt999 10y ago
> Most methods in my area have already been developed and the pressure to s/publish/ship (pushy s/advisor/PM, several s/projects/products not producing the intended s/results/sales, and s/proposal/budgets writing) has always been hampering away at my free time to think. I really dislike this system. Sounds like you have plenty of "real job" experience ;-)
BeetleB 10y ago
A few points. I spent 7 years in grad school, then quit without a PhD. I don't regret it for a minute. I managed to spend 7 years studying topics that interest me, that I will not get to study had I gone straight into industry. Sure, while working you may have some spare time to study some math/physics. But nowhere near at the level you could/did in grad school. There's really no comparison. If you're not happy in grad school, perhaps: 1. You don't like your research topic. 2. You don't like your advisor. As an example, I did not have a very pushy advisor, so I learned what I did in a very relaxed manner. Bad idea if I were to end up in academia as a career, but it worked out great for me. It does suck not finishing the PhD, but once I was in industry, I saw the jobs that most PhDs in my research topic would have ended up with - and most of those jobs are horrible. I worked with them for 4 years, and moved into programming. While the satisfaction of solving really challenging problems is no longer there, the programming job overall really is much better: More autonomy, more creativity, better work schedule, etc. But bottom line: Grad school is for learning the stuff you are passionate about. If you're not doing that, either change your topic/advisor, or leave.

by tmoot 10y ago

ddavis 10y ago

Also a physics PhD student. I never touched CS as un undergrad, but I got very interested in writing software as an undergrad when I started in an experimental HEP group (I've never taken any formal programming courses). I don't completely regret going to grad school even though I often think about the likelihood that I leave physics when I graduate to get a job in software development. I also dislike the academic system - and that's the biggest contributor to that likelihood to leave for the software industry being high. The physics itself is no longer _incredibly_ interesting to me, but I can't shake the data analysis itch ;)

physcab 10y ago

I was a Physics undergrad+ Physics / Materials Science PhD and I ended up just quitting 4 years into my PhD. You can do it too. You don't owe your advisor anything and you've definitely put in your indentured servitude. I ended up getting a job as a data analyst / scientist and never looked back. You can work on interesting problems, use the same experimental design knowledge and methods, and get paid $100k more than a grad student.

koolba 10y ago
Four years? Is it common for a Physics PhD to take that long? I thought most fields are closer to two years.
- loarake 10y ago
  People who go straight from undergrad to PhD often take 5+ years (in the states and Canada, at least), especially in the experimental fields
- URSpider94 10y ago
  Four years would be on the very short end these days. Most doctoral programs in math and the sciences are a MINIMUM of four years, with average terms creeping up to 6. Never say never, but a 2-year doctorate is pretty much unheard-of. Some people think of this as 2 years for a Masters and 2 more for PhD, but in practice most hard science programs don't really offer a true Masters program. When I got my doctorate, a bunch of us figured out we could apply to get our MS diploma after we finished our coursework -- hardly anyone in the PhD program had ever bothered before. We all got them and put them on our desks as a kind of inside joke.
  - crazypyro 10y ago
    Don't some universities give MS diplomas out to people who make it so far in the program, but drop out before getting their PhD as a kind of "well, here's something for your work"?
    - whorleater 10y ago
      Yeah those are usually referred to as "terminal masters", meaning that you terminated your education with as MS.
      - URSpider94 10y ago
        "terminal masters" more usually refers to a field where a Masters degree is the highest attainable degree, like a Masters of Fine Art (there is no Doctorate of Fine Art). Although searching Google - I can find references to the usage you're giving. But, I fully agree that a Masters in a hard science, especially from a top research school, is almost always a consolation prize for those who drop out. My program would not accept students into the program for a Masters, it was PhD only, unless you dropped out.

ddebernardy 10y ago

Don't feel trapped. There are lots of CS experts out there who are competent but have little domain knowledge expertise and therefor limited understanding of what they're writing software for. Just push ahead and see it through until you get bored with it. Being the person around who can write software and understand the underlying physics of this or that problem that you're seeking to model makes a world of difference and is a very valued skill in some fields.

fsloth 10y ago

I was 6 months into my PhD in physics - just been given assignment based on obscure Austrian codebase and a quick briefing based on nature article ("Let's discuss when you have something - seeya!") when an opportunity in software came about (a graphics gig - the last thing I wanted to do was write CRUD apps). Never looked back. I was ridiculously underequipped in theoretical as well as practical side beyond linear algebra and C++ but we had a great team and I had the chance to learn quickly. One thing - if you decide to move to industry, make sure the first years you can learn from someone more talented than you - even if informally. This is critical, software is a craft.

StClaire 10y ago

You don't have to stay. Look for development jobs or internships for the Fall semester. If you like it more than what you're doing now, don't go back. If you decide that you want to get into the physics, the go back. Plenty of grad students take a semester or two off and go finish their PhDs. If your advisor blows a gasket, well, you can probably do better somewhere else anyway. I know a lot of graduate students and early professors who have a fear of private industry. I think they all know they can make more money outside of academia, but they don't realize they can work fewer hours and not have worry about a bad tenure committee screwing up their careers. A bad boss can make my work life suck, but he'll need to work hard to completely nuke my career. Anyway, I understand how you feel. Despite my lackluster GPA, a couple professors want me to go on for a masters in math or statistics. You should see their faces contort when I tell them I don't want to go to graduate school or I don't want a career in academia. You spent your life in academia, surrounded by people who spent their lives in academia, who have surrounded themselves with people who spent their lives in academia. Get some fresh air, fill your bank account, and then decide.

mng2 10y ago
I agree, I realized the truth of your second-to-last sentence sometime during grad school. These people have played the academia game and it worked out for them, and their sense of self-worth and prestige is tied to their standing inside the system. Of course, the academia game is a lot more difficult to play these days.

avn2109 10y ago

We hire people with your exact profile for data science jobs all the time. You should be applying to DS jobs like there's no tomorrow.

tossractt999 10y ago

> Most methods in my area have already been developed and the pressure to s/publish/ship (pushy s/advisor/PM, several s/projects/products not producing the intended s/results/sales, and s/proposal/budgets writing) has always been hampering away at my free time to think. I really dislike this system. Sounds like you have plenty of "real job" experience ;-)

BeetleB 10y ago

A few points. I spent 7 years in grad school, then quit without a PhD. I don't regret it for a minute. I managed to spend 7 years studying topics that interest me, that I will not get to study had I gone straight into industry. Sure, while working you may have some spare time to study some math/physics. But nowhere near at the level you could/did in grad school. There's really no comparison. If you're not happy in grad school, perhaps: 1. You don't like your research topic. 2. You don't like your advisor. As an example, I did not have a very pushy advisor, so I learned what I did in a very relaxed manner. Bad idea if I were to end up in academia as a career, but it worked out great for me. It does suck not finishing the PhD, but once I was in industry, I saw the jobs that most PhDs in my research topic would have ended up with - and most of those jobs are horrible. I worked with them for 4 years, and moved into programming. While the satisfaction of solving really challenging problems is no longer there, the programming job overall really is much better: More autonomy, more creativity, better work schedule, etc. But bottom line: Grad school is for learning the stuff you are passionate about. If you're not doing that, either change your topic/advisor, or leave.