3 ms·

This was written in 1999.

HarryHirsch 12y ago
I know. It's all bullshit what the guy writes, this essay and all the others on his site. This one here (http://physics.wustl.edu/katz/defense.html http://physics.wustl.edu/katz/defense.html) is really something fierce. That's why I said the unemployment crisis isn't caused by an oversupply of scientists - up to about 2004 most everyone with a PhD degree could find employment in industry. But this fellow Katz doesn't even mention industry. He is either ignorant or intentionally dishonest. There is no excuse for either.
- rifung 12y ago
  While I don't know whether he's right or wrong, he definitely mentions the industry in the article. He first says, "computer science and engineering are the few fields in which industrial demand makes it sensible to get a Ph.D" and later, "there are hardly any industrial jobs in the physical sciences". Other professors and PhDs I've talked to have basically said the same things as he says here. There are definitely jobs for PhDs in CS in industry, but whether you would be considered a "scientist" for those jobs is debatable, as most of the time you don't have the same level of freedom you would have in academia (or at least that's what I've been told).
- prewett 12y ago
  The author is a physicist; where would one find employment in the physics industry? The "physics industry" is pretty much academia, with the exception of a few DoD positions. Physics Ph.D.s frequently go into finance and software development, but since neither of those use physics (except limited amounts of software), I think they would fit into the "career change" that he did mention. I graduated with an B.S. in Physics about the time that he wrote, and his analysis pretty much matched what I saw in the lab I worked in. Of my physics classmates who I know what happened to them, all got jobs doing no physics (including the newly minted Ph.D. who was supervising me). I talked with the postdoc in our lab (her second postdoc position), looked at the number of Ph.D.s and postdocs at Ohio State (lots), looked at the number of open positions in the Physics Department at Ohio State (none), and decided I did not want to postdoc until a professor died and then hope that I get picked. So I said physics was a fun, stimulating, foundational undergraduate choice, felt like I understood the entire world, and promptly pursued software. (Fortunately, I was aided by being tired of school and not really enjoying physics research) One of my physics classmates did software for a while, then decided to do a Ph.D. in (rocket) propulsion, which is physics-related. "Industry" for him is pretty much limited to NASA (who else is going to employ someone looking into new forms of propulsion?) Turns out he doesn't want to work for NASA bureaucracy, so he switched back to software again. I think the author is right on, at least for his field of physics.

I know. It's all bullshit what the guy writes, this essay and all the others on his site. This one here (http://physics.wustl.edu/katz/defense.html http://physics.wustl.edu/katz/defense.html) is really something fierce. That's why I said the unemployment crisis isn't caused by an oversupply of scientists - up to about 2004 most everyone with a PhD degree could find employment in industry. But this fellow Katz doesn't even mention industry. He is either ignorant or intentionally dishonest. There is no excuse for either.

rifung 12y ago
While I don't know whether he's right or wrong, he definitely mentions the industry in the article. He first says, "computer science and engineering are the few fields in which industrial demand makes it sensible to get a Ph.D" and later, "there are hardly any industrial jobs in the physical sciences". Other professors and PhDs I've talked to have basically said the same things as he says here. There are definitely jobs for PhDs in CS in industry, but whether you would be considered a "scientist" for those jobs is debatable, as most of the time you don't have the same level of freedom you would have in academia (or at least that's what I've been told).
prewett 12y ago
The author is a physicist; where would one find employment in the physics industry? The "physics industry" is pretty much academia, with the exception of a few DoD positions. Physics Ph.D.s frequently go into finance and software development, but since neither of those use physics (except limited amounts of software), I think they would fit into the "career change" that he did mention. I graduated with an B.S. in Physics about the time that he wrote, and his analysis pretty much matched what I saw in the lab I worked in. Of my physics classmates who I know what happened to them, all got jobs doing no physics (including the newly minted Ph.D. who was supervising me). I talked with the postdoc in our lab (her second postdoc position), looked at the number of Ph.D.s and postdocs at Ohio State (lots), looked at the number of open positions in the Physics Department at Ohio State (none), and decided I did not want to postdoc until a professor died and then hope that I get picked. So I said physics was a fun, stimulating, foundational undergraduate choice, felt like I understood the entire world, and promptly pursued software. (Fortunately, I was aided by being tired of school and not really enjoying physics research) One of my physics classmates did software for a while, then decided to do a Ph.D. in (rocket) propulsion, which is physics-related. "Industry" for him is pretty much limited to NASA (who else is going to employ someone looking into new forms of propulsion?) Turns out he doesn't want to work for NASA bureaucracy, so he switched back to software again. I think the author is right on, at least for his field of physics.