<p>Alright, so I know it may sound silly, but I’m a person that has to have goals and direction, so I’m a bit confused over what I truly want to pursue. I’ve always loved the idea of engineering, I know I have the mind for it and as of now I know I’d really love to do research. But at the same time, I have a certain feeling that I want to be on the cutting edge, truly on the cutting edge doing something that could possibly be ground-breaking to what we know about our universe. I’m stuck between being a physicist and an engineer, and part of me wants to do engineering because it’s “good enough” for what I love to do (which is solve problems and think new things) and because it’s safe in regards to finances. With being a physicist, I’ve heard that it has some risk to it.</p>
<p>Anyway, I know this might be geared a little more towards the science section but I don’t see a whole lot of people who are very helpful that post there, so I figured with all the engineers here a few would know about physics as well. Can someone tell me, would it be a good idea to do engineering as an undergrad and then decide if I want to do physics or engineering in grad school? I figure this would be the safest route, but I know physics majors have to know a lot more “physics” than engineering (if any at all), but I’m aware of physicists being able to go to grad school as engineers simply by taking some classes to catch up, and I was wondering if it was possible to do it the other way around or if it was even necessary. Would it also be a good idea to pursue a minor in physics if I took this route? And if I’m just not doin’ it right, then what would be the recommended route I take?</p>
<p>Also if anyone knows about what research life is like for a physicist versus and engineer in all regards, please post as well. Thanks for any helpful comments.</p>
<p>Well, the biggest difference is how applicable the research and topics are to foreseeable advances in technology. A lot of what physicists do is so theoretical that it doesn’t get used in technology until years down the road when some engineer takes the concept and applies it. Physicists deal with some pretty awesome stuff (I almost majored in physics) and do generate some practical content, but for the most part, they do science for the sake of sciences. Engineers generate (at the graduate level) a fair amount of groundbreaking science in their own right, but for the most part, it is science generated for the sake of solving a real-world problem.</p>
<p>Basically, it comes down to how theoretical you want your studies to be. It would almost definitely require some catching up to go to grad school for physics from an engineering background, because while engineers are generally strong in physics, they don’t take nearly as much as a physicist. I only took relativity because I wanted to (I know, I may be a masochist). A minor in physics may be enough to bridge that gap though, so if you want to minor in physics, go for it. If I could do my undergrad all again, I would probably (A) try harder my first couple years (and not date that crazy girl I dated freshman year) and (B) I would minor in physics.</p>
<p>Yeah, minor or double major in physics. It’s not so uncommon, depending on the program requirements. Some places may even have minors in engineering. Still, it might be best to simply major in the more marketable degree to have a strong backup plan.</p>
<p>But definitely take some physics courses. They’re pretty cool. I’d say a pretty rough estimate to the number of courses you would have to take either way (engineering to physics or vice versa) would be about five. Graduate schools will have more specific info, though.</p>
<p>I feel physics is the best undergraduate degree in route to M.S and Ph.D in engineering. Physics undergrad’s focus is on knowledge, whereas engineering makes sacrifices in amount the of ‘pure’ coursework so graduates enter industry directly and be useful. So if your going to Ph.D anyways I think physics provides a better base. </p>
<p>I feel physics graduate schools should be avoided though. Engineering research is more interesting sense you are using your theoretical base and applying it towards real advancements such as making efficient and affordable solar cells, For this reason, engineering research is economically more viable and practical than physics.If your just in love with learning and want to truly be on the frontier of advancement in science then do physics graduate school but you will make substantial sacrifices; for instance engineering research could be done in conjunction with an industry company such as Cummins on combustion, your research could land you a job there, a physics research is not relevant to industry in big picture. I’ve also heard don’t go into physics grad school thinking you’ll get a professorship, which is sad because there’s really not much else for them but hey, it’s competition.</p>
<p>^ Physicists can get a lot of the same jobs PhD mathematicians and engineers can get. There are certainly some areas of physics which are more marketable than others… solid state (and surface) physics is quite marketable, whereas string theory or antimatter probably is a few years down the road, at best.</p>
<p>Still, it is true that physicists are having trouble because, well, there are so many of them… more than the market can comfortable bear, or at least such is my understanding. Still, you can get industry jobs with a PhD in physics, just not so easily as you could with something in engineering.</p>
<p>I would also say take some extra physics courses if you can. After taking my required Physics I, II and III…I went and added Quantum Physics and Computational Physics just for electives and enjoyed them.</p>
<p>True, there may be a slight logjam as far as pure physics employment positions for the physicist, but the defense world still will hire physicists for a variety of engineering analysis, engineering design and engineering testing roles.</p>
<p>Would a double major be too much? I mean, I’m not sure there’s so much crossover between engineering classes and physics classes beyond the first through third semesters… atleast from what I remember from looking at sample schedules.</p>
<p>I think the only reason I don’t want to major in physics is #1) if for some reason I don’t end up wanting to do research or wanting to go to graduate school (I don’t feel that, but regret is just no good) then I’ll still be in good shape. #2) I feel like majoring in just ‘physics’ is too broad, and I’ve heard that quote that’s something about a jack of all trades but a master of none and I feel like that might be a bad thing. #3) I’m going to GaTech and their engineering program is phenomenal and since I’m a GA resident I feel as though I should take advantage of something like that, but this reason isn’t really a main reason as much as it’s more like one of those things that would just edge me over to the other wise.</p>
<p>Also, it seems logical that if I ever wanted to get an industry research job I could point to my engineering undergraduate degree and this could probably account for some things in regards to my potential abilities as an engineer. I mean, physics isn’t so far off from engineering, and if physicists can get jobs in some engineering-type roles, then it seems like this should be possible, but that’s not something I’ve actually heard just was wondering if it actually works like this since it seems semi-reasonable.</p>
<p>I’m mainly just worried about employment opportunities. I mean right now I’m taken care of and I have a roof over my head and food to eat etc. so I have time to wonder about the universe… once that becomes a problem then I think that would be difficult. Besides, I hear a lot about researchers in chemistry and biology (can’t say I’ve really talked to any physicists specifically) and they say research life is crap and to not do it because there’s no employment in it. That is really what I’m afraid of, and I don’t want to make a mistake and give up an opportunity to make myself marketable in the event that I can’t find the sort of job I want.</p>
<p>hadsed, that jack of all trade’s master of none is more appropriate for interdisciplinary engineering majors that don’t take advanced coursework in any sub topics of physics, I wouldn’t say that about physics undergrads; their curriculum is stacked</p>
<p>What field of engineering uses relativity and quantum physics the most? I don’t think nuclear engineering would, since that part is left to physicists and you are just building a reactor to do the job of turning a turbine.</p>
<p>Yeah, I know a lot of people who have doubled in Engineering and Physics. I’m CS and Physics. Check with your school to see what the requirements are and see if it is worth it to you to take however much more coursework is required. I can definitely recommend it.</p>
<p>Alright, new question now. What sort of research will benefit me for grad school? I’d like to do physics research over engineering research as it seems more interesting to me, but if research is top notch here in engineering and not so top notch in physics then would that make a difference? Should I simply do both? Does it even matter?</p>
<p>Do both. Do whatever you find more interesting. Forget how big-name the research is; do something you have an academic interest in. If there’s nothing like that, step aside and let others do it instead.</p>