The Spacetime Metric
Friday, February 23, 2007
the road less traveled
What is the "trouble with physics"?
A. Too many theories to choose from
B. Not enough real physics jobs
C. Having to compete with stamp collectors (people in other fields)
D. All of the above
The correct answer is (D), and not surprisingly so. As graduation gets closer and closer for many of the physics majors I know, I'm starting to sense an atmosphere of overwhelming despair. Many of them are wondering what they're going to do after graduation; the question, "What do you do with a physics degree?" is getting thrown around a lot. The obvious answer is "go to grad school", but since only about 15 percent of RPI graduates (all majors included) go to grad school, I don't think we're really prepared for it.
These people think- erroneously- that physics should be very similar to engineering. Since there are a lot more engineers than physicists (about 100 times more in America), and since engineers tend to be very specialized even if they just hold a bachelor's degree, people know a lot more about engineers than they do about physicists. Which is ironic, because high schoolers (i.e., those who are trying to figure out their future careers) don't take engineering courses before they go to college. There are very few books for the general public that really delve into the details of what engineers do. So why are there so many times as many engineering majors as there are physics majors?
I don't think the answer is because of job opportunities. The opportunities for engineers certainly aren't perfect, especially because so many jobs are being outsourced. The Capital District of Upstate New York is a perfect example of an area where there had been almost limitless engineering jobs a few decades ago, but over time, everything changed for the worse, contributing to the overall decay of the area.
So what's the answer? Why is physics less popular? The physics majors who lament over the lack of job opportunities obviously haven't heard the laments of liberal arts majors, whose condition is far more pitiful. Physicists may have to go to grad school, but at least we're basically guaranteed to get a skilled job :) (although not necessarily physics-related). ¶ 6:29 PM 0 comments
A. Too many theories to choose from
B. Not enough real physics jobs
C. Having to compete with stamp collectors (people in other fields)
D. All of the above
The correct answer is (D), and not surprisingly so. As graduation gets closer and closer for many of the physics majors I know, I'm starting to sense an atmosphere of overwhelming despair. Many of them are wondering what they're going to do after graduation; the question, "What do you do with a physics degree?" is getting thrown around a lot. The obvious answer is "go to grad school", but since only about 15 percent of RPI graduates (all majors included) go to grad school, I don't think we're really prepared for it.
These people think- erroneously- that physics should be very similar to engineering. Since there are a lot more engineers than physicists (about 100 times more in America), and since engineers tend to be very specialized even if they just hold a bachelor's degree, people know a lot more about engineers than they do about physicists. Which is ironic, because high schoolers (i.e., those who are trying to figure out their future careers) don't take engineering courses before they go to college. There are very few books for the general public that really delve into the details of what engineers do. So why are there so many times as many engineering majors as there are physics majors?
I don't think the answer is because of job opportunities. The opportunities for engineers certainly aren't perfect, especially because so many jobs are being outsourced. The Capital District of Upstate New York is a perfect example of an area where there had been almost limitless engineering jobs a few decades ago, but over time, everything changed for the worse, contributing to the overall decay of the area.
So what's the answer? Why is physics less popular? The physics majors who lament over the lack of job opportunities obviously haven't heard the laments of liberal arts majors, whose condition is far more pitiful. Physicists may have to go to grad school, but at least we're basically guaranteed to get a skilled job :) (although not necessarily physics-related). ¶ 6:29 PM 0 comments
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
on pseudoscience
I've noticed, since the temperatures have consistently remained below freezing here, that there has been somewhat less talk of "global warming." By "somewhat less" I am implying that some people have been going outside for a change. The temperature got up to 293 K at the beginning of January throughout much of the northeast, even in upstate New York, so the usual alarmists went crazy. Now the temperatures have fallen dramatically.
I was quite disgusted to discover that Columbia University is now offering a somewhat new master's program. Not in loop quantum gravity, physics blogging, or anti-string policy... but in "climate and society."
I didn't know it was possible to major in pseudoscience, let alone get a master's in it, but here we go. This example of "groupthink" is far more frightening than anything theoretical physicists could ever come up with. :) Indeed, climatology is an actual example of groupthink, and an alarming one at that.
Fortunately, not everyone is buying this global warming garbage, not even in the climatology community. As the Reference Frame tells us, there have been quite a few papers recently (and a lot more to come) which are trying to convince the groupthinkers that "global warming", if it actually did exist, would not result merely from human activity. It is the opinion of this blogger that anthropogenic global warming theories were developed by Luddites who want to make people feel guilty for wrecking the planet through CO2-emitting technology.
It gets even sadder when you realize that the Kyoto Protocol is costing untold billions of dollars, all of which are being thrown away. If only that money could have gone to legitimate science, to physics research, to something perhaps even more powerful than the LHC (like the ill-fated SSC). I am not as optimistic as Dr. Motl that the LHC will find evidence for supersymmetry a few hours after it starts up, but we desperately need the LHC to continue actual scientific research. The "trouble with physics" is that it doesn't get enough funding and has to resort to less-powerful accelerators. (The SSC would've been about twice as powerful as the LHC.)
If only pseudoscience would make way for real science... ¶ 4:44 PM 0 comments
I was quite disgusted to discover that Columbia University is now offering a somewhat new master's program. Not in loop quantum gravity, physics blogging, or anti-string policy... but in "climate and society."
I didn't know it was possible to major in pseudoscience, let alone get a master's in it, but here we go. This example of "groupthink" is far more frightening than anything theoretical physicists could ever come up with. :) Indeed, climatology is an actual example of groupthink, and an alarming one at that.
Fortunately, not everyone is buying this global warming garbage, not even in the climatology community. As the Reference Frame tells us, there have been quite a few papers recently (and a lot more to come) which are trying to convince the groupthinkers that "global warming", if it actually did exist, would not result merely from human activity. It is the opinion of this blogger that anthropogenic global warming theories were developed by Luddites who want to make people feel guilty for wrecking the planet through CO2-emitting technology.
It gets even sadder when you realize that the Kyoto Protocol is costing untold billions of dollars, all of which are being thrown away. If only that money could have gone to legitimate science, to physics research, to something perhaps even more powerful than the LHC (like the ill-fated SSC). I am not as optimistic as Dr. Motl that the LHC will find evidence for supersymmetry a few hours after it starts up, but we desperately need the LHC to continue actual scientific research. The "trouble with physics" is that it doesn't get enough funding and has to resort to less-powerful accelerators. (The SSC would've been about twice as powerful as the LHC.)
If only pseudoscience would make way for real science... ¶ 4:44 PM 0 comments
