[Nuclear Experiment vs Nuclear Theory] [National Lab/General Outlook]

[redflactober]

Hello all,

I have a question for those with knowledge of Nuclear Physics career outlook.

I am at a point where I need to decide soon. I know I want to go to grad school, I know I want to study Nuclear Physics, but I'm a little torn between which method of study to undergo. I would not mind either Experiment or Theory; I've done undergrad research in both disciplines, and would be happy with either path. This has lead me to exploring other differences between the two paths to help sway the decision. My biggest curiosity lies now in finding out which path is more likely to lead to an actual "physicist" position in a National Lab (ideally). My intuition tells me that obviously a PhD in Nuclear Experiment would be more sought after in a lab setting ofcourse. Though I've heard more and more about computational groups at various labs like Oak Ridge and Argonne, and how they really aren't as much of a minority as I had at first believed (admittedly, the credibility for these statements is ofcourse unknown to me).

In the end, I just love Nuclei and I want to maximize my chance of staying in the field, despite nothing being guaranteed.
So I come to a place like PhysicsForums in hope of finding some experienced people to gain insight from. Then, to those who are in the know, would either (Nuclear) Experiment or Theory have an upper hand above the other in career longevity? Or is the choice relatively arbitrary in comparison to work ethic and who you know?

Thanks In Advance.

 

[Vanadium 50]

No way to tell. As they say "there's always room at the bottom" - i.e. you can pick a promising field, but if you aren't very good at it, it won't help.

 

[CrysPhys]

My biggest curiosity lies now in finding out which path is more likely to lead to an actual "physicist" position in a National Lab (ideally). My intuition tells me that obviously a PhD in Nuclear Experiment would be more sought after in a lab setting ofcourse. Though I've heard more and more about computational groups at various labs like Oak Ridge and Argonne, and how they really aren't as much of a minority as I had at first believed (admittedly, the credibility for these statements is ofcourse unknown to me).

<<Emphasis added>>

* Your goal is a career as a physicist in a US national lab, correct? But your profile lists your country as Brazil. Before proceeding, you should check the visa/green card/citizenship requirements for the positions you are targetting.

* Purely as a hypo, assuming you meet the requirements, you are targetting a small niche. You should always have a Plan B, but a solid Plan B is even more critical when your target set is relatively small. So develop a solid Plan B; determine the knowledge, skill set, and experience that will best position you for success in Plan B (as well as your primary); and determine which PhD program will afford you that knowledge, skill set, and experience.

 

[redflactober]

No way to tell. As they say "there's always room at the bottom" - i.e. you can pick a promising field, but if you aren't very good at it, it won't help.

Let’s assume that I’m obsessed- Er… “formidable” in whichever field I choose.

You’re saying Nuclear physicists don’t skew towards either experimental or theoretical in a US national lab? If there is no skew, then I see why you mentioned that there’s no way to tell.

As I type this I realize that it’s a radically specific piece of information to be asking for. But something like that would be relevant to my wanting to maximize any chance I can clutch onto by my two front teeth.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Let’s assume that I’m obsessed-

Then see a mental health professional.

Er… “formidable” in whichever field I choose.

Now we're playing "let's pretend". I find that unhelpful.

You’re saying

Please don't put words in my mouth. I don't like it. Few people do.

You are asking is to predict the details of the job market 10 or 15 years down the road. Nobody has a crystal ball. To make it harder, you have mentioned nothing about subfield (RHI, nuclear structure, fundamental symmetries, etc.) nor what you are good at (apart from the dubious statement that you are equally good at everything). Now its triply impossible.

 

[berkeman]

* Your goal is a career as a physicist in a US national lab, correct? But your profile lists your country as Brazil. Before proceeding, you should check the visa/green card/citizenship requirements for the positions you are targetting.

@redflactober -- Have you done this?

 

[WWGD]

@redflactober -- Have you done this?

And required security and other clearance.

 

[redflactober]

Then see a mental health professional.

Now we're playing "let's pretend". I find that unhelpful.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I don't like it. Few people do.

You are asking is to predict the details of the job market 10 or 15 years down the road. Nobody has a crystal ball. To make it harder, you have mentioned nothing about subfield (RHI, nuclear structure, fundamental symmetries, etc.) nor what you are good at (apart from the dubious statement that you are equally good at everything). Now its triply impossible.

I think you’ve misinterpreted me here. I’m not asking you to predict anything, the question was asking those who have been in the field what their experience has been. Anecdotal experience is the extent of my question, sorry for not being clear before. Not being sarcastic here.

You mentioned that picking a promising field means nothing if I’m not good at it. The reason I said let’s assume I’m formidable is because, well, if I’m no good then I won’t find a job and that’s that and this conversation is over. I already have a good intuition about how that would go.
If we did assume I, or anyone, was formidable in their field of choice as a postulate, then removing that as a variable, from your experience if you have it, in general based off prior observations, does Nuclear theory/experiment provide better opportunities at DOE Labs?

I was never trying to put words in your mouth, I was repeating my interpretation of your message to see if I understood what you said correctly. I can’t know until I double check. Since I’m asking for anecdotal experience, there should be a way to tell in what direction the lab skewed. It might not be true in general, but honestly at this point it would sway my decision. I’m surprised because I never meant to send any message of ill will.

To add more information into the mix, I wouldn’t say I’m good at everything, that’s not even close to the truth. My undergrad research is in Gamma Ray Spectroscopy; currently trying to help improve our detectors.

Since you’ve replied I’ve spoken to a lot of the faculty at my university, and we’ve come to the consensus that Experimental research would indeed maximize the chance of finding a position at a lab. It does seem like a no brainer, so sorry for wasting your time. I just wanted to basically hear about others experiences.

 

[redflactober]

@redflactober -- Have you done this?

I apologize, I think I have missed a basic rule here. I chose the Brazil flag because that’s where my family is from and my first language. I was born in the USA, I’ll change my flag.

 

[redflactober]

<<Emphasis added>>

* Your goal is a career as a physicist in a US national lab, correct? But your profile lists your country as Brazil. Before proceeding, you should check the visa/green card/citizenship requirements for the positions you are targetting.

* Purely as a hypo, assuming you meet the requirements, you are targetting a small niche. You should always have a Plan B, but a solid Plan B is even more critical when your target set is relatively small. So develop a solid Plan B; determine the knowledge, skill set, and experience that will best position you for success in Plan B (as well as your primary); and determine which PhD program will afford you that knowledge, skill set, and

<<Emphasis added>>

* Your goal is a career as a physicist in a US national lab, correct? But your profile lists your country as Brazil. Before proceeding, you should check the visa/green card/citizenship requirements for the positions you are targetting.

* Purely as a hypo, assuming you meet the requirements, you are targetting a small niche. You should always have a Plan B, but a solid Plan B is even more critical when your target set is relatively small. So develop a solid Plan B; determine the knowledge, skill set, and experience that will best position you for success in Plan B (as well as your primary); and determine which PhD program will afford you that knowledge, skill set, and experience.

Thank you. I realize my question was super general, but you managed to give me advice that’s very specific. I’m going to bring this concern to build a plan with me to my next meeting with my academic advisor:)
It also makes me lean toward experimental research in every way. Thanks again!