Is engineering physics a meme? I heard people go in there and just come out unable to find jobs because they are neither engineers nor physicists. I'm currently taking Physics, but i'm considering on switching to Mechanical Engineering because the general consensus is that if you don't make it to Ph.D. and hence academia, you'll become a finance slave. I really want to stay and do something relevant to Physics where I'm genuinely interested to participate in Physics research in future either in optics or particle physics.
The reason why i'm considering Mechanical engineering is so that if shit works out, i can either work in the aviation industry or the space industry hopefully, and probably even advance to grad school with aerospace engineering specialization, so what do you guys reckon, wise men who have been through thick and thin, should I follow my dreams and continue on with Physics or simply switch to MEng for opportunity, safety and possibly you could say money. Because engineering physics from what i generally hear is out of the picture already.
Would really appreciate your feedback, Thanks Senpai
It's not that I do not approve of, but i heard from fellow friends and relatives that it is that way, generally either be a full physicist or a full engineer, no one wants a jack of all trades.
its not so much a jack of all trades as an elite discipline as far as im aware
the eng phys people at the school i went to had to maintain a 3.8 gpa to graduate. that means they had to beat the electrical engineers and the physics people they took courses with.
You'll defintely have a far better chance of getting a job in the aerospace industry with a mechanical engineering degree if that's what you're asking, but yes for aero you generally need a masters at a good school, though B.Eng. Mech/Aero can land you a job too if you have good internships/references.
>that means they had to beat the electrical engineers and the physics
They beat them because they only took intro courses from either while EE/physics had a ton more course work and more difficult senior level classes.
i dont really consider 3rd/4th year intro level courses
also the senior level courses were definitely not more difficult. more in depth, but not more difficult. the 2nd/3rd year courses are where most of the weeding out happens.
Aero engineers most do research thermofluids/CFD, material science etc. , but it largely depends on the department.
There's a shitton of research to do on the applied side, most theoretical pure models do not resonably translate to reality mostly due to complexity; you're not just trying to solve the Navier-Stokes coupled with a non-ideal EOS coupled the actual chassis/part you're trying to design (which is to say you're also trying to optimise this design). So you don't try to solve it, you simulate, which is another field of research on its own .
Your senior courses felt easier to you because you were more developed. Imagine if instead of new in-depth material you did similar work to your sophomore/junior courses expanded laterally only. It be hard not to get an easy 4.0.
>i dont really consider 3rd/4th year intro level courses
All undergrad courses are pretty much intro level except for design courses (courses not the projects) and things like QM II/ Stat. Mech. II etc.
If you just get a bachelor's in engineering you're no better than a finance slave, except you'll be making less trying to improve efficiency by a fraction of a percent of a single component in CAD. My point is, if you want to do anything hands on, experimental, and interesting you're going to have to get a graduate degree
We just got a molecular engineering program.
It's the beginning of the end for pure science / liberal arts universities desu.
Soon every university will be a trade school in some capacity.
it means the electrical engineers and physics people needed a 2.7 gpa to stay in the program, and the eng phys people needed a 3.8 (maybe it was a 3.7, cant remember). i think the math phys, comp phys, and honours phys needed a 3.3. i had to work my ass off for my lowly 3.0 specializing in physics.
i remember the eng phys people were pretty damn good and they made up about 10% of every class.
what is grade inflation?
everything was on the curve where i went to school so you had to be the best to get a 4.0. it didnt matter what the material was.
could be that the eng phys didnt have to take qm II/stat mech II. i didnt need to to specialize in physics. definitely the more rigorous physics degrees had to take those courses tho, but like i said, there was less weeding out by 4th year, so id think it would be less challenging overall.
the eng phys people were still smart as fuck.
no need to start insulting. the class average was listed next to your grade on my transcript.
seems lame that whereever you went to school, half the students got C- or less. but i guess systems vary from place to place.
>3.8 GPA to graduate
That doesn't really tell you anything about their employment opportunities. I, like OP, am interested in what jobs actually hire people with engineering physics degrees. Intuitively it seems like they would be less desirable than a specialist engineer or a specialist physicist.
Let me put it to you this way OP.
Imagine you were running an engineering consulting firm or an R&D department and you need a specialist to supplement theoretical knowledge in your engineering team.
Are you going to hire an EP or a real physicist?
Same thing with if you have a theoretical team and need an engineer to design a reactor, you're going to hire the real enigneer not the EP.
The multi-disciplinary "disciplines" don't fill a unique niche and knows less than people who are actually from the field. This is also things like Mechatronic degrees are pointless.
Let's put it this way, no firms are gonna hire physicists, I may as well be an engineer cause either
2) Post Grad
If 1 doesn't work out, 2 and 3 sucks, although 3 may earn me fuck tonnes of money, but i'm gonna hate myself
Got accepted to UoC. I plan on keeping the girlfriend LDR and study math there. How does that look like?
You will almost never need one, but there are two reasons to hire a physicist.
First for example when you need an extra hand on typical grunt/assistance work; code/lab monkey duties, technical report writing/assistant etc. and it would be too expensive to hire an engineer for that job. Your options are freshly minted engineering graduates who will leave you in 2 years if you don't bump their salary, or more experienced science bachelor graduates in chemistry, physics etc. Generally you hire chemists for lab monkeys and physics for code monkeys since they are the only other major that comes close to understanding the basics of modelling and (numerical) optimisation.
Secondly when you need someone with specialist knowledge for a long term project beyond a typical consultation period. That's generally PhDs specialised in the field (with their undergrad being irrelevant).
The point is not place for EPs and they are worse off that physics graduates going into physics grad-school.
Always major in engineering for undergrad because you'll legally be allowed to take the license exams to become an engineer. Plus you can always go to grad school for physics and math. You can't do this if you were in pure science going to engineering.
At the bachelor's level, the advantage of engineering physics is breadth; you can apply to more internship opportunities for both physics and engineering, and have an easier time getting into both physics and engineering graduate fields if you're interested in that. Remember that specialization, even at your bachelor's stage, will really come from the nature of the work you do at internships rather than what it says on your degree. I know this from experience.
For graduate school, it's useful since it opens up the amount of faculty positions you can apply to and the nature of the research you can perform. Businesses will again really only focus on the nature of your research, and you can work on problems that most engineers can't do alone (i've had this happen very often at jobs, they'll need a mech.e who knows about electromagnetic fields or interaction cross-sections). It's more efficient for them to hire one person that can do both things instead of two to do it in a team.
look nigga, engineering isn't about your degree, its about what you can do.
do you belong to a professional organization? (if you like mechanical stuff join ASME, etc)
did you get some internships?
MOTHERFUCKING SOFTWARE SKILLS
Solidworks/CATIA/NX for CAD
Abaqus, ANSYS for CFD and FEA.
just knowing how to do some CFD and FEA will land you a job ffs.
the title of your degree is irrelevant as long as its ABET accredited and you can get your stamp sometime down the line.