And this is literal physics 1 stuff. We were tasked to come up with the rocket equation basically on our own, with minimal setup. Like we walked in and we tasked with it ~before~ the lecture on it. He walked around with the TAs helping us along. Even my groupwas able to give a good answer. With a level of physics described by KSP, and we were like C-B students at best. Its so basic I'd expect the "average" (willing) person to be able to understand the concepts.

Deriving that really was a fun moment, because even though we didn't get it all by ourselves, it felt like we ~could~ have given a bit of time. Really made me feel like I had passed some basic level of understanding of how the world works. I couldn't tell you the equation at this point, but I don't work with rockets, physics, or much advanced math daily. Really a joke that I feel more qualified then these clowns.

[–] quarrk@hexbear.net 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You should pursue a physics degree if possible, if you haven’t already. It’s that for four years (plus stress but that’s normal)

[–] LaughingLion@hexbear.net 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

lowest rate of employment after graduation of any other degree currently. there is a higher rate of employment in their field of study for journalists than physicists and its not even close

[–] quarrk@hexbear.net 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Correct, there aren’t that many jobs with the title of “physicist.” It’s very employable however, if one is willing to branch out into applied fields like engineering. I.e I don’t think there are many impoverished physicists (by education) at least in the west. It’s the path I took at least.

Education always has a tension between abstract advancement of knowledge (academia) and application. In the capitalist countries, the latter will always win out. I don’t think it is a bad choice to learn about something that both interests you and sets you up for employment, even if your employment won’t directly fall within that area.

[–] LaughingLion@hexbear.net 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

sorry, i miquoted the statistic. not highest unemployement rate in their field. also second highest unemployment rate overall for recent graduates. physicists having trouble getting jobs, period.

[–] quarrk@hexbear.net 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I’m assuming US job market. I googled around and found this that seems to be where that statistic comes from

Frankly I still don’t believe it or consider it alarming. Even at face value, if it’s a difference of 6% and 8% unemployment, it is not that meaningful. It’s still 92% vs 94% employment. Once employed, a physicist can expect a good or great salary. Lifetime earnings are great even if it can be hard for some people to find a job straight out of college. Everyone in my program is gainfully employed, usually not as an academic, but in software development, engineering, finance, or education. It’s far from a “do not recommend” field even if the latest CNN fad is to doom and gloom about the fall of STEM (usually simultaneously hyping AI as the replacement, which is rubbish)

Consider the rise of LLMs. Because it is a novel field, there are not many people with an education tailored it. Physicists are generalists. That makes them desired for industries in uncharted territory where a strong analytical and theoretical mindset is more important than a particular certification or knowledge of a computer program.

[–] LaughingLion@hexbear.net 1 points 1 week ago

this number changes yearly. physicist is often the worst employed.

and when talking about large populations and unemployment the difference between 6% and 8% is MASSIVE

also anthropology being #1 is no surprise i actually know someone with a masters in it. went to a specialized school abroad and everything. she is a librarian now. completely respectable field and she enjoys it. but it is not in her field whatsoever