Slashdot Mirror
Starting a Career in Science at Age 38?
A Science Nostalgic writes "I'm 38, have a successful career as a software developer but feel the all-too-similar enterprise apps are boring my brains out, and I'm intensely missing the world of science, which I didn't pursue in favor of programming when I got my engineering degree. Now, I'm contemplating a job in research, but fear the age and the lack of 'exercise' with math and physics would pose an understandable handicap. If I study math seriously, I can realistically shed the 'rust' in a year, maybe two, but I still fear I'll be considered too old for research. I graduated abroad so I don't have any old contacts at the local universities (there are a few in my city). I checked their job boards, and they have no positions for research, just the usual ones in software development that I could use as an entry point. Do you have any experience with such a career change? Is it feasible at all to get into science once you approach 40? I feel my brain is still alive and kicking, and years of debugging have taught me a few things about investigating causes and correlations, which are useful skills in research."
You might just end up with the, "Body is willing but the mind is not" thing though.
Old people tend to have the opposite kinda problem, but hey. Mid-life crisis and all that.
(Kidding, kidding)
On a serious note, I know several people who decided to take up alternative careers or go for a PhD much later in life. When I was in grad school, there was this guy who had graduated from MIT in the 80s and came back in his 40s to go to grad school.
He had his own company, so that was helping him support himself. And I've seen several people who decide later on in life that they want to specialize in something different because they felt that they weren't using their head enough at their current job.
I think at the end of the day, anyone can do it - you just have to like it enough. Goodluck!
Change is good. The human mind is a wonderful thing, it allows you to learn how to do new things no matter how old you are.
Bottom line, do it if you want a new challange and it interests you. I recently changed jobs (my last day at my current job is actually today), my new job hold alot of challange and requires skills that i both have and haven't developed ~yet~.
If humans were happy doing the same thing all the time, we would have never moved out of caves. It's human nature to want to be challanged and inspired by new things.
-Pizentios
I'm 36 and just left a career in science for a career in software development.
Academic, private and public sector science is rife with incompetent management. I could bear it no longer.
Self employment in science was not an option as startup costs (hardware) are prohibitive. (Anyone want to loan me 1.5+ mil?... fat chance...)
Self-employment in software development however, is entirely feasible and far more rewarding than a career in science.
Avoid science like the plague, unless you like working for overpaid incompetents, slaving your ass off for pennies, meaningless work and zero job satisfaction.
Seriously, unless you are already rich, and can buy a management job for yourself, forget it. Unless of course you're into masochism.
Stay in software development, at least you have some chance of quality management and meaningful work. The chances of that in science are virtually nil.
I don't think it's ever too late to do something new. One of my professors related a story about a student of his that just died at age 94. The man worked a full career, retired at age 60, and decided to go to law school. He got a job as an attorney for a nearby city and worked literally until the day he died, because he enjoyed it and didn't like being idle. The man worked *a whole second 30 year career* after putting in 38 years in his first career.
As an engineer currently in law school, I'm something of the reverse (although I feel I'm 'adding law' rather than 'leaving science'). They're just different mindsets.
A preposition is a terrible thing to end a sentence with.
I'm not saying a career in science would be impossible, but you might find yourself struggling to keep up with some of the younger researchers simply because your brain isn't as open to solving new problems. Some people have an issue when it comes to a younger person being your boss. If you don't think you can handle someone younger than you directing the research or if you don't think your self esteem can handle some punk kid who just spent the past 8 years studying math solving problems that seem impossible to you, then I don't recommend it. Now, since you were a programmer, depending on what you programmed, mathematically speaking, you might be okay because your crystallized intelligence develops from what you do with your fluid intelligence. But it's going to be a lot of hard work, and you have to be absolutely sure that you have the time to devote toward this.
Actually, that is not regarded as true anymore. As put forward in the book "Old Masters and Young Geniuses: The Two Life Cycles of Artistic Creativity" by David W. Galenson, he notes that there are two classes of "genius." There are those who create at a very young age and don't do anything but revise those creations as they get older, and those who spend a lifetime building up experiences until finally in their later years they produce "masterworks." In terms of applicability to the original post, scientific research has room for both. His experience he cites would indeed be useful, and he could use it as a foundation for entering research.
ggKimmieGal,
I think that the old canard about scientists doing their best work under the age of 30 is mainly something that research assistants throw around in the hope that they'll get tenure. I've been around scientists all my life and I can tell you it's baloney, invented by scientists under 30.
Someone very close to me is in the process of getting her second PhD at the age of 50, in an area of mathematics that's about as "out there" as it gets. A reviewer at one of the prestigious journals wrote, about some of her papers, without knowing her age, that she's a "rising young star".
Why would musicians, artists, inventors, novelists, philosophers, linguists and economists all get better as they get older, but not scientists? Unless you're a hooker or a professional athlete, age should not be a barrier.
You are welcome on my lawn.