Slashdot Mirror


Particle Physicists Facing Insane Competition For Work

Jim_Austin writes "Teams of hundreds of young scientists — including many grad students and postdocs — staffed the Large Hadron Collider and helped make one of the most important scientific discoveries in recent decades. Now they must compete for just a handful of jobs. Quoting: 'The numbers make the problem clear. In 2007, the year before CERN first powered up the LHC, the lab produced 142 master's and Ph.D. theses, according to the lab's document server. Last year it produced 327. (Fermilab chipped in 54.) The two largest particle detectors fed by the LHC, the A Toroidal LHC Apparatus (ATLAS) and the Compact Muon Solenoid (CMS)—which both independently spotted the Higgs—boast teams of 3000 and 2700 physicists. By themselves, the CMS and ATLAS teams minted at least 174 Ph.D.s last year. That abundance seems unlikely to vanish anytime soon, as last year ATLAS had 1000 grad students and CMS had 900. In contrast, the INSPIRE Web site, a database for particle physics, currently lists 124 postdocs worldwide in experimental high-energy physics, the sort of work LHC grads have trained for. The situation is equally difficult for postdocs trying to make the jump to a junior faculty position or a permanent job at a national lab. The Snowmass Young Physicists survey received responses from 956 early-career researchers, including 343 postdocs. But INSPIRE currently lists just 152 "junior" positions, including 61 in North America.'"

13 of 226 comments (clear)

  1. Capacity by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What this says is that every rich person in this country is lying through their teeth about needing immigrants. We have highly trained scientists and engineers. The percentages of people who have the right attitude and mental attributes to succeed in this line of work has remained constant for as far back as we've had standardized testing results. There has been no shift of the basic personality types from one to another; Each generation has had the same proportions as the previous.

    What it means is that nobody wants to invest. And scientific progress is an investment. It doesn't give you the immediate payoff of, say, a sequel to the Fast and the Furious (what are they up to now, seven of those infernal movies?). Science isn't formulaic. There's no spreadsheet that says "And after you spend $100 million developing a drug for cancer, you'll get this as a reward. Spend $200 million, and you'll get a free t-shirt too." Science growth mirrors our own; We grow in spurts, with long periods where nothing seems to be happening, periods where change is slow, and occasional paradigm shifts.

    This isn't very amiable to the current "get rich quick" culture the Boomers are espousing as they approach their retirement. They're sucking every corner of society dry looking for a quick way to monetize, any incremental way to earn a profit without much risk. And science... well, it's too risky for them. They don't care about future generations, or a cure for cancer, or putting men on the moon again. They want botox and comfortable retirements.

    This is society reaching back and giving people who love science the middle finger. It's saying "We don't need you, because your contributions aren't immediate. You live in the future and we're trying to recapture our past." So unless science comes up with a cure for aging, or a time machine, it's not getting funding. And that's really all there is to this story. It's about greed, pure and simple. Nobody gives a damn about tomorrow, because for the people holding all the cash... their tomorrows are running out.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Capacity by the+gnat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "America for Americans." It's not racist at all! Ever think that maybe that prosperity was a result of theft and maybe it needs to be spread around instead of kept among white people?

      I didn't really detect any nativism in the GP post. I personally favor open borders, both for scientists and avocado pickers, as long as they obey a few basic rules (i.e. work hard, don't hurt anyone, contribute to the general welfare, etc.). If someone in China or India thinks he or she can do my job better or cheaper, they're welcome to try. But I also think the claims of a shortage are self-serving bullshit by a clique of plutocrats who would happily fuck their fellow citizens for a new private jet. The only shortage is of people willing to do first-world work for developing-world salaries. Pointing this out isn't picking on the poor would-be immigrants who only want the same opportunities I have - it's merely the product of frustration at seeing the rich and powerful game the system yet again, and do so by lying through their teeth. If we're going to open our doors to foreign technology workers, it shouldn't be because some technology or pharma executive wrote an editorial in the WSJ.

  2. Doing what you love by msobkow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doing what you love rarely puts bread on the table and a car in the garage. Just ask a musician.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Doing what you love by Prune · · Score: 4, Insightful

      General knowledge has value beyond mere practical applications. It is part of the generation and maintenance of human culture. Once society rises above the level of mere subsistence, culture is pretty much the entire point of human existence. And I say this as an engineer.

      --
      "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
  3. On the plus side... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

    When the resonance cascade occurs, we'll be able to just zerg-rush the bastards with PhD-and-crowbar equipped theoretical physicists. Aliens won't stand a chance.

  4. Re:why not work for wall street? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Their attempt to build a giant, destructive, black hole with the LHC didn't work out, and now most of them are too depressed to try again.

  5. Re:why not work for wall street? by nbauman · · Score: 4, Funny

    No, we need a program to divert them from destroying society.

  6. Re:Expect Great Things by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    With that kind of brainpower, there should be some startling developments in the next couple of decades.

    It will be an interesting test of the fungibility of brainpower. You don't become some sort of high-powered physicist by being an idiot; but the process that produces physicists doesn't necessarily groom or evaluate candidates for doing not-physics, so we'll see what sort of not-physics they end up getting up to.

  7. Funding pure research requires a wealthy society by Kohath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This should be no surprise, since these positions are for pure scientific research with no way to calculate the ROI for the money spent. Countries have debt problems caused by borrowing and their budgets are already stretched to pay benefits for retirees and other non-workers. Add a long recession, a weak recovery, and very little prospect for robust future economic growth, and ultimately you don't end up with the sort of fiscal environment that can support lots of pure research.

    Wealthy societies have discretionary funds for things like pure scientific research. Poor societies have to struggle just to get by. If you want more pure research, you need more people in your society to be employed productively. And you need them to generate lots of wealth -- far beyond "the amount they need" or "their fair share" -- so there will be a lot extra left over for things like pure research.

  8. Re:Expect Great Things by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You don't become some sort of high-powered physicist by being an idiot

    You do need to be somewhat of an idiot, at least about finances. PPs get paid very little in grad school, only a little more afterwards, and often end up in the unemployment line at the whim of legislative budget committees. The same thing happened when the SSC was cancelled in America. Is there any other career where brainpower is rewarded less?

  9. Since A-bombs stopped being cool by Animats · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This isn't new. It's been that way in high-energy physics since A-bombs stopped being cool. After WWII, there was a huge interest in getting into physics, and large numbers of PhD physicists were produced. The U.S. Government hired a lot of them. Nuclear weapon design became excessively fancy, much to the annoyance of today's workers who have to maintain the old bombs.

    Then, after the US had produced enough bombs for the next few world wars, the nuclear establishment wound down. Los Alamos got into all sorts of strange non-nuclear stuff like chaos theory. Lawrence Livermore became a senior activity center for aging physicists. The average age of the membership in the American Physical Society went up by six months each year. That was back in the 1990s. It hasn't gotten better.

    When the USSR wound down, there was a US effort to find jobs for old Soviet nuclear experts. The worry was that they'd go to work for somebody who still wanted to build a bomb or two. Some came to the US.

  10. Re:why not work for wall street? by monatomic · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is simply not true. Companies do not usually like to hire physicists, certainly not particle physicists. It is just not widely applicable to industry. Engineers are preferred. That's why there are not many jobs for them.

  11. Tech clustering have value... by jopsen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If we're going to open our doors to foreign technology workers, it shouldn't be because some technology or pharma executive wrote an editorial in the WSJ.

    Well, said... As someone moving to SF on an H1B next month, I'm usually pro the H1B program :)
    But I do want to point out that not everybody abuses the H1B program.
    I'm not relocation from a third world country, or to work at a third world salary, in fact could get similar wage here... actually I could just do job remotely.
    Or get a well paying job at a company here... but the job wouldn't be as fun :)

    I think mobility is important for many reasons, in my considerations are things such as SF having a lot of tech companies, startups and etc...
    I don't know if I'll apply for a permanent visa at some point, but if I move back the contacts I'll be making will be invaluable, on both ends.
    At the end of the day, if you don't let tech workers from around the world in, tech workers from around the globe will cluster in another valley.

    Note. with all the NSA scandals, lack of welfare, poor security, crime, human rights violations, war crimes, etc. that the US has got going, I'm starting to wonder why I'm relocation.
    On the other hand, I did all the paper pushing... So I might as well try it out :)
    Anyways, feel free to tell me why the US is so awesome, I kinda need it...