Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Physicists of HN, what are you working on these days?

news.ycombinator.com

91–100 of 333 posts

Re: Ask HN: Physicists of HN, what are you working on these days?

#91

Condensed matter physics PhD (2016) now working in the software industry as a data scientist. Focused on modelling/simulating materials during my thesis and realized that I loved the software aspect of things and did not love working on the same problem for many months at a time. As others mentioned, transitioning to data science is not that hard if you have a physics background and there are many interesting problem…

The two body problem (2 professionals in academia finding jobs close to each other, for some value of close that is reasonable for daily life) is famous in science in general. It is, unless one of you has a Nobel Prize, unsolvable without one person making a change of career.

Re: Ask HN: Physicists of HN, what are you working on these days?

#93
Not in Physics, but I bailed on a PhD in Chemistry back in the early 80's and became a programmer. I still do it today, but wonder what might have been if I could have finished it back then. We have a programmer here with a PhD in Math but that's even less well paying if you want to do theoretical stuff. Sadly doing original research in any field is not a great career option.

Re: Ask HN: Physicists of HN, what are you working on these days?

#95
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"""try to read bad handwriting from records from nuclear weapons plants. It's a dull job a monkey could do but it pays the bills.""" + """For years I worked as a computer guy for an academic department and that was fun and I'm trying to get back into it""" Sounds like you could enjoy automating your work. Learn a bit of Python and some Machine Learning/Deep Learning and digitize the handwriting and build a little pro…

I would be very, very hesitant to to this. First of all, you definitely don't want any chance of incorrect recognition of handwriting coming from a nuclear weapons plant . Secondly, who knows what policies he might violate by using some unauthorized, untested software (whether OP is the author or not) with potentially sensitive information.

He can use it such that the model's predictions are still manually verified by him before actually submitting them or whatever. Seems pretty harmless to me.

Re: Ask HN: Physicists of HN, what are you working on these days?

#96
I earned a masters in physics about 15 years ago and started in industry as a software developer. Over time I started working on more analytic applications, basically because I could understand the math, and for the last six years I've worked full time as a data scientist. My physics background has been a huge help:

* Linear algebra: stuff like the QR decomposition for solving the "normal equation" of least squares regression, eigenvectors for PCA and the singular value decomposition for T-SVD, and so on. Linear algebra shows up everywhere in applied mathematics, statistical modeling, and data science. It's actually relatively simple and can be understood completely in about two semesters, but physicists do get a lot of practical experience and intuition. For example, eigenvalues turn out to be very important in quantum mechanics, so I suspect physics students spent a lot more time thinking about them compared to almost any other major.

* Vector calculus, matrix calculus, and optimization: physicists see this stuff in classical mechanics, E&M, etc. We can easily visualize vector fields and know a ton of relevant theorems and notation. We learn specific techniques such as the method of Lagrange multipliers for solving constrained systems. All of this helps because a huge chunk of statistical modeling and machine learning is formulated as an optimization problem, often a constrained optimization problem. For a statistician studying, say, SVMs for the first time, things like Lagrange multipliers and KKT conditions seem to come out of nowhere, while a physicist would have seen them in several other contexts first.

* Scientific programming: Most physics undergrads will have at least some experience with numerical optimization or simulation. This is a little different than application development or implementing an algorithm. The main trick is to be able to translate equations into performant, vectorized implementations. You also need to understand lots of practical things like rate of convergence, condition number, singular gradients, etc., just to be able to debug when things aren't working correctly.

* Experimentation: machine learning is basically empirical. Cross validation is essentially designing, conducting, and analyzing experiments. We improve our models not by proving theorems, but by forming and testing hypotheses. Basic stuff but extremely helpful in practice.

You have to remember that 10 years ago you couldn't really get a degree in machine learning or data science. (I believe degree programs and specializations with those names now exist and becoming fairly common, although I've had mixed results when interviewing graduates of such programs.) I would say the physics joins statistics and applied mathematics on the short list of degrees that, purely by chance, covered most of the relevant material. Of these, physics is probably the worst choice if you know you're going in that direction, because a physics degree only provides a thorough grounding in the prerequisites and little to none of the details. I had to learn much of that on my own through self-study.

Re: Ask HN: Physicists of HN, what are you working on these days?

#97
I’m working on reducing the quantum noise of gravitational wave detectors as well as work in quantum metrology. Measurements on the quantum scale using light are still relatively unexplored and there is a lot of work to do.

I just sent my first paper for publish, a new design for a gravitational wave detector with reduced quantum noise

Re: Ask HN: Physicists of HN, what are you working on these days?

#98

(PhD, 1996 in general relativity) Embedded graphics drivers for real-time systems. I keep the physics part of my brain alive by developing physics based Unity assets (nbodyphysics.com) and supporting a package for GR on github (grtensor). I still buy WAY too many physics books. Current aspiration is to work through "Modern Classical Physics" Thorne/Blandford.

Love your website, when I get home I am going to boot up my PC and play around with some of your code :)

Re: Ask HN: Physicists of HN, what are you working on these days?

#99

BSc in Physics, MSc in Math dropout PHD in high energy physics (needed the money) to work as data scientist on a major tv broadcaster in my country

I hear you, man. I hope that job is interesting, I would like to make that transition myself. Cheers.

Re: Ask HN: Physicists of HN, what are you working on these days?

#100
I'm about to finish my PhD (condensed matter) and I've reached the conclusion that science is just a phase for many of us. My university hosts a Beyond Academia event where companies come to recruit future phds, there's a student-run club that brings in people outside academia that hold a phd to talk to us about their path and current jobs, and as I've attended these events over the last four years I see example after example of brilliant people simply having to move on from science.

It's staggering to see your Stanford and your Harvard grad students become scientific experts only to then work on improving ad delivery and how to move someone else's money across the world to make the rich richer. It feels wasteful. But there's no room for everybody, there's very little room for a few and it's stressful, competitive and the path is riddled with anxiety and mental illness, which I've had enough of already in grad school.

People move to data science because it's a transition into the software industry that is eating the world. It's a safer bet, pays well, and has the name "science" in it :) It helps people transition.

I've stalked many on linkedin over the years and it does seem that science is just a phase, very few are still doing science. I think all these people liked or loved research, but the combination of the nasty, petty environment surrounding research, and the lack of permanent positions makes it very difficult for someone to have a fruitful, worthwhile career in science in my opinion.

I think we have a problem. We have a lot of smart people but we don't know what to do with them. And I think no one up high is really questioning what is the purpose of a college education and of a post graduate education in order to modify these programs to better address a student's path. Academia changes one funeral at a time, and that might be too slow to tackle some of the problems we are facing.

I've really enjoyed the research aspect, but I have come to hate my interactions with my PI who is sometimes too busy doing administrator stuff and in my opinion sometimes refuses to see reality for what it is: Sometimes to do modern research you have to invest in modern equipment. Sometimes I don't understand why my data looks a certain way, why is anger the default reaction to this?

I haven't had enough time and space to gauge whether or not this phd is worth it, all I know is that I'm really excited to leave an environment that has broken me a few times, and that continues to inflict pain on others I love.

Post reply on HN