Hello,

I just graduated from high school about a month ago and am now going to be going to Cal Poly Pomona in the Fall. My plans are to go there for 2 years and do my best so that I may be able to transfer to a UC like UCLA, UCSD, or UCB.

Now, for the main problem. I am having tremendous trouble choosing between a few science and engineering majors. I think that the pathway to choosing the correct major(s) would be to analyze my interests.

I am interested in the physical sciences. Specifically, I researched these majors in the field: Astrophysics, Physics, and Geophysics/Geophysics and Space Physics (long name for Planetary Science lol). I get pretty bored reading about Biology and anything related to it.

In order to graduate from my high school, I was required to do a senior project. My senior project came out to be at the top (not necessarily 1st place, but I am extremely confident that I was).

Now, I was only average performing, or so my grades said: straight C's in 9th grade, straight C's with a few B's in 10th grade, straight B's and a few A's in 11th grade. See a pattern? Looks to me that the derivative of the equation for my grades is positive =P. In 12'th grade, I knew I had to do something special. I had to do my extreme best so that I may get into a good university (I later realized that doing your best during one school year changes practically nothing, but it still wasn't a loss). Thus, while having 7 classes during the fall semester of my 12th grade year (two AP - calculus and government), I also took a college class (speech) to try to demonstrate my capabilities to universities. Along with getting a 4.16 gpa during both semesters of my 12th grade year, I got a B+ in the college class (horrible speech skills =P). That isn't all.

I thought that my senior project and large amount of community service would also help. Thus, I tried to make my senior project something out of the ordinary. It was composed of a 6 and a half page essay on the fate of the universe from a scientific point of view. There was another requirement: a tangible product. For that, I had to do something related to the overall subject of my senior project: Astronomy/Astrophysics. Thus, for the product I decided to build a telescope. I ended building my own 8 in. diameter, 6 foot long telescope through a tedious 3 months of non-stop work. This brings me to my next interest: building.

The second part of choosing my major: engineering (specifically Aerospace, Mechanical, and Computer or Electronics Engineering). I really like to build things. I loved to see the product of my hard work in building my telescope and having people awed and amazed when they look through it. I received a great amount of personal satisfaction and an overwhelming feeling of having accomplished a great task. I knew this had to be special. That is what brings me to engineering. I love science and math and I do very well in them, academically. I know that I would be good in engineering. The problem is...we cannot all do everything that we want. In choosing a career, I will still have to choose between the theoretical science and the engineering. Thus, I have to come to a decision between these two different fields for a major.

I have even thought of doing a double or even a triple major that is mixed with a few majors of both fields, but I quickly realized that that wouldn't change the story. These fields don't go very well together for one person. They go perfectly together in the working world and the engineers and scientists always work together on projects. But never has there been a person who was designated an engineering scientist or engineer/scientist. One person has not played the role of two fields. That is why I came seeking help here.

I would appreciate any advice or opinions from anyone that may or may not draw some relation to my problem. Thank you very much.

They do mesh in some people; double major programs in EE and physics are not uncommon (we even have one). Some of the most effective physicists and astrophysicists have had strong backgrounds (even if not degrees) in engineering (look up Jim Westphal or Jim Gunn, or example). And there are engineering skills that serve physical scientists well indeed (you may also look for programs called, for example, scientific instrumentation, of which there are a few). If you were one of our physics majors strolling in for advising, I would urge you to specialize as late in your college career as possible - try to take courses common to both areas at the outset and keep options open. This not only lets you make up your mind with as much expeience as possible, but you can react to changes in the marketplace or other new developments that could help you fine-tune career preparation.

I think I mentioned before, that one of the graduate programs in geophysics listed three other undergrad majors as good fits: EE, physics, and math.

Good luck, Xcron, and welcome to the board.

Welcome aboard, Xcron. =D>

I agree with the others on keeping the door open on a double major.

Mechanical engineering was my choice as it is broader in scope than the others. It incorporates; EE, CE, IE and a little NE. You get a taste of them all. I enjoyed an IE course the best as it taught computer programing which I enjoyed and aced. However, a future in computers seemed slim at the time (1971). Looks like I guessed wrong. :-?

Take a closer look at all the course titles and descriptions for each possible college. One college may intrigue you more than others. None will be easy.

Cut yourself a little slack the first year. However, make sure you don't look for the easiest way because you don't want to have regrets for at least not trying to go for your dream job.

Once you choice, simply plan your work and work your plan.

bueno suerte

__________________
Lighten up! This is a stellar board!

I agree with everyone else on the double-major idea. An Engineering Physics program or a double major in both disciplines (however your school handles is) doesn't seem to take that much more work, and it sounds like what you want to do for undergrad. (Disclaimer: I saw friends do this, as I was pure physics-I never was quite the engineeing type.) As an undergrad, I didn't encounter too much differentiation between experimental and theoretical physics. It was there, but not a whole lot. I would suggest pursuing the double major and seeing where it takes you. Decide between theory and experimentation (i.e. leaning more towards physics or engineering) late in you undergrad career. A lot can happen in three or four years, especially in a physics program. Once you finally know what you want to do, that's what grad school is for. 8)

You are still young, and as others said above, there is plenty of time to keep your options open. No point in forcing a decision too early. Ask the academic counsellor at your school or at the college what percentage of college students enter their junior year with the same major they has starting out.

One important part of college is to expose you to things and expand your horizons. You may encounter something you never thought of. I would think that many science and engineering tracks have similar requisite courses, and the first two years of college are heavy on the basics anyway. The math and other backgroiunds are appropriate to any major.

When I look at science versus engineering - assuming there really is a line between them for discussion - my thought is that underneath it all, science is about finding out things, while engineering is about creating things. Sure that is too simple, but I like it anyway.

Engineers built Hubble, while Astronomers explore with it.

I entered college decades ago as a physics major. Once I got a couple years under my belt I had discovered broadcasting. I had studied meteorology there and thought seriously about becoming a TV weatherman or science reporter. You might take a similar path and become the next Jules Bergman. You might discover writing. You might be the next Carl Sagan. Point is that the thought would never have occurred to me before I got to college. I hated writing before college, and on into it for that matter. But as it turns out, now I are a writer. Now and then I write something and I actually get money in return. Blows my mind.

My God, you might even decide to teach!!!

Stay flexible.

This is amazing..............I am completely speechless.......I have been at the whole forum thing for quite a bit (a few weeks, I think), looking for an answer and looking for someone/people that may have some relation to my situation. I have posted on an Astronomy website, and I have posted on college forums. Never, and I mean NEVER, have I had as many answers to my thread as I have had just now...by only posting ONCE.

I am just.....amazed as to how much help I have just received from everybody that has posted. It has probably been the best round of advice I have ever received.

Everybody had been telling me to do a single major but I had always wanted to do two or three because I never liked to stop learning about the universe and its nature, and now with the support of several people who have agreed with the idea that doing a double major would be perfectly fine, I believe I have the confidence that will crush any opposition to taking on only a single major.

I used the same post that I have used for a few weeks for starting threads about my situation. My actual situation is only slightly different. I am not certain that I will be attending Cal Poly Pomona. The science department at the university is not very good, the school does not have much of a social life, Pomona is a rather boring city, I would only be able to receive an OK engineering degree or whatever kind of degree I pursue, my GE classes would not transfer over to the UCs because of a problem with the unit conversion, and it's about 32 miles away from where I live. I am currently trying my hardest to get set up at a nearby college, Pasadena City College. It is a community college and supports programs that help prospective transfers in their goals. PCC is actually #1 in California for transfers to USC and #2 for transfers to UCLA. I'm sure that I made a pretty good decision as I will only have to take a bus to get to the college (which, along with other costs, promotes a HUGE economic advantage over Cal Poly Pomona), I will be able to complete a transfer program that allows me to complete all of the General Education requirements at whichever university that I want to transfer to, I will be able to transfer over to a school that doesn't just have an OK engineering or science department but a highly-ranked department like the departments that UCLA has, and I will have first priority in admission to the school of my choice because priority for transfers to UCs is first given to community college students, then to other UC students, and finally to all other 4-year universities.

As was advised in several of the replies to my post, I will be doing all of the background preparation for several prospective majors. I will be doing the math, physics, some chemistry, some computer programming, and some engineering courses at PCC. The only sad part is that I will not be able to follow some of the advice that was repeated in a couple posts: I will not be able to take courses in all the different majors that I am thinking about currently because PCC is only a community college which prepares students for their major at a different school and this means that I will be preparing myself for whichever major I choose to puruse. That is a huge problem for a person like me. I am completely unsure of which major(s) I wish to pursue. Luckily, I only have to complete the requirements for one major before I pick that major as the main major that I will be declared as at the school that I will transfer over to. This is good news for someone like me. I'm not sure as to which majors I will be doing exactly. All I know is that I like the idea of science and engineering. This has me at a standstill because I know not even which major I will pursue even when I pick either field. I was guessing Mechanical Engineering, but I may just find out at PCC that I actually do not have a strong interest in engineering ( which I doubt because I so like the idea of creating useful devices, machines, and other things that will be useful for science ). I also thought I would pursue Physics either way until I came upon Engineering Physics, and the idea that maybe physics wasn't right for me (though that can't be true because I like science so much, so I guess the obstacle here is Engineering Physics and Applied Physics).

I researched on the major called Engineering Physics which was rather vague and wasn't explained well enough for me to distinctly recognize what the major is about.

As engineering was described as about creating things and science as being about finding out things, I know that I want to do both. I want to be a scientist who researches something and then does the job of an engineer and applies that knowledge to create such a device, or whatever it may be. What would lead me into this path?

Any advice on the many things that I have discussed in this post would greatly be appreciated. I wish I had discovered this forum earlier, because I badly needed this kind of help and advice beginning a while ago.

The decision was easy for me, since I had worked for some years as an electronics technician before I returned to school for my EE degree. The Physics department tried to recruit me anyway!

Don't get the idea that there's no overlap between engineering and Physics. Many physicists design and build things (just go to one of the big research labs like SLAC or Fermilab for numerous examples). Many engineers do basic research, though this is a relatively small subset of EEs. I'd suggest you try to meet with the dean of the EE department at your school and find out what kinds of research are going on at the grad level there (if your school of choice has a graduate program, that is). That will give you a very good idea of what you might encounter in your undergrad days, since undergrad courses (especially in the Junior and Senior years) are often taught by the same professors who are doing the research work.

The chances are that you'll take a course somewhere along the line that gets you excited about some field. That is likeliest to happen when you have a very good teacher, one who is excited about his/her specialty and able to convey that excitement. Therefore I urge you to take advantage of whatever student ratings that your school provides and choose high-rated profs whenever you can; this will maximize your chance of getting an "aha!" experince in one of your classes. (But be careful that the high ratings weren't simply due to the teacher being "easy". Look at the comments along with the raw numbers.)

I'm sure you'll be fine. Remember, you can still change your mind at many points along the way -- after a couple years of undergrad, before grad school, or even after that. And many people have more than one career over the course of their working lives, so you're never really boxed in: you can always change horses.

Art History, that's the career of the future. Major in Art History and you'll have the world by the tail.

__________________
Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out. ---Cardinal Wolsey (1475-1530)

Okay, cut to the chase...

Engineers make more money and the degree program doesn't require a foreign language.

If you read that and are thinking, "So?", then go into science.

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

Xcron, welcome.

Your choice of major path is only a start, and you don't know where you'll wind up. I was a physics (and anthropology!) double major. Well, I've been an engineer ever since. I also got a master's in EE, but have done little electrical engineering stuff. So, remember you're not locked in to one little field by your education. It's just a start.

As other folks have said, physicists often build and use hardware (in the lab, rocket or balloon payloads, etc.) and engineers get to work on cool research projects. Not to mention you can run wild outside of your work doing astronomy or robotics or inventing your own Theory of Everything.

Or maybe you'll take a distribution class in college and decide you really, really want to become the world's leading authority on Chaucer or Dostoyevsky. Or become a large-animal veterinarian.

The point is, you have a chance to do work you love, and your interests will evolve as you go along. (OK, that's two points.) Pick a direction to start, try a few different things as you go along, work hard, and enjoy.

top 3 paying "working-class" disciplines are lawyers, doctors and engineers, if that makes a difference. assuming efforts to unionize don't pan out, engineers may overtake both lawyers and doctors at some point due to 1) an overabundance of lawyers and 2) high insurance and HMOs cutting into the medical profession.

now, money aside... i'm an engineer, electrical at that, so i'm biased towards the EE discipline. in general, engineers have the opportunity to enjoy the best of many worlds. we are generalists at heart, though we still specialize in various areas. particularly, i'm into signal processing. signal processing (particularly discrete-time signal processing, or DSP, and communications) requires heavy mathematics including statistics. when it's all said and done with my latest degree effort, i'll probably qualify for a few math/stastics degrees as well.

research is typically carried out in the theoretical realm. however, i have had numerous opportunities to build and test the theory (i design receivers). [horn tooting]i even have practical products in the field (yay, finally)[/horn tooting]. there is nothing better than putting theory into practice. the primary difference between engineering research and scientific research is that the engineering sort usually has a more defined problem to solve. e.g. "we need a satellite communications link capable of 1 Gb/s data rate with a 200 MHz spectrum that weighs less than 2 lbs. with under 50 W of power dissipation and has lots of red and green blinkies on the front" as opposed to "let's figure out what an atom is made of!"

taks

edit: clicked submit before signing...

I hope I didn't miss where someone mentioned this, but one thing to consider is how much time you're willing (and will be able to afford) to spend in school. You can get a good job in engineering with a Bachelor's degree. A Bachelor's in physics is not much more useful than the above mentioned Art History. You need to go to grad school. If you think you can stand 10 years in college, and will be able to find the funding, go for the science. If not, an engineering degree can still be a stepping stone.

Disclaimer: I'm an engineer!

__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

keep in mind, with an MS in engineering, you'll likely start in design immediately. with a PhD, you'll be elevated to project leadership roles and some research almost immediately. with a BS, you may have to do some "internship" type work for a couple years before really sinking your teeth in. though neither of these statements should be construed as rules...

taks

Ok, I really need to cover a lot because as I kept reading through all of the posts since my last post, I had come up with a lot of responses.

First off, I read about James Westphal ( http://pr.caltech.edu/media/Press_Releases/PR12581.html ) from Caltech as "ngc3314" had suggested in his first post. I just want to say that I was able to draw so many relations as to what I had dreamed of doing while I was reading about the kinds of jobs and things he created. That is exactly a part of what I may want to do some day - inventing devices or other things. But the thing that really interested me was the Dr. Westphal was a Physics major. This is what really caught my eye. I have been looking for some kind of connection to what I have been thinking about the past few days ( doing my main major in Physics, which I would continue in grad school, and doing two more majors of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering ). By reading about Dr. Westphal, I have found a greater confidence that I would still get to do something I love (creating things) while having it include my love for science. Sadly, I wasn't able to find anything about James Gunn from Princeton. Ngc3314, if you could please give me a link to a biography or some information about him, that would be very much appreciated.

hhEb09'1, I am glad that I can pursue whichever majors I like during my undergrad years and then when I find something that makes me extremely hooked onto it, I would follow that in grad school. Yay!!! =)

George, I believe that is basically why I actually picked Mechanical Engineering as a major that I was interested in. Many people have recommended just doing ME because it is such a broad engineering field and I will have the maximum amount of doors open to me n the engineering field because ME is used in anything you find in our world these days, so I am glad that there is such a major hehe.

What can be said about the Applied Physics or the Engineering Physics majors?

Tobin Dax, I am interested in science for its two main parts which I like so much: the experimental and theoretical components. Though, another facet to my current problematic situation is that I am having trouble choosing between these two fields because I like the experimental component of science more than the theoretical component. I understand that the theory is extremely important and I am not arguing with that, but I would like work/research in experimental physics where I would possibly work at a Particle Accelerator facility and just do research on the effects of bombarding X particles on Y particles, haha. I'm glad that a physics program is so versatile and that is probably why I was interested in it in the first place, along with Astrophysics and Planetary Science.

Enzp, I know that I am still young, but the problem is that I have to choose my major or a definite major that I will be doing so that I may begind completing the requirements for major preparation before transferring to a UC or whichever school I want. Luckily, I don't have to decide too soon because this Fall semester, I will just be taking some GE classes and a few classes to prepare me for the rest of the requirements of the science/engineering major that I will declare.

Donnie B., I am glad that "physicists design and build things" because that is definitely something I really want to do in the future. And I am drawing a conclusion that if physicists do those things, then they obviously apply their knowledge of physics and making ingenious devices. That is something I would really love to do!!! This promotes my latest idea of the Physics main major and the second and third of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering (though I have no clue what the actualy second and third majors are because I am trying to decide my main and it looks like I am making great progress). I can't wait for the experience that will make me say, "aha!" and that will spur me to pursue it for grad school or whatever I will be doing at the time...perhaps an undergraduate degree even haha.

What does EE encompass? Is it just working with wires, power systems, and electricity??? ...

Eoanthropus Dawsoni, this was taken from " http://www.markhasty.com/archives/20...-college-major " : Art history involves four years of looking at slides and going to museums, and forty-five years of working the 3 to 11 shift at Domino’s.

Jim, I needed that quick and concise description of both science and engineering, haha. There is one slight problem. I care about how much money I make. I want to make enough to live freely and luxuriously and as I would want to live, with as few problems that are based on money as possible. Also, as I believe that I have a knack for science and math, I also believe that I have a knack for languages. I already know 3: Russian, Armenian, and English and have done 2 years of high school Spanish. These 2 years have been the easiest work possible in a foreign language and I have come out on top in the class, as I am able to speak Spanish rather well and carry on conversations while everybody else in my class does not have that capability. I want to take as many foreign language classes as possible in the future (probably some Russian and Armenian at PCC to polish my skills in both since they're so rusty right now, then advance them further at the school that I transfer to along with as many other languages that I can possibly learn within the timeframe that I receive my degrees). Where does that put me? But that doesn't even decide that I am going to do Engineering as my main major because that doesn't get rid of my love for science. I knew 2 people that work at JPL. One of them gets $80k and the other gets $90k. One did physics and the other did astrophysics. I think that that is enough money to lead the kind of lifestyle I described earlier in this long paragraph, or is it not?

sts60, How did you get started in engineering if you did physics and anthropology??? That is very enlightening and interesting for my case because I am guessing that it connects to what I probably will end up doing. I'm glad that Physicists still build stuff and hopefully since I will be doing Physics, and a few engineering majors, I may get to do both engineering research projects, robotics, space missions, etc.

Taks, I did not know that Engineers were in the top 3 paying "working-class" disciplines. Yay!!! Hahahahaha. OOOhhhh, I'm glad you posted on this thread since you specialize in signal processing. Do you think that you would fit right in at the SETI Institute? I mean, would you fit in and be able to process signals from their radars and arrays of satellites to search for extraterrestrial intelligence? I really really really want to know how I could possibly get that kind of job..searching for other life in the universe. That is exactly what got me interested in Planetary Science...the search for other life. I guess that Engineers are just more practical than scientists...though I think that scientists are just as well suited for engineering jobs...if they have the necessary background knowledge. If I don't get an MS or PhD in the engineering fields that I pursue, will I still get research jobs in engineering with the B.S.'s and my PhD in Physics? I hope I don't end up doing internship work for a while...since I will probably stop at BS for engineering, if I take my thought up route. I hope I will still get research jobs or be the lead scientist like Steve Squyres is for the Mars Rovers mission that is still running. He did Planetary Science and I may do Physics. I doubt I will be a scientist for that kind of mission, =(.

How come almost all of the engineers who have replied to my thread have been EEs? Why is it so popular? Why do I seemingly think that it is boring and dull and only about wires and stuff? Am I missing something? Are they paid more than other engineers? What's going on around here...

Trebuchet, I'm willing to spend, probably, a maximum of 5 years for undergrad...Your point is part of the reason why I decided to make Physics my main major...since it's almost worthless as a B.S. and needs to be a PhD for a job. With 2 other B.S.'s in some engineering fields...I could get engineering jobs, research jobs, physicist jobs, etc...that is what I thought. Also, I'm guessing that grad school for science will also take 4-5 years, so yes your number (10) of years is probably correct heh.

Wooooooo, what a post...thank you all for all of your information and help...wow, I am thinking about my future in ways I never considered, hahahahahahah. Very good! This will probably be the only post this big since I responded to everybody who has posted up until now. =)

EE (Electrical Engineering) is an extremely broad field, so much so that by the time you hit grad school you must choose a subfield. Here are a few of those fields:
- Computer systems (so huge in itself that it's actually a separate major, Computer Systems Engineering, in many schools; this is not the same as Computer Science, which focuses on the theory of software)
- Power generation and distribution
- Communications (telephone, TV, radio, etc.)
- RF systems (overlaps with communications but also includes radar etc.)
- Semiconductors (diodes, transistors, integrated circuits; closest to pure Physics)
- Analog and mixed-signal (includes audio, analog-to-digital conversion and vice versa)
- Control systems (includes much of the machine-to-electronics interface)

Most of these major divisions have many sub-sub-disciplines. There are also many areas of overlap between EE, Physics, and applied math, such as data compression, random processes (as applied to signal recovery), antenna design, and the like.

One thing to keep in mind: the first two years of undergrad work are very similar for any scientific field, including Physics and most branches of engineering. There are a couple engineering disciplines that are somewhat less stringent (civil and industrial), but everything else will require pretty much the same solid grounding in math, Physics, and Chemistry.

You might want to get hold of the course catalogs from a few of your potential 4-year colleges (where you'll be going after PCC) and compare the curricula they require for various majors you're thinking about. There will be differences between Physics and the various engineering disciplines, but those will show up mostly in years 3 and up.

Why so many EEs? Look around you. Electronics is everywhere! Those video game consoles, computers, cell phones, the whole infrastructure of the internet, TV, radio (etc. etc.) don't pop out of thin air. We design them! Your life would be almost unrecognizable if not for the contributions of EEs.

Did you know that the typical new car today has over 100 microprocessors (computers) in it?

ok, so making a living is important to you... that's good.

yes. this is what i do now, but my goal isn't finding extraterrestrials, it is detecting unauthorized signals, craft, personnel, etc. it is also defense of various installations through the use of radar, communications between processing nodes or data collection centers (satellites, ground stations, vehicles, etc.) all the same math used to detect extraterrestrials. i'd bet, however, that the technology i get to use in the defense industry is far more advanced that that used at SETI.


i don't have any idea. if you're worried about pay, i'd bet these guys are on the low end of the spectrum, however. of course, if you happen to be the guy that found ETs, you'd be set for life.

yes and no. engineers are typically solving practical problems, and also implementing the solution. scientists are typically searching for answers to vague proglems. there are similarities and differences i suppose.

oh yes, most definitely IF you do the work and earn the position.

i think you took my comment a bit wrong. "internship" is nothing more than advanced training. getting out of school with a BS means you have a rather broad education. the first few years of engineering work are typically geared around exposing you to real world problems, and finding out 1) which you are most suited to work on based on skill and 2) which you are most suited to work on based on desire. with any luck, there is an overlap and you can work on something you like and do well at. getting a higher degree is the same thing, but you have to pay for it.

hmmm, EEs comprise about half of all engineering disciplines. EE is NOT just about wires and stuff. open up your computer. 10 different EEs and a few MEs designed the pieces in there. analog and digital Integrated Circuit (IC), digital and analog Printed Circuit Board, power supply, Computer Architecture, Connector, etc. just to name a few of the specializations just with one product. donnie B listed a few subgroups, and there are many more under each (however, i disagree that communications by itself is a subgroup, it is usually listed as communications and signal processing).

the work i do, comm and signal processing has very little to do with actual wires and stuff. it is mostly mathematics and statistics. i write simulations a lot, which means software like work, too. of course, i also do system design, which means lots of decisions on the various subgroups i (and donnie B) have pointed out. sort of a generalist with a preference for the signal processing realm.

oh, btw, physics undergrad degrees also qualify alongside EE degrees with most companies. you just have to make sure you get some software skills in there and maybe take a circuits or DSP class.

taks

typical engineering degrees take 4 1/2 to 5 years. some schools tinkered with calling it a 5 year degree, but feared enrollments would drop. the problem is that doing it in 4 years requires 17 hours per semester (between 5 and 6 classes) and most of those hours are hardcore math (or related). the stress is incredible, but worth it in the end!

tkas

From a physics/ astronomy major currently playing the ropes of college, I have a few points...
- Even if you want to be an engineer you're most likely going to want to do some grad school eventually. (For one thing, you get paid more no matter what your field.) Not saying for anything you'd go straight to grad school, a lot of ppl take a few years off to work and then go to grad school, but just something to think about.
- If you DO go to grad school, for physics in particular but also for engineering in most cases, you will most likely get paid to go. You'll need to do some work while there, such as TAing or research, but for most cases it's unheard of to not get paid to do it (ok, the stipend is small, but it beats professional school where you pay to go). So stop worrying about that in case you were.
- A physics BS by itself is actually pretty good on the job market; it's just most people who have 'em stop calling attention to the fact that they have them. Basically if you get a degree in physics people say "ah ok, this person knows how to solve problems" which is nicely looked at in the job market. As one prof likes to remind us at our school, one of the largest banks in the country keeps contacting our physics department for people to work there because they think physics kids are good at what they need!
- With the exception of the theorists, I've never met a physicist who wasn't an engineer in their own way because who on earth is going to build what you need in your lab? Better to just do it yourself! That having been said, a lot of kids on the fence go into Engineering Physics where they usually make you pick a concentration in engineering (such as EE) and go from there.
- When it's all down to the wire and you're thinking which one you prefer, I always think of the difference between science and engineering like this: a scientist discovers the concepts, an engineer sees how the concepts can be used. Both are important to be sure and there's always a need for a middleman should you prefer that, so don't be worried if that's where you want to be!
Best of luck.

__________________
Yes, I have a life. It's quite different from yours.

Taks, I hope that you are right when you say that all the hard work that I and many others have and will go through just to get their degrees is all worth it in the end. Hopefully that means I can have an extremely good lifestyle, hehehehehe.

Andromeda321, your post was very enlightening. I thought that Physics degrees were only useful for that field when they got up to PhD. I'm guessing that a Physics BS would still be very good when being considered for a job since Physics students are taught to be extremely good problem-solvers.

I still need more information on Engineering Physics and Applied Physics to decide if I should consider them. Engineering Physics represents a physicist who does engineering, in my mind. This is probably incorrect because I read that this major trains an engineer to use physics. I want to be a Physicist who is employed as both a researcher/scientist to discover the concepts and as the researcher/engineer to employ those concepts and find a use for them =). I hope those kinds of people are paid handsomely. (Like Dr. Westphal, what an inspirational figure he was to me. I hope I am able to be like him, except that I would work on different Engineering such as even on (if it were the past) the Discovery shuttle or the ISS, or monitoring black holes suspected of being at the heart of our galaxy and other galaxies. I hope I will be able to do any job that the fields offer if I do a Physics PhD and two Engineering BS's.) I just need to decide what two Engineering majors I will do, or do I do one engineering major and another science like Astrophysics or Planetary Science. That would be cool, except then I would probably miss out on one of these which I am currently interested in: ME and AE.

Well you're ahead of the curve compared to most other people by this point so I'm sure you'll make the right choice. Just don't forget to invade various prof's offices at wherever you go to school to see what they think as well!
Random statistic of the day: only one in twenty people that graduate with a physics BS end up becoming physics professors. Most people don't know that little tidbit...

__________________
Yes, I have a life. It's quite different from yours.

I was happy when I saw this topic because I am probably going to go into the Engineering or maybe Physics, not sure. I am only in 11th grade but am pretty set on what I want to do. This topic has really helped explain the different kinds of engineering. For example, I thought just like Xcron that EE's just played with wires. I am looking at going to CSM so this has been very enlightening. I am amazed by how many engineers surf these boards. Thanks

EDIT: Cleaned it up.

Wow Xcron, you certainly are verbose....perhaps you should choose English!

Ha! This coming from a Math major

Pete

__________________
PJE

There's so much I don't know about astrophysics. I wish I had read that book by that wheelchair guy.

Glad we could help! 8)

As I mentioned above, I went to engineering school after I'd already been exposed to electronics as a tech. That was incredibly helpful, since I understood exactly what all my courses were getting at, and how the material would eventually be used. I think the first year or two would be very tough for someone coming in cold, with no idea what engineering was all about. That's made worse by the fact that freshman and soph classes are huge, auditorium-type affairs (at Big State U, anyhow), and may be designed to weed out the unsuitable students early.

If you get to an engineering school and find yourself at sea, or not understanding why you're learning what's in your intro courses, think of BABB as a resource. I'll bet you'll find folks willing to help you see the light.

Heh, I might have to use the BABB's help for Chemistry 2 next year, well, next week actually . I had my teacher last year; he's very hard but has about a 90% pass rate on the AP exams. I think I will be fine though.

we only had to take one semester of chemistry (chem 05) and a lab to go with it (chem 02, i think...). hahahah!

i suppose lifestyle is a matter of opinion, but i'm not griping. what's more important than money is how much you enjoy your life in general. i enjoy mine, but mostly because of my wife and son (2 years old). i also happen to love my career.

oh, i was a lucky one, too. i was 7 when i told my mother i was going to be an electrical engineer. i just knew...

taks

Only one credit of Chemistry (1 year) is needed to graduate out of our school. I am only taking Chemistry II because,

a) I like it, well, sort of. It can be quite challenging.
b) It will help me get into more colleges.
c) I want the college credit.

Taks, you are one lucky man. I admire your satisfaction with your life because I, for one, am definitely far away from satisfaction with my life. I wish I had known what I wanted to do, but that would also have taken the fun out of exploring different disciplines as I am slightly doing so now by learning about them and may do in college once I start taking classes in the fields. What was your motive for choosing Electrical Engineering? How did you choose it at such a young age, what spurred you? I would think that a child at that age would in no way be faintly interested in such a discipline as EE, but I am horribly wrong as you are evidence of this. I'd definitely like to know what made you so interested in EE.

Trivial Pursuit, I am happy that this thread is not only benefiting me with the load of information presented by the numerous figures that have already voiced their responses but to other, even prospective, students in these discussed disciplines.

peter eldergill, You wouldn't believe the irony in what you have said! I did rather well in my English class in 12th grade and received the highest grade ( we had to do a senior project to graduate... ) and the Modern Literature department award at the end of the year out of the graduating class. Since then, I had considered English as a major but turned it down almost instantly because it was so dis-interesting to me. There is nothing even slightly possible of interesting me enough to pursue English as a major. I love reading, especially about science and science fiction. I like reading other books as well, such as the books I was required to read in 12th grade (Brave New World is the only one I can remember at this moment, haha...). I have considered other random majors that I was perhaps interested in but turned them all down instantly. I have already narrowed the fields down to Science and Engineering. I just need to specify down to 2-3 majors from Physics, Astrophysics, Planetary Science, ME, and AE (completely unsure about CE and EE, or CS)(still not sure about Engineering Physics and Applied Physics...since no one has said anything about that yet since my last post.......).

Andromeda321, I am definitely going to be social with the professors in my main courses in science and engineering. I'm sure that they can enlighten me with their experiences and further information, though I will remain dependant upon this thread until school starts. I'm sure I will make the right choice but I just need some help from others with their advice, suggestions, opinions, etc. to give me some insight as to which fields I would prefer. I am also glad about that statistic you mentioned, because I would not be happy with my work if I was a professor. That just isn't what I am interested in: teaching...ehhhh....=)

We need more engineers. I think there are enough Grad students and professors siphoning physical science money from schools as it stands. We need more rocket boys--and less payload people to have a good balance.

That's the kind of teacher I like to see; one that works you hard because he/she wants you to do well, not one that takes delight in failing kids!!

Andromeda, I am one of the 19/20 of people with an undergrad degree in physics who is *not* a physics professor. Most likely will never be!