Triple major in math, physics and computer science?

[JavaMomma]

Originally posted by: Estrella

Originally posted by: tmc
kudos. yes, just go after what your mind says.

imho, math and cs go together beautifully, but phy might be a little outside of math and cs.

Physics gave birth to modern mathematics. Remember that Newton fella? Paul Dirac? Without physics we would not have higher level math.

Physics and Math are good together
Math and computer science are good together...
but that doesn't make Physics and computer science good together.

 

[Flyback]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Flyback
A MS in math or physics is non-existant at good schools. If it is there, it only exists as a means for preparation to enter the PhD. Most schools I've looked at go straight into the PhD from undergrad.

It isn't the "same scholarly exposure". I have diverse interests and want to learn some more about computing that I wouldn't get if it was a major in math or physics exclusively.

Again, I'm not worried about money. If I stayed on and went for a grad degree, that inevitably leads to the same job--it would just take a whopping year longer for me.

You later added the PhD idea. That fits your needs the most. Do a BS in one major and have your PhD span the other two (or all three, if that is possible). Yes, it is the same scholarly exposure. Why would you think otherwise?

Again, who cares about money. That is not my argument! My argument is about the type of work not the pay from that work. Why can't you and Estrella understand that?

A PhD that spans the other areas? You need the foundations, man!

I appreciate your feedback and all, I mean, hell, maybe you're right. I'm just not on the same wavelength.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

don't live your parents life live your own life. it it is what you want then do it.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Graduate studies offer more depth and greater exposure to the current research in the field.

If you want breadth rather than depth your tiple-major plan makes sense, but if you'd rather dig deeper into one area then limiting your BS to one or two of the three then going into a Ph.D program makes more sense.

I only ended up with one BS in Computer Science but I don't regret not taking the 2 extra courses I'd have needed for a second BS in applied math. I enjoyed my math classes but preferred to spend the time with a couple of extra CS classes instead.

I also don't regret spending time on humanities classes. A few classes in art and literature might make you a more well-rounded person than if you take only science classes.

 

[zebano]

Originally posted by: Flyback
I am finishing up my first degree and have a cumulative 4.0. This does three things: I am exempt from the electives, can manage time effectively (4.0 was not overly easy to achieve), and I can definitely get in given my calculus marks and grades for my CS classes (algorithms, design patterns, research courses). My current degree is best described as above business information systems but much lesser than CS.

Reason: Find myself longing for much more detail about how things work. My passion for math and science has exploded over the past 2-3 years. Did a little self-learning in areas of logic and set theory. Those areas interest me most, but I definitely want to learn analysis, topology, differential geometry etc so I can get a basic understanding of things that put me in awe (science end of it).

Some people say that you can just read a book or two on your own time. The problem with this is: I've worked full time and know that its hard to come home and crack a book no matter how interested you are (after being ragged on by dilberts). Additionally you'd have to spread it over much longer period of time (10 years, perhaps..and with wife and child? forget it!) to achieve what you could in a concentrated 4 years. Lastly, you don't have the resources such as the professors and peers who can help you learn (especially at a top school).

Realizing they aren't exactly bird courses, I figured that I would spread them out over 4 years like a normal undergrad and take 4 classes per semester (5 would be the tipping point for this trio). I'll go during summers, too.

4 years, 3 semesters per = 12 semesters total. At 4 classes (half credit each) per semester, I'll have 48 classes (24 full credits) when done.

24 credits can be split 3 ways, 8 full credits per discipline. I've already looked at the curriculums for each and that more than fits in most classes I'm really interested in. The rules of double and triple majoring state that you can't have overlap. I've looked at the curriculums and the classes I want to take and there isn't enough to cause problem so this is fine. At this partciular school, a major consists of ~7 full credits (depending on area).

Normally it would be stupid to triple major with these areas of focus but:
- I'll be doing 4 classes per semester
- Exempted from the liberal studies classes
- I have ample CS background that will help through those courses
- All three areas are what I'm interested in--I'm not satisfied where I'm at
- Not taking or asking for any money from my parents

My parents think it is rather stupid to do this. They have a very traditional view of the world--you go to school, get married with the first girl who blows you, and get a job fresh out of school where you work 35 years. Their other complaint is that I'll be 28 years old when all is said and done.

Normally I'd agree with them if I was under their roof and using their money. I'm not. I've lived on my own for the past 4 years (worked all my way through college and got ample scholarships and bursaries). Also, this isn't exactly a means of escaping the "real world"--I'm going to be doing much more than 37.5 hours/week of work between class and studying.

People might say it sounds all well intended but that in the end its about getting a job--and they want to know if it helps me get a better job. This degree isn't a means towards a job. This is for pure scholarly interest--I want to learn this stuff. Of course I'll have to get a job when I'm done, but I'll have a good 37 years (if I work till I'm 65) that I can spend in the "real world".

What do you think given the fact I'll have a lesser semester load? Doable?

Cliffs: See the bullets.

So you have a CSish degree (I can't for the life of me remember what it's called). Why not get a degree in physics while minoring or just taking extra classes in the topics of math and CS that you want? This will 1. Speed up your graduation, allowing you to get into a masters program sooner and 2. Allow you the diversification that you want.

Just because you put some study into a subject doesn't mean you need a degree in it. Plus, I think you will find more fulfillment in the masters/PHD level work than the basics, so why not get a crash course and move on to the fun stuff before you burn out?

 

[Estrella]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Flyback
A MS in math or physics is non-existant at good schools. If it is there, it only exists as a means for preparation to enter the PhD. Most schools I've looked at go straight into the PhD from undergrad.

It isn't the "same scholarly exposure". I have diverse interests and want to learn some more about computing that I wouldn't get if it was a major in math or physics exclusively.

Again, I'm not worried about money. If I stayed on and went for a grad degree, that inevitably leads to the same job--it would just take a whopping year longer for me.

You later added the PhD idea. That fits your needs the most. Do a BS in one major and have your PhD span the other two (or all three, if that is possible). Yes, it is the same scholarly exposure. Why would you think otherwise?

Again, who cares about money. That is not my argument! My argument is about the type of work not the pay from that work. Why can't you and Estrella understand that?

The first paragraph you wrote says that if he went the B.S. + M.S. route he would get the same scholarly exposure as a triple major. No. He would not get the same exposure. If he did just Math and Physics he would get almost identical exposure since the degree plans are very close at any school. However, the Computer Science spectrum, would not be a given if he just specialised in either Math or Physics.

I will agree that I misunderstood your second paragraph. Although, I would hardly call a misunderstanding falsifying. But even still, one can still have a "scholarly" job at a low position.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Flyback
A PhD that spans the other areas? You need the foundations, man!

I appreciate your feedback and all, I mean, hell, maybe you're right. I'm just not on the same wavelength.

You'll get the foundations along the way. Don't let that bother you.

I have three degrees myself. BS and MS in chemical engineering. The MS focus was on computer simulations of chemical engineering processes (spanning a lot of math and computer science work). My PhD is officially just in Engineering. However, it was my own mixture of mathematical modeling, computer science, electrical engineering, chemical engineering, and a tough of biochemistry.

Did I need a separate degree in Math, in CS, in EE, in ChE, and in Biochemistry to get my PhD? No. I simply took the accelerated foundation courses made for graduate students who don't have the undergraduate training in that field. Then, when I wanted more detailed learning, I took a MS or PhD level course in that field that covered exactly what I wanted to learn.

For example, in biology I took one accelerated MS level course which covered both of the undergraduate level biochem courses. Then I skipped right to a graduate level virology course. Sure I only had one of the 12 prerequisists for the virology course. But I managed to get through it all. I learned quite a bit in that course. I learned exactly what I wanted and what I needed for my PhD. I got the foundations and the depth that way.

Of all the people I've met in my years, the most employable (and therefore they got the most stimulating jobs) were people with a BS degree in math and a graduate level degree in science or engineering. Very few people span both worlds. Large companies have teams of mathematicians. They have teams of scientists. And they have teams of engineers. But none of those teams can talk/understand each other. So you have a 3-legged beast crawling in all directions without any coordination. These cross-major people had the ability to understand 2 or 3 of those groups and became the coordinators linking the math models to the fundamental science. Linking the science output to the engineer's products. Linking the engineer's results back to verify the math models. To me, those are wonderful careers. But, they are careers intended solely for people with graduate level education.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: JavaMomma

Originally posted by: Estrella

Originally posted by: tmc
kudos. yes, just go after what your mind says.

imho, math and cs go together beautifully, but phy might be a little outside of math and cs.

Physics gave birth to modern mathematics. Remember that Newton fella? Paul Dirac? Without physics we would not have higher level math.

Physics and Math are good together
Math and computer science are good together...
but that doesn't make Physics and computer science good together.

QFT, except for graphics, and even then not so much.

Unless you specialize with aeronautics and laminar flow programs.

 

[Estrella]

It is if you do medical scan technology.

I have a friend who got a job for a summer project at M.D. Anderson who is writing a program for some new scanning technology utlizing physics, vector parametrization(to describe the motions of three dimensions with respect to time), and Computer Science. The project is going well so they asked him to stay on it and skip school for a while. He is not even done with his undergrad.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: Estrella
It is if you do medical scan technology.

I have a friend who got a job for a summer project at M.D. Anderson who is writing a program for some new scanning technology utlizing physics, vector parametrization(to describe the motions of three dimensions with respect to time), and Computer Science. The project is going well so they asked him to stay on it and skip school for a while. He is not even done with his undergrad.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that one. BME is a fascinating field.
They have some crazy things out there for doctors now.

 

[Flyback]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Flyback
A PhD that spans the other areas? You need the foundations, man!

I appreciate your feedback and all, I mean, hell, maybe you're right. I'm just not on the same wavelength.

You'll get the foundations along the way. Don't let that bother you.

I have three degrees myself. BS and MS in chemical engineering. The MS focus was on computer simulations of chemical engineering processes (spanning a lot of math and computer science work). My PhD is officially just in Engineering. However, it was my own mixture of mathematical modeling, computer science, electrical engineering, chemical engineering, and a tough of biochemistry.

Did I need a separate degree in Math, in CS, in EE, in ChE, and in Biochemistry to get my PhD? No. I simply took the accelerated foundation courses made for graduate students who don't have the undergraduate training in that field. Then, when I wanted more detailed learning, I took a MS or PhD level course in that field that covered exactly what I wanted to learn.

For example, in biology I took one accelerated MS level course which covered both of the undergraduate level biochem courses. Then I skipped right to a graduate level virology course. Sure I only had one of the 12 prerequisists for the virology course. But I managed to get through it all. I learned quite a bit in that course. I learned exactly what I wanted and what I needed for my PhD. I got the foundations and the depth that way.

Of all the people I've met in my years, the most employable (and therefore they got the most stimulating jobs) were people with a BS degree in math and a graduate level degree in science or engineering. Very few people span both worlds. Large companies have teams of mathematicians. They have teams of scientists. And they have teams of engineers. But none of those teams can talk/understand each other. So you have a 3-legged beast crawling in all directions without any coordination. These cross-major people had the ability to understand 2 or 3 of those groups and became the coordinators linking the math models to the fundamental science. Linking the science output to the engineer's products. Linking the engineer's results back to verify the math models. To me, those are wonderful careers. But, they are careers intended solely for people with graduate level education.

I really appreciate the feedback you and others have given me. Even though I disagreed at first, I'm giving consideration to all your opinions and that is why I asked. Again, thanks a ton.

 

[Estrella]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Flyback
A PhD that spans the other areas? You need the foundations, man!

I appreciate your feedback and all, I mean, hell, maybe you're right. I'm just not on the same wavelength.

You'll get the foundations along the way. Don't let that bother you.

I have three degrees myself. BS and MS in chemical engineering. The MS focus was on computer simulations of chemical engineering processes (spanning a lot of math and computer science work). My PhD is officially just in Engineering. However, it was my own mixture of mathematical modeling, computer science, electrical engineering, chemical engineering, and a tough of biochemistry.

Did I need a separate degree in Math, in CS, in EE, in ChE, and in Biochemistry to get my PhD? No. I simply took the accelerated foundation courses made for graduate students who don't have the undergraduate training in that field. Then, when I wanted more detailed learning, I took a MS or PhD level course in that field that covered exactly what I wanted to learn.

For example, in biology I took one accelerated MS level course which covered both of the undergraduate level biochem courses. Then I skipped right to a graduate level virology course. Sure I only had one of the 12 prerequisists for the virology course. But I managed to get through it all. I learned quite a bit in that course. I learned exactly what I wanted and what I needed for my PhD. I got the foundations and the depth that way.

Of all the people I've met in my years, the most employable (and therefore they got the most stimulating jobs) were people with a BS degree in math and a graduate level degree in science or engineering. Very few people span both worlds. Large companies have teams of mathematicians. They have teams of scientists. And they have teams of engineers. But none of those teams can talk/understand each other. So you have a 3-legged beast crawling in all directions without any coordination. These cross-major people had the ability to understand 2 or 3 of those groups and became the coordinators linking the math models to the fundamental science. Linking the science output to the engineer's products. Linking the engineer's results back to verify the math models. To me, those are wonderful careers. But, they are careers intended solely for people with graduate level education.

Why didn't you say there are all of these catch-up courses for grad students? Would have made a lot more sense to us college neophytes.

 

[tfinch2]

If it's a pure scholarly interest, don't waste your time with undergrad and go to grad school.

 

[Flyback]

I really should clarify my ULTIMATE plan. Basically I wanted to get into computer-driven experimental physics and simulations. It is very lofty, and given that I haven't even done the undergrad it sounds very absurd to even consider it now. Most people would flat out laugh given that I don't have the basic prerequisites. THAT is why I didn't mention it at first--baby steps, people, baby steps.

FAILING the master plan to get into a PhD programme (who knows, maybe I'm not that kind of material), I would still like to end off on a note with diverse knowledge of math, physics and computing. Maybe I'll get an MS in Education and up teaching community college after I do this triple major. Again, who knows.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Flyback
I really appreciate the feedback you and others have given me. Even though I disagreed at first, I'm giving consideration to all your opinions and that is why I asked. Again, thanks a ton.

You are welcome. Oh, and since I forgot earlier: welcome to Anandtech. Sorry, I was a bit harsh earlier (I'm quite stressed with a pet in the hospital possibly dying today). You can do well with three BS majors. However, I think you are going to be happier if you shift some of that BS work into your PhD. Sure, take one or two BS level courses in each field if you can fit it in, but you don't have to do that. You can take them later if needed. Good luck with whatever route you choose.

Originally posted by: Estrella
Why didn't you say there are all of these catch-up courses for grad students? Would have made a lot more sense to us college neophytes.

(1) I assumed it was known and (2) it doesn't apply to every course, so don't take it too far and assume it'll be there. But many universities will have them for the bigger majors. And in the worst case scenario, he can just take a BS level class or two as a PhD student. The university may frown on it, but it is doable.

 

[Estrella]

EDIT: Lol, some how i accidentally clicked the reply button at the bottom of the page. I lose at life.

 

[Injury]

Didn't read any of it, but enjoy 4 more years of school and the bills to go with it.

Why is this a better idea than going for a doctorate in one field?

If one bachelor's degree is quickly growing obsolete, are you certain that your investment of 3 will be enough to be worth it? I mean, there's a load of things I want to learn, but there's just no point to doing it just to know it.

Finally, if you insisted on two degrees, let alone 3, I would be certain a company that's worth that much education has a need for that sort of background.

Okay, one more comment: Are you certain you aren't doing this simply because you are somehow, deep down, afraid of leaving the school scene that you've been a part of for two decades and going into the working world?

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Flyback
Most people would flat out laugh given that I don't have the basic prerequisites. THAT is why I didn't mention it at first--baby steps, people, baby steps.

If a college/advisor laughs, then just move on to the next one. A good advisor will see the drive and passion inside his/her student. Then that advisor will help cultivate you into what you want to be. If you have to back track and take some prereqs as a PhD, then so be it. The good advisor will help pick just the bare minimum courses that will help you reach your goal.

I highly suggest you personally visit (or at least phone) professors at the colleges that you want to attend and discuss this issue with them. Preferably, talk to professors who do research into the area related to computer-driven experimental physics and simulations. Befrend at least one of them, and you are in. A professor who is fully behind you will push you through the administration paperwork and help get you accepted into the university - even if you are deficient in some classwork.

 

[Estrella]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Flyback
Most people would flat out laugh given that I don't have the basic prerequisites. THAT is why I didn't mention it at first--baby steps, people, baby steps.

If a college/advisor laughs, then just move on to the next one. A good advisor will see the drive and passion inside his/her student. Then that advisor will help cultivate you into what you want to be. If you have to back track and take some prereqs as a PhD, then so be it. The good advisor will help pick just the bare minimum courses that will help you reach your goal.

I highly suggest you personally visit (or at least phone) professors at the colleges that you want to attend and discuss this issue with them. Preferably, talk to professors who do research into the area related to computer-driven experimental physics and simulations. Befrend at least one of them, and you are in. A professor who is fully behind you will push you through the administration paperwork and help get you accepted into the university - even if you are deficient in some classwork.

QFT

 

[TheoPetro]

I am currently a 3rd year student in Physcic, Math, Comp sci.

I dont know about you but I am not one to sit around and put up with petty bullsh!t semester after semester. The Physics was interesting but it quickly lost that with the amount of dumb work. Like I said I am in my 3rd year and I am JUST getting into interesting stuff. It is decently easy if you study even a little bit but coupled with the other two it can make for an annoyingly stressful semester. The Math has been awesome. No complaints there and in 4 more classes I am done with all the Math I need. The comp sci was interesting but I swear to God writing 50 "If statements" gets mind numbing pretty quickly.

I am now seriously considering dropping the Physics/Comp sci and getting something in business. I am going to keep the Math but the other two just got too tedious for my tastes. Like you, I value learning alot and Physics is definitely the way to go. It explains how the world works at its most basic parts. Just try not to get too burned out. I had to take all the English and Elective bullsh!t classes and I think I am just ready to graduate.

If you plan on getting a PhD in Physics then expect to be in school untill you are around 30. The thought of that drives me insane and with a BS in Physics I doubt I would do much. I have done a decent amount of research into grad school and the average time it takes after your BS is 8 years. If you really just want to learn your whole life consider a teaching position at a university..

I dont think I want to wait untill I am in my 30s to make over 100k so thats another reason for the change. Ya you can live a decent life as a physicist but when you look at the average salery with befefits for a physicist and its 120k and then you look at the same thing for a CEO and its 1,200,000, I have trouble chosing Physics. There is just so much more I can do for people with 1200k than 120k.

Just my thoughts.

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: TheoPetro
I am currently a 3rd year student in Physcic, Math, Comp sci.

I dont know about you but I am not one to sit around and put up with petty bullsh!t semester after semester. The Physics was interesting but it quickly lost that with the amount of dumb work. Like I said I am in my 3rd year and I am JUST getting into interesting stuff. It is decently easy if you study even a little bit but coupled with the other two it can make for an annoyingly stressful semester. The Math has been awesome. No complaints there and in 4 more classes I am done with all the Math I need. The comp sci was interesting but I swear to God writing 50 "If statements" gets mind numbing pretty quickly.

I am now seriously considering dropping the Physics/Comp sci and getting something in business. I am going to keep the Math but the other two just got too tedious for my tastes. Like you, I value learning alot and Physics is definitely the way to go. It explains how the world works at its most basic parts. Just try not to get too burned out. I had to take all the English and Elective bullsh!t classes and I think I am just ready to graduate.

If you plan on getting a PhD in Physics then expect to be in school untill you are around 30. The thought of that drives me insane and with a BS in Physics I doubt I would do much. I have done a decent amount of research into grad school and the average time it takes after your BS is 8 years. If you really just want to learn your whole life consider a teaching position at a university..

I dont think I want to wait untill I am in my 30s to make over 100k so thats another reason for the change. Ya you can live a decent life as a physicist but when you look at the average salery with befefits for a physicist and its 120k and then you look at the same thing for a CEO and its 1,200,000, I have trouble chosing Physics. There is just so much more I can do for people with 1200k than 120k.

Just my thoughts.

For every N (where N is rather large) people making 120K, there is one making 1.2 million.

 

[TheoPetro]

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: TheoPetro
I am currently a 3rd year student in Physcic, Math, Comp sci.

I dont know about you but I am not one to sit around and put up with petty bullsh!t semester after semester. The Physics was interesting but it quickly lost that with the amount of dumb work. Like I said I am in my 3rd year and I am JUST getting into interesting stuff. It is decently easy if you study even a little bit but coupled with the other two it can make for an annoyingly stressful semester. The Math has been awesome. No complaints there and in 4 more classes I am done with all the Math I need. The comp sci was interesting but I swear to God writing 50 "If statements" gets mind numbing pretty quickly.

I am now seriously considering dropping the Physics/Comp sci and getting something in business. I am going to keep the Math but the other two just got too tedious for my tastes. Like you, I value learning alot and Physics is definitely the way to go. It explains how the world works at its most basic parts. Just try not to get too burned out. I had to take all the English and Elective bullsh!t classes and I think I am just ready to graduate.

If you plan on getting a PhD in Physics then expect to be in school untill you are around 30. The thought of that drives me insane and with a BS in Physics I doubt I would do much. I have done a decent amount of research into grad school and the average time it takes after your BS is 8 years. If you really just want to learn your whole life consider a teaching position at a university..

I dont think I want to wait untill I am in my 30s to make over 100k so thats another reason for the change. Ya you can live a decent life as a physicist but when you look at the average salery with befefits for a physicist and its 120k and then you look at the same thing for a CEO and its 1,200,000, I have trouble chosing Physics. There is just so much more I can do for people with 1200k than 120k.

Just my thoughts.

For every N (where N is rather large) people making 120K, there is one making 1.2 million.

I hope youre talking about physicisits because the average Physics salary is 120k where I live and the average CEO salary is 1.2mil. I am not saying that I will be getting 1.2 mil right out of business school but that is the average with 10-15 years experience. I have done a ton of research on this one and I really think I can do alot more with the $ made from a business than I can with the $ made from being a lab rat.

 

[MrDudeMan]

flyback, you sound exactly like me a few years ago. when you realize that an undergrad in any field really doesnt give you much depth at all, you will stick with one major and pursue it to an advanced level. undergrad classes are only enough to get you an entry level job which will run out of momentum relatively fast. i love to learn also, but you have to be realistic. if you are smart and like to continue to challenge yourself, being a jack of all trades is not a good decision; instead, being an expert at one will take you much further. you will get bored in a hurry with no training in courses that actually teach you more than basic stuff. your aspirations are admirable, but i just dont see it leading anywhere.

 

[Flyback]

I think I might just pursue the math & physics majors, taking the computational theory and other courses in CS that really interest me. I likely won't ever write a compiler or OS, so I can just pretend a series of magical gnomes run inside the system. I'll focus on the algorithms, computation, and scientific computing courses that interest me most.

The thing is, I'm definitely going to be doing the undergrad for 4 years--can't fast-track at the school as only some courses are offered during summer, so I couldn't just squeeze it all together and get out faster. That is why I thought I might as well add the extra courses to make it a triple major if I'm already taking a few.

I might do something else the first year, though. I need very few prereqs, so I'll likely be doing 3 classes in fall and winter, then 1 mandatory lab in the summer. This way I'll be able to finish off some software projects I want to complete before jumping in too far. Additionally I can spend time preparing for the upcoming classes in math and science by reading ahead. I want to know the stuff inside and out. I've already got the initiative--done lots of reading on my own time while in my current program.

 

[Special K]

Originally posted by: TheoPetro

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: TheoPetro
I am currently a 3rd year student in Physcic, Math, Comp sci.

I dont know about you but I am not one to sit around and put up with petty bullsh!t semester after semester. The Physics was interesting but it quickly lost that with the amount of dumb work. Like I said I am in my 3rd year and I am JUST getting into interesting stuff. It is decently easy if you study even a little bit but coupled with the other two it can make for an annoyingly stressful semester. The Math has been awesome. No complaints there and in 4 more classes I am done with all the Math I need. The comp sci was interesting but I swear to God writing 50 "If statements" gets mind numbing pretty quickly.

I am now seriously considering dropping the Physics/Comp sci and getting something in business. I am going to keep the Math but the other two just got too tedious for my tastes. Like you, I value learning alot and Physics is definitely the way to go. It explains how the world works at its most basic parts. Just try not to get too burned out. I had to take all the English and Elective bullsh!t classes and I think I am just ready to graduate.

If you plan on getting a PhD in Physics then expect to be in school untill you are around 30. The thought of that drives me insane and with a BS in Physics I doubt I would do much. I have done a decent amount of research into grad school and the average time it takes after your BS is 8 years. If you really just want to learn your whole life consider a teaching position at a university..

I dont think I want to wait untill I am in my 30s to make over 100k so thats another reason for the change. Ya you can live a decent life as a physicist but when you look at the average salery with befefits for a physicist and its 120k and then you look at the same thing for a CEO and its 1,200,000, I have trouble chosing Physics. There is just so much more I can do for people with 1200k than 120k.

Just my thoughts.

For every N (where N is rather large) people making 120K, there is one making 1.2 million.

I hope youre talking about physicisits because the average Physics salary is 120k where I live and the average CEO salary is 1.2mil. I am not saying that I will be getting 1.2 mil right out of business school but that is the average with 10-15 years experience. I have done a ton of research on this one and I really think I can do alot more with the $ made from a business than I can with the $ made from being a lab rat.

I'd like to see some statistics that show the average salary 10 yrs. out from business school is 1.2 million. If it were that simple, everyone would be doing it.