- Joined
- Jun 21, 2012
- Messages
- 4,968
When replying to comments made by multiple responders, you should mention their username prefixed with a commercial "at" sign, @, to identify who your comment is directed toward. Like this: @Delta Prime or @HANKMARS.Forgive me, I was addressing the thread starter; given his region in Arizona and his previous questions which I responded to concerning powering electronics off grid.
I am not a physics master, but I am hoping to make a contribution by continuing my education at this fine institution where I also work, but I must admit academia seems far more attractive. Than being a practicing physicist…
I have known and worked with many practicing physicists when I was employed by the University of Dayton Research Institute from June 1967 to August 1979. Like most professions, some were good physicists and some were not so good. I doubt any of them would survive as a physicist in a commercial, profit-making, environment. Some of them didn't appear to have even a modicum of common sense, although some were good with chalk and a chalk board. And then there is the old bromide: "If you cannot wow them with your brilliance, baffle them with bullshit." I've run across more of this type than I care to remember.
I also met a few physicists at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) in Albuquerque NM during my last job before retirement. Most of them were nice folk, who seemed genuinely interested in what my company was doing (perfecting a GaAs solid-state switch) with a project they had abandoned in the late 1990s, deeming their "final solution" to be impractical. But one in particular had a "Not Invented Here" attitude. He flat out didn't believe we had accomplished in a few months what they had spent a decade trying to perfect. Our results just didn't agree with his "theory" of how things were supposed to work, so clearly we must be promoting a fraud. He didn't use the word "fraud" but that's how it came across in our one and only joint conversation with "the powers that be" at SNL. Later, after that meeting, my boss and I were given a "tour" of some of the SNL facilites.
The people we met on the tour were polite and seemed to be interested in what we had accomplished, but AFAIK there was never any follow-up with SNL personnel. Of course, follow-ups might have been classified and if so, I was deemed not to have a "need to know." The results of our work were published, but the work that was done by our sub-contractor (L3 Pulse Sciences) with our PCSS (Photo-Conductive Solid-state Switch) has Department of Commerce export control restrictions. It's a REALLY good optically-triggered switch: fast (picoseconds), high current (kiloamperes), high voltage (kilovolts), and capable of hundreds of discharges without failure. Our original task was to determine its suitability for a compact particle accelerator, designed by a physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories (LLNL), but first we had to figure out a way to make it work... which we did. There were other problems (still unsolved) of how to actually build that dielectric-wall compact accelerator, but I was not involved with trying to solve them.
So, yeah, if you can afford the life-style, an academic environment is the place to be for a physicist. I was gonna become a physicist, but instead became an electrical engineer. Glad I did because the work has been very interesting and aligns perfectly with my electronics hobby. I probably could have done better as an entrepreneur, but I don't know how to do that either!
BTW, based on our other conversations and your posts, I do consider you to be a "master physicist" or at least a wannabe. If you can, get that PhD and find a teaching position in academia that also allows you to perform sponsored research. The key word is sponsored: applied physics pays; theoretical physics not so much, because the field is overcrowded. Of course if you have "genius" chops like Einstein or Newton the sky's not much of a limit. Be all you can be.