By Bee on Tuesday, March 04, 2008

A brief history of mine (III)

[Bee wrote these drafts before she left, and asked me to publish them while she is away for your and my entertainment. It seems she is presently stuck because her flight to Toronto was cancelled due to an upcoming storm, but I hope she will be back, soon and safely. - Stefan]

Over the years, this blog and its visitors have come to be a source of continuity in my life - the blogger software changes less often than my apartments, and my 'next-door' bloggers less often than my officemates [1]. So I want to take the opportunity to send a Thank You out to all of you. I appreciate your feedback, your encouraging comments to my post 'Timeout', and to our 2nd anniversary post. Special thanks also to those of you who sent emails or messages on Facebook.

After part I and part II, I have successfully bored myself into complete indifference towards my own CV, but here is the last part. If you make it to the bottom of the page, you are pretty much up to date. For those with less patience, the recently updated standard CV is here. As mentioned previously, I did on purpose not include any names of friends, or people I did/do work with.



Canada

Between receiving and accepting the offer from Perimeter Institute, Stefan asked me to marry him. I virtuously scheduled the wedding arrangements and the event itself around several conferences, workshops and research visits. The move to Canada later that year was quite painful. My furniture didn't arrive for several months, and the bureaucratic hassle sucked big time. Moves take up so much time and energy [2]. How about postdocs just get moving homes, and universities offer parking space in front of the departments?

Here at PI, I was hired as an interdisciplinary candidate, and I like to joke this means nobody knows what exactly it is I am doing. Including me. But as a quote goes that is attributed to Wernher von Braun:
"Basic research is what I am doing when I don't know what I am doing."

After some months in Waterloo, I figured out the institute's website lists me in the Quantum Gravity group. Being a phenomenologist, I spent some time trying to increase the interest in phenomenological consequences of Quantum Gravity, e.g. with the workshop I mentioned earlier, though my use of the word 'observable' for 'something that can be observed' seems to be somewhat confusing occasionally. I can't say I understand all the details of what people in that group are working on, but as in the previous places where I've been, I certainly learn a lot.

The LXD group we founded back in Frankfurt (see part I) refused to die silently. There were two students remaining who we were not able to discourage (we tried, believe me), and they had to follow their studies under quite difficult circumstances. With joined efforts of their supervisors and me, they both eventually successfully finished their thesis only some months ago. The one topic was focused on black hole production at the LHC, the other one on properties and predictions of the previously mentioned minimal length model. I found it quite touching to read in the acknowledgements thanks go to "Dr. Sabine Hossenfelder for the help and above all for the idea that is the basis for this work." Sadly enough, one of the students decided to leave the academic world after his defense, a decision I can relate to very well [3].

Perimeter is exceptional in various regards. One of the most astonishing features are outside doors on the 4th floor that open into empty space. A friend speculated they lead to invisible bridges, Indiana Jones style. I call them 'the graceful exit scenario'. Either way, one wonders what the architect was smoking while on the drawing board.

Besides my continuing amazement about the building and the (oohm) artwork distributed in it, I've developed some sympathy for the quantum foundations people, and follow my long standing (though so far rather unproductive) interest in cosmology, especially the dark matters. Recently, I developed a liking of complex systems and networks (so you'll probably hear more about that). And related, well, if you read this blog frequently you know that my interest in the intersection of natural and social sciences is more than a hobby. And of course there is the fatal attraction of black hole physics that I can't quite escape, not to mention that the idea of extra dimension still seems appealing to me. And and and.

Perimeter is a great place in that the topics of conferences, workshops and lectures are very diverse, and the interactions between the researchers are overall very supportive. If the temptation hadn't been exactly before my nose, I probably wouldn't have went to a conference on the Many World's interpretation, and chances are I'd never have heard about quantum error correction. It creates a hugely inspiring atmosphere, and as a consequence the numbers of drafts that go in and out of my drawer roughly balance each other. I add a piece of the puzzle here or there if I come across something interesting, and if enough pieces fit together the outcome is a paper.

To clean up with a confusion I have repeatedly encountered, postdocs at PI do *not* have supervisors. Neither I nor any of the other postdocs was hired to work specifically with somebody, or on a certain topic. I am, as far as can be, free to think about what I want to think about. And it is a freedom I appreciate very much.

And now

The only cloud on my sky is stated in condition 5 on my work permit, where it reads as follows


    1. Unless authorized, prohibited from attending an educational institution and taking any academic or vocational training course. (Interesting, eh? Does that cover conferences? Conferences I organized myself??)
    2. Not authorized to work in any occupation other than stated. (That would be 'post-secondary teaching assistance', whatever that means. Seems my entire daily work is not authorized.)
    3. Not authorized to work for any employer other than stated.
    4. Not authorized to work in any location other than stated.
    (So it's illegal to work while on vacation in Hawaii, I never knew.)
    5. Must leave Canada by 31 Aug 2009.

Meaning I have to write applications - again - this fall. Which, after all these words, eventually brings me to the reason of my current tiredness.

I've been in the field for more than ten years now. I've had contracts for a year, for 9 months, I've even had a contract for 6 months. I moved 5 times in 4 years. I have three different social security numbers, but I'm not sure if I'd qualify for either of their benefits (actually, I have four, but that's a longer story). Each summer I try to arrange my conference participation with meeting friends and family. My contact to them is an annual briefing with the essentials, who got married, divorced, died, lost his job, had children. I have no retirement plan, and my unemployment insurance is basically non-existing because I've never had a job in my home-country for more than a few months (the ones that I've had were tax-free scholarships which doesn't count). Since I've never had a regular income, no bank would sensibly lend me money. I vote in a country where I don't live and live in a country where I can't vote.

I'm not telling you that because I want to complain; I am telling you that because my situation is in no means exceptional. That's just what it means to be a postdoc. In fact, I believe I am better off than many others. I could live with that - if there was an end in sight.

A typical source for my frustration is attending conferences where the students of the organizers talk plenary whereas I get a 10 minute parallel session. I can't but find this ironic since I myself was one of these students on other occasions, and I wonder why I didn't stay in the community I come from, and let myself be handed over through the usual connections. Wouldn't one expect that after having passed all these exams, after having published more than twenty papers, and having given an increasing amount of talks, people would at least pay a minimum amount of respect to you? Would maybe at least consider that you aren't stupid by default, just because they've never before heard your name, the name of your supervisor, or because they don't know the place you've graduated? Doesn't that ever stop? How old do I have to get until I have proven I am qualified?

And it doesn't help either if friends recommend just not to attend these conferences - that certainly won't improve matters. If I'd get a penny each time somebody tells me 'sorry I forgot about you', if I'd get a penny each time somebody postpones an appointment, forgets about a deadline, or a favor I have asked for, if I'd get a penny each time somebody thinks he's too important to listen to me, or mistakes me for the secretary, I wouldn't even have to bother applying for a new job. But I don't get pennies, I just get grey hairs. I've long left that age in which I am eager to read Mr. Important's paper/article/book just to leave a good impression, always with the omnipresent 'letter of recommendation' in the back of my head.

Coz that's what it is like, being a postdoc. After all, what counts are the letters. And just thinking about sending out a pile of applications again makes me want to crawl back into bed, and pull the blanket over my face.

I am very critical about myself because I've never worked my way into the depths of whatever field. Instead I keep skipping from one topic to the other. In an attempt to make sense of that CV of mine so far, the only pattern I could possibly find in the decisions I made is that I apparently have always chosen the job that put the least constraints to the topics I had to work on. The price I pay for following my interests is that I can't keep up with people who have specialized in a given field. And occasionally I want to scream at them I am neither stupid nor lazy - I just have never heard of theorem so-and-so, don't know that abbreviation you keep using (a very widespread and annoying habit), sorry but didn't read your paper from '86, or maybe I just don't fucking care in how many different ways you can decompose E8 or swhatever. But of course I don't. It's just not nice to remind people how irrelevant their own existence is - we all cherish the illusion that our life is somehow meaningful.

But if you give me a basis to work on, I can go from there - after all, the only thing I always wanted to do is to contribute if only a little piece to our understanding of nature's ways. I am flexible with my interests, and willing to work on a lot of topics, should they manage to catch my interest that is. Hey, I'm 31, my brain time is finite and I'm not getting younger. Call me ignorant, a crackpot, a moron, go with my mum and call me stubborn (Holzkopf!), or call me stupid. If I would care, I wouldn't still be in the field.

But admittedly I sometimes think, maybe I am indeed just stupid, and maybe I am just not intelligent enough. It's not that I don't know I should establish myself some easily classifiable program, but the idea doesn't resonate with me. I call myself a phenomenologist because the name seems to be general enough to cover in the broadest sense what I have always been interested in: understanding the world we live in.

Recently, I read in Homer-Dixon's book 'The Ingenuity Gap' species that flourish best in systems which become more complex are those specializing in exploiting niches [4]. And indeed, this is exactly what you see happening in the scientific community: an increasing specialization and the development of species that occupy niches, while structural gaps develop in the network. Not only does this clash with my personal preferences, I also believe that for scientific progress to work optimally there needs to be a balance between specialization and generalization, and this balance is presently off towards favouring specialization [5]. PI does a good job acting against this, but it is an exception in the 'system'. And I am back on the market in November, still searching for a place where I might fit in.

Sometimes I wonder if this fight is worthwhile.

Why am I telling you that

Because I see an increasing number of friends leaving the academic world. It hardly happens because they are not qualified enough, or because they discovered they lost their interest in physics. Neither does it happen because they couldn't find a job. In fact, they often quit a position they had. They just simply weren't willing to play these games of vanity any more. Many of them just want to have a job where their skills are appreciated appropriately - appropriately to their age and expertise - where they have a sensible contract, and at least some kind of stability and future options. So they go and work for the research departments of large companies, become teachers, work in counseling, in a bank, scientific publishing, for the weather service, or in a patent office.

The good aspect is I don't know anybody with a PhD in theoretical physics who became unemployed. Theoretical physicists, so it seems, have the reputation of being good in solving problems, which makes them useful for a lot of different tasks.

The bad aspect is that all these people are lost for foundational research.

And that, folks, are the selection criteria currently applied to pick the 'brightest' and 'most promising' young researchers: Those who will do well should be completely convinced of their own ingenuity, flourish without much motivation, and perform well under high competitive pressure. They should be able and willing to think in one to three year plans - for work and for life -, have connections up the latter and use them, act polically and socially smart, and should be willing to work under other people's supervision until their mid thirties.

Now I'll go back to bed and pull the blanket over my face. Thanks for listening in.



[1] They keep coming and leaving without that anybody even finds it necessary to let me know of it! Chances are when I'm back a complete stranger sits on the next desk.
[2] The DMV of Ontario for example, wasn't able to access neither the files of my driver's licences from Arizona nor from Germany. Not enough that I had to hand in my beautiful California licence, in exchange I ended up with an Ontario beginner's licence (they have a graded system) and a resulting horrendous insurance fee (it's about ten times higher than what I paid in Germany, though the coverage is less). Sure, I could have requested my files from Arizona being sent to me, but this would have required a signature from an US notary to confirm my signature is my signature. At some point you get just too tired to take care of all that crap.
[3] Though I've repeatedly been asked to accept graduate students, and I in principle wouldn't mind, I am presently very hesitant to do so since I myself have been suffering as a student from postdocs who had to move, or where otherwise distracted by requirements on their own jobs. Since I keep receiving emails asking for graduate programs at PI, I don't know nothing about nothing, and I'd recommend you read the blurb on the PI website. I believe they have some kind of a program, since there seems to be a program for everything here. (And I am further sure there is probably a committee to that program since there seems to be a committee for everything here.)
[4] I don't have the book with me so can't give you an exact quotation, sorry.
[5] Related: Letter in the March issue of Physics Today "Encouraging young PhDs to jump boundaries"

Labels:

48 Comments:

At 9:14 PM, March 04, 2008, Blogger Olharessobremim said...

I left the field right after graduation. I was extremely depressed, and on medication, since I didn't have any perspective to get an independent life. I didn't have an inch of perspective on a future. (Really, i use a wheelchair, and it sucks that I also have many other needs. Living in Brazil is not a good thing for a person with disabilities, because of several issues related to transportation, architecutre, etc.)

So, basicaly, I got a job at the patent office, at the trademark departament. After that, I was never so happy. I was so disgusted at the academic world... I am still disgusted. But lately, I restarsted studying physics. My interests are like yours, and I can't stop in one topic. But whatever is the case, I am never returning to that world, unless it's as hobby and just doing it online, as I am doing right now. I hope the internet just keeps improving, because I love what I study, but I damn loose my freedom, my family and my girlfriend.

While there is Emule and Amazon for the books, blogs, free archives, like arxiv, forums I can remain satisfied with the state of affairs.

 
At 1:31 AM, March 05, 2008, Anonymous Domenic said...

Um... hmm, I'm not going to lie, that's a bit depressing. Maybe this whole career choice I'm all pumped up for isn't such a great idea...

I guess my current thinking is that I have this constant self-imposed "threat" that if things get too un-fun in academia, I'll just go into industry (probably programming, maybe something financial). This puts a fairly sharp limit on how much BS I'm willing to tolerate. I think I can threaten myself like this since I have accepted from day 1 why I'm actually in the field: not in order to do prestige-granting original research, but to learn and explore a fun subject. So if it's all just a grind full of not-much-prestige original research, poking away at tedious details of a specialized subject that I know through-and-through, designed to eventually culminate in an acceptable level of prestige, then it's not worth it. If I can manage to bypass that kind of tedium (and get funded at the same time, of course), then I should still be having fun no matter what my prestige level is, so it's all good.

I have to say though---I read your CV when it was linked to, before reading any of the depressing parts of this post, and damn, it looked really impressive to me. My metric was more or less "woah, so many of these papers have interesting titles!" plus "wow, lots of talks, it must be pretty cool to have people want you to speak at their conference." So I guess what I'm saying is that despite the amount of 'prestige' your CV has or has not bought you, to someone interested in physics it looks like you've done a lot of fun things that I'd like to explore. (Small comfort, perhaps...)

Anyway, I hope you still feel that physics is fun and---more pertinently---worth the effort.

 
At 1:42 AM, March 05, 2008, Anonymous sympatheticgeneralist said...

Sigh, it's a postdoc blues with which I feel strong sympathy and allegiance.
When you are curious about virtually everything and when you are not a tenure, it's a dangerous combination. As Einstein once said, in order to succeed you have to be a monomaniac. Academic world is getting uglier, largely overproductive. Even though you don't need to feel in all the gaps, too much competitive community tries to do just that, and more. How vain and wasteful! Maybe, it's a deep-rooted problem of capitalism pervading every aspect of modern life. Academism is no exception.
Theory of evolution also tells us something: Nature does not work in the most efficient and elegant way. It just tinkers along indifferently. Quite brutal and callous, indeed! Still the end products are usually marvellous, we can't deny. There seem to be times when specialists flourish and times when generalists flourish. I think, the past few decades were for specialists. They fitted themselves into special niches very successfully. However, in this rapidly changing environment too good adaptation can bite itself back. When the resources run dry, how can you manage your life? Only generalists (like you, Sabine) can survive hard times to continue the lineage. And also who would synthesize these miserably balkanized, fragmented, specialized fields? If a community cannot sustain a fair number of generalists, it may go extinct in due time.
Cheer up, Sabine, and hang on until your time comes. Long live generalists!!!

 
At 5:32 AM, March 05, 2008, Anonymous Thomas Larsson said...

Things were pretty much the same 15 years ago, if that is any consolation. Of the ca 20 grad students in theoretical physics at KTH which I know about, born 1955 - 1965, I think two got permanent positions in academia, and neither in theoretical physics. In the previous generation born around 1950 things seem to have been different. Perhaps the sample is biased (I don't know those who left before I started), perhaps the 1968 generation avoided the evil private sector at all costs, or perhaps there were more positions around.

Myself, I ran out of funding after a four-year postdoc, and didn't work very hard to get another position. Pushing 35, I had other priorities: getting a permanent income and starting a family in the city of my choice. I think you can appreciate the charm in that.

 
At 5:55 AM, March 05, 2008, Anonymous Chris Oakley said...

Bee,

The "baby boomer" generation who got hired in the sixties are now invoking age discrimination laws to ensure that they cannot be retired, ensuring that people like yourself cannot expect to get a permanent job until they physically drop dead. This will probably take a while, and from what you say, you would not be at the front of the queue anyway ...

Going into the "real world" is not so terrible. In any case I no longer believe that the smartest people end up in academia - the smartest people will, like yourself, have a cutting edge, and this ruffles feathers. With academia set up as it is at present the "optimal" student or post-doc is someone who worships his/her superiors, does not question the status quo too much, and does mediocre research that shows their sponsors in a good light: these people get advancement, not malcontents like yourself.

Consider the advantages of the "real world":

1. An income subtantially higher - so buying property, raising a family, etc. are no longer out of the question

2. Working on problems that someone actually wants solved!

Don't underestimate (2) - ivory towers are all very well, but being part of a machine is, in the long term, much more satisfying.

 
At 7:40 AM, March 05, 2008, Blogger Phil Warnell said...

Hi Bee,

Well Bee what can I say. On one hand it all sounds like what one might expect and that is you are describing a rat race designed for smarter rats. On the other you give warning of what it can be like if one chooses to create a path not even in the maze. I will tell you straight off I’ve always admired these kinds of people and am empathetic to their goals and yet never sympathetic, for I know this is the last thing they look for. All I can say in this regard is that it is primarily only people of this stripe that end up being remembered after a generation or two. Whether this was also one of their goals I would say varies between individuals and most likely had nothing to do with the result. So my hope is that you may be a person whose name might hold some significance for my grandson.

For a peak inside what many have called the real world, I can provide a modest glimpse of that. First off I can say I know you’re a smarter rat then myself and yet in testable terms I’m also one of the smarter rats. For a smarter rat that is primarily self interested and who only measures their success in terms of money, things for the most part go their way. For those who insist on a broader assessment things can often be as frustrating almost as often as you have expressed. Yes many will appreciate you ability to problem solve, organize and create, yet at the same time many are wary and envious of an ability they don’t have or understand. In the real world the smarter rat stands out and even much more when they operate at capacity. So in short, which ever way you go, if you maintain what I see as your core principles you will still suffer the consequence of that rat that chooses not to follow a path that exists within the maze. I however wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors.

Best,

Phil

 
At 9:38 AM, March 05, 2008, Anonymous chimpanzee said...

B:

I totally agree/sympathize.

Everyone has a similar story: "I fought the Law [ Bureacratic Overload/Insanity ] , BUT THE LAW WON"

"It [ Academia ] is BORING"
-- S. Wolfram
[ he left to start Wolfram Research, & the rest is history. An alumni from my HS (Theodore Gray) is a co-founder ]

"The difference between a tenured professor & a terrorist..is that you can negotiate with a terrorist"
-- Ed Davidson, EE Dept Head/U. of Michigan

[ my ex UIUC EE professor, who inspired Martin Eberhard (grad-school colleague) who co-founded Tesla Motors & Nuvo Media (sold for 176 million). I brought up the same issues you are talking about to Ed, about Infrastructure Change to facilitate Interdisciplinary Science ]

"Forget it!"
-- Bertram Herzog, CRCG (Center for Research in Computer Graphcis)/Fraunhofer Inst

[ personal communication @SIGGRAPH 2001, about changing University infrastructure to accomadate Interdisciplinary Science. He used a German cartoon to illustrate the futility. Fraunhofer Inst was designed to help German university-industry collaboration/cooperation. Bee, you liked that PIXAR/Ratatouille animated film: this is the research field (Computer Graphics). I interviewed w/PIXAR after my PhD, & was told I was overqualified (overspecialized & unemployable). ]

"Many had continued to hope for a further comeback from Fischer, the chess giant, and a few continued to claim to have observed him playing blitz on the internet chess club under anonymous handles, nonchalantly defeating the strongest grandmasters with weird moves."
-- T. Dorigo, Quantum Diaries

My PhD thesis was based on a "weird move" (thinking different), which led to a breakthrough in my field (which was hopelessly STUCK). Yes, I'm another Bobby Fischer type ("knife-edge Formula 1 car") who stomped off into oblivion after a big victory (been living like a hermit for 25 odd years, I still haven't bathed in 2008..that's over 2 months). I'm on the trail of another "weird move" (crazy idea) which should solve your problem (& others, e.g. Kea).

"Needs & Solutions"
-- Fortune magazine

It came out of your posts on Web information-filtering & URL-backtracking (history) for weblink (can you forward me that post, I can't seem to find it)

It involves an Automated web-based Distributed-Architecture funding model. Here are my contacts:

- my former grad-school officemate is now Vice-President of Georgia-Tech & President of GTRI/Georgia-Tech Research Inst (previously head of SEI/Software Engineering Inst @Carnegie Mellon), whose ex-GaTech colleague is now President of Caltech.

- another grad-school colleague (son of my ex-MS thesis advisor) is now Director of Research @Intel (grid-computing & inference computing).

- One of my friends (formerly Chief Scientist @Disney Animation, which merged w/PIXAR), is now with Google Earth.

- founder of NCSA/Nat'l Center for Supercomputing Applications (ex computational Astrophysicist), now head of Calit2/UCSD

Just like PI's PIRSA technology-initiative (which I curiously suggested on your blog "arxiv using video", did PIRSA pick up on it?), here is another technology-based solution to fix an "obsolete funding model".

"I'm locally pessimistic [ e.g., stuck in PI, depressing winter ], but globally optimistic [ "travel the world", roam my mind doing research ]"
-- Dr. Jordan Pollack, CS professor/Brandeis Univ

[ we were grad-students together, his PhD advisor (famous MIT PhD, was at NEC Research Labs..now at Columbia Univ) ditched Academia at the time I got my PhD ('84) ended up at Connection Machines (I know the founder who is a famous MIT PhD, he is local to me), which is where R. Feynman worked that 1 summer ]

It would allow you (or Kea, G. Lisi, me) to roam the world as a mobile-global scientist (I know you're in Hawaii getting stimulated intellectually & emotionally), & you would get paid online ("virtual") by multiple parties..automaticall. It's based on a Google solution (like a Paypal with automated agents). Research without Borders, so to say.

Revolution [ radical change ] VS de-Evolution [ current crap ]

Curiously, some good quotes come from Hawaii Five-O episodes (reflection of the "Down with the Establishment" 60's)

"We just knocked the Establishment [ Academia ] on their Status-Quo"
-- The King Kamehameha Blue/Hawaii Five-O

[ Four university students led by snotty rich kid Arnold Potter steal the cloak of a Hawaiian king using an elaborate scheme going through a museum's skylight and then using a homemade tripod mechanism. ]

Casey (idealistic girl): "My father says Ireland needs heroes [ Bee, Kea, G. Lisi ("future Einstein") ]"
Costigan (terrorist): ""There are no heroes. Only desperate men and fools [ "chimpanzee" ].... and graves. Too many graves. [ physicists scattered out of Academia ]"
"When the cause is in danger [ physics research ], there's no room for questions -- or conscience."
"Tiocfaidh Ar Lá" [ Our Day Will Come ]
-- "Up the Rebels"/Hawaii Five-O

You get my drift. "Our Day Will Come"

These blogs are a networking tool, that allows the "restless natives" to band together. Bee/Kea are expressing Needs, I have a Solution (have *access* to a lot of powerful/smart people).

It looks like you passed thru LA (I saw the Santa Monica picture on your Flickr photo-blog), on the way to Hawaii. A quick face-2-face meeting would have helped, Re: above plan. I never got a reply from the last email I sent you (Tesla Motors idea).

"We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of a dream"
-- Willy Wonka

 
At 10:29 AM, March 05, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Chimpanzee,

Got me. How did you manage to recognize Santa Monica from that one photo? I am impressed. I am really sorry but I wasn't in the mood to meet or talk to anybody. Apologies also to Domenic. I wouldn't have been good company anyway. I will be in the area again, I am pretty sure about that. In fact, I am still in LA, stuck at the airport, cursing American Airlines and the weather in Toronto. [Oh great. They are just announcing the flight is delayed. I can't believe that. This probably means I will get stuck in Dallas.]

Thanks for the quotes, that's as always very inspiring. I guess I am not as technologically enthusiastic as you are, but network wise there are definitely advantages that might turn out to be helpful. I think the post you were referring to is Growing Mountains.

Best,

B.

 
At 10:40 AM, March 05, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Olharessobremim,

I am sorry to hear about your bad experience. But you are of course right that with free archives and the information source the internet provides the disconnection from the academic world is much softened. Thanks for your comment. Sometimes I think the reason why things don't improve is that for those who stay in the academic world it is possible to pleasantly ignore those who have left. They have no voice, they don't show up in the surveys, and if they dare to have an opinion they get stamped and dismissed as a 'failed scientist'. If you'd do a survey on the conditions of post-doc life, how about to include all those who have left? Plus complaining isn't something you do when the competitive pressure is high. Who wants to hire a complainer? Think pink, the future is bright, you're a winner. It is a very human trait to talk oneselves into believing the system one works in is perfectly okay. Best,

B.

 
At 10:51 AM, March 05, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Domenic,

I am genuinely sorry if that sounds depressing to you. Indeed, I was thinking of you, and some other grad students, while writing, and I was hoping it doesn't come out wrong. I certainly don't want to discourage anybody, but of what help is it to paint things more rosy than they are? (In many instances, departments are reluctant to discourage any student because their grants depend on the number of students they have. Keep that in mind, if you talk to faculty. Money makes the world go round.)

I guess my current thinking is that I have this constant self-imposed "threat" that if things get too un-fun in academia, I'll just go into industry

You wouldn't believe how often I have heard this. And as I wrote above, in increasingly many instances people actually do it. Shouldn't it make us think that apparently nobody ever goes INTO academia because their job got to 'un-fun'?

And I myself feel kind of stuck. It's just that I keep thinking I am not done. Who is going to finish what I've begun if not me?

Thanks for the nice words about the CV. I too think it looks nice actually. My largest achievement of the last years is the marital status :-)

Best,

B.

 
At 10:57 AM, March 05, 2008, Anonymous Peter Morgan said...

You're still there so far. There is always a question of survival niche as well as the question of research niche.

Provided you can somehow maintain access to a research library, you can continue fundamental research without a job in academia. Your life will continue to ask you how committed you are to research; it's OK for it to change from a job to a hobby to a passion from year to year.

 
At 11:04 AM, March 05, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Sympathetic Generalist,

Thanks for the nice words. Yes, that's exactly what I meant :-)

Hi Thomas,

I don't know. In Germany the ~1955 generation did pretty well because they hired a lot of fairly young people in the late seventies I believe.

Hi Chris,

invoking age discrimination laws to ensure that they cannot be retired, ensuring that people like yourself cannot expect to get a permanent job until they physically drop dead.

Hey, sounds exactly like in Germany!

Yes, I can very well relate to (2). For a change it would be nice if somebody was actually interested in what I am doing, and to have the feeling to be good for something. It seems to me the best I can get in my present job is tolerance. Best,

B.

 
At 11:21 AM, March 05, 2008, Anonymous a quantum diaries survivor said...

Hello Bee,

of course I also sympathize with you. I had to go through the awkward self-promotion business for quite a while, and I just barely am getting out of it now - I am going to be called in a month or so to Rome for a colloquium with the president of INFN, who will question my research activities of the last couple of years and then decide whether to grant me tenure (actually I think the chances of not getting it is basically zero, but anyways).

I know the feeling. I was lucky in some ways, and unlucky in others. Mostly lucky though - I did not find in my path hindrances which became too hard to pass. I believe you are mostly lucky too, and I think this "getting it off" in this post is a useful way to reset your mind before the next round of fights for a better job - and might I add, hopefully closer to Stefan.

As many have noted, life outside academia is not that bad, but I think you, like me, too badly want to continue, and I have the prejudice that the hurdles you crossed outnumber those you have ahead of you. So, don't get discouraged, keep focused on what most interests you, and spend one day a week on the job searches. Don't mix the two things, for maximum serenity.

Cheers,
T.

 
At 11:59 AM, March 05, 2008, Anonymous Peter Orland said...

Somehow this comment didn't get posted before. Am I blacklisted?

I just wanted to say that when I have been
involved in job searches at my own institution
I read the letters of recommendation last.

Letters are important, but so are recent
papers and applications.

 
At 12:12 PM, March 05, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

update from gate 46A, the flight got cancelled. i can't believe this shit. i mean, i was only booked for this flight, because my yesterday flight was cancelled as well.

hi Peter,

thanks for your comments. No, you are not blacklisted. in fact, our very extensive blacklist contains only one person, and it's not you. best,

B.

 
At 12:21 PM, March 05, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bee:”But if you give me a basis to work on, I can go from there - after all, the only thing I always wanted to do is to contribute if only a little piece to our understanding of nature's ways.”

Did you read G. Greenstein, A. G. Zajonc: “The Quantum Challenge”, Jones and Bartlett, Sudbury, MA (1997)? It is beautiful collection of real problems in modern physics. In particular, it contains discussion of back-action (par. 3.6) which in my view erroneous since the momentum isn’t gauge invariant in the presence of the fundamental interaction (unmeasurable quantity). ??? ישר כח!

Regards, Dany.

 
At 2:40 PM, March 05, 2008, Anonymous Uncle Al said...

"Autoritätsdusel ist der größte Feind der Wahrheit," Albert Einstein, 1901... and then he denied quantum mechanics.

Vacuum isotropy and Lorentz invariance observations are in the massless EM sector. Parity is not a Noetherian symmetry for being discontinuous. Teleparallel and affine gravitations allow chiral vacuum backgrounds in the mass sector. Somebody should look.

"Test of the Equivalence Principle Using a Rotating Torsion Balance"
Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 041101 (2008)
http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/publications/pdf/schlamminger08.pdf

Their 4.84 g Be masses as solid spheres would be 1.71 cm diameter. 4.84 g single crystal quartz would be 1.52 cm diameter in either parity. They had [(1.001077) - (0.99868)/(0.5)(1.001077 + 0.99868)][(8)(4.84]= 0.0928 g active mass total.

In quartz they would have at least (0.999726)[(8)(4.84)]= 38.71 g active mass total. 38.71/0.0928 = 417 times the active mass.

There is no convincing them to try something with theoretical basis that has not previously failed. Christ wept. To obtain a different destination follow a different trajectory.

 
At 2:52 PM, March 05, 2008, Anonymous Tkk said...

My two-cent worth of advise:

1) Time for freelancing, i.e. do whatever interests you, is over. You may freelance again after you gained tenure.

2) You can benefit from the advise of 'supervisor', more like a mentor. To help you set a career goal, focus, gain in-depth expertise, publish results.

3) But first, you must set your goal, SOON. Back to Germany academic? Go to CERN or similar such places and pursue a permanent career in experimental physics? Or astronomy/cosmology? Get a junior faculty position at PI and prepare to stay in Canada permanently? Go to private industry? Each of these goals requires quite different planning to achieve.

The time has arrived to decide how you want to spend the rest of your life. And that includes leaving the field altogether and start a family.

 
At 6:20 PM, March 05, 2008, Anonymous ali said...

Hi Bee,
Tkk has a point here. In this game called academia, what matters is to get superb letters of recommendation from big names as you noticed yourself. You may need to parade in front of them in order to do that if necessary but living in a bubble(or freelancing) is not going to accomplish it thus your present postdoc position did not allow you to get a good letter from a big name in high energy physics (like Ed Witten) presumably. The core problem is that the market is flooded with PhD scientists and there are very few potentially permanent positions. Academic job market in theoretical physics and chemistry is deteriorating because there is no funding. It is mediocre even when the overall economy is booming so it should hardly surprise us that it is so poor right now since USA is in recession.
Another thing to remind you is that you are probably eligible to get permanent residency in canada and perhaps in usa if you want to (I am eligible myself even though I never applied for it) but it is not going to gurantee an academic job for you. If you
write me in facebook, I can
give you more details.
Cheers

 
At 6:21 PM, March 05, 2008, Blogger stefan said...

Dear Bee,

tanks for the comment about that part of your CV :-)

And for the link to Gutzwiller's letter - dislocations are cool, as long as they don't mean to dislocate your stuff from one country/continent to the next every two years ;-)

Best, Stefan

 
At 9:07 PM, March 05, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Tkk,

3) Yes, exactly that is the problem.

Best,

B.

 
At 10:35 PM, March 05, 2008, Blogger Tim said...

Sabine ( a more beautiful name to me than Bee, which sounds like either "Aunt Bea" of an old American t.v. show, or you know what),

I've read this blog for a year or two.

I went straight into industry in 1974 after realizing that I probably wasn't going to be one of the tiny handful of people hired each year in relativity. Just a Bachelor's, but I took Jim Hartle's general relativity class at UCSB. Despite liking math, I could sense that things were getting "Real Tight" in physics (a situation which hasn't changed, and which the ever-increasing Post-doc wanderings indicate is getting worse).

Anyway, water under the bridge. There
s good and there's bad in going into industry. The good is that pay is high, with potential stock options. And, in the right geographic and technology areas, many chances to join new companies.

In my case, I joined Intel in 1974. It was then a fairly small company known for pioneering products in several areas: solid state memories (static RAMs, dynamic RAMs), erasable/programmable ROMs (EPROMs), and the newly introduced "microprocessor."

I joined working for a guy named Craig Barrett, a professor from Stanford taking a sabbatical to work on a project at Intel. (He was a metallurgist, now called a materials scientist, and was very sharp and opinionated....not surprisingly to me, he elected to join Intel permanently, giving up his tenured Stanford professorship. BTW, he later became Preseident and CEO of the company and is now its Chairman.)

At first, working for a chip company seemed like a big step down from Thinking About Big Things. (Not that I had yet reached that status of being expected to do that and write papers on it, but I had fully expected to someday be doing that...then the disintegrating job market for wannabee professors hit in the 70s.)

But things began to get more interesting. I found that I enjoyed using my physics to solve important problems, some straight materials problems, some deeper physics problems, and some eventually getting me into interesting areas of software and systems.

(In brief, one of my biggies was figuring out in 1977 that the source of random, single-bit errors in our (and everyone's) dynamic RAMs was mostly due to alpha particles from low levels of uranium and thorium present in the environment near the chip. This led to a lot of interesting physics, though none of it "foundational," obviously, but the links to other areas, to systems, was quite illuminating. And quite financially and career-rewarding to me. It opened other doors.)

I eventually retired completely in 1986, when I was 34, having gotten enough to do so. Part of this was the run-up in stock prices (I also invested in other Silicon Valley companies), partly it was the simpler life I was happy to live.

Since then I've done various things. Lots of opportunities.

Partly this is being near Silicon Valley (I live near Santa Cruz, southwest of SV). Lots of various circles (Amara Graps, who posts here, was in one of them).

I mentioned downsides. Rarely are people hired to "do as they wish." I was sort of in that position in my last few years at Intel, but it caused some problems. Companies expect results-oriented research. Gone are the days of Bell Labs (and even that was much less "blue sky" than the popular press often portrays--the transistor guys were obviously racing to get a solid state replacement for a key component of switches, and the 3 degrees Kelvin guys were working on a seemingly mundane problem of trying to figure out why a low level of noise was entering their systems....neither was blue sky reasearch!).

I saw many times my company hire bright physicists (though not as many as the EEs and CS grads they hired) and then reassign them to more pressing matters after some initial period.

My friends at IBM, Google, Apple, Cisco, etc. say mostly the same thing. One may hire at Fubar Corp to work on "aptical foddering," but get reassigned to "defect reduction" a year later.

The upside is the paycheck, the relative freedom from having to reapply every few years, and the ability to remain in one area.

(One reason Silicon Valley continues to thrive is that people choose to switch jobs rather than accept transfers, which increases the incentive to stay in Silicon Valley, which feeds on itself....the result is that the centroid of the tech world, with dozens of world leaders, remains bounded by a 10-mile-wide by 30-mile-long region. Intel, H-P, Apple, AMD, Ebay, Google, Yahoo, Cisco, even NetFlix and Craig's List. And many more. Microsoft is just about the only major company with only a "satellite" presence here.)

I wish you well.

But between "Not Even Wrong" and "The Trouble with Physics," you of all people should see the terrible troubles theoretical physics has gotten itself into. Even if there is nothing to blame on the current crop of tenured folks (and I am not one of those who blames them at all), it's pretty clear that physics is not a growth industry. At least not in academic departments.

I didn't think things were bright in the mid-70s. Apparently some got positions and even tenure in the period I likely would have tried to enter the market (probably would've been around 1980-82, had I made it through the hoops). But the numbers mentioned here, in this thread, are not encouraging.

Frankly, I'm glad I got out in 1974 and went on to have a lot of fun and make a lot of money.

(P.S. I'm not necessarily recommending California or Silicon Valley at THIS TIME. When I joined Intel, house prices were about $40K for Sunnyvale, $80K for Palo Alto. Today, about a factor of 15 higher, for the same houses. And salaries have not gone up 15x. Partly this is "dual income," partly it's "trading up," partly it's people willing to get heavily into debt.)

Best wishes,

--Tim May, Corralitos, California

 
At 5:11 AM, March 06, 2008, Anonymous Thomas Larsson said...

Bee,

Somebody born 1955 (and thus several years older than me) was 24in the late 70s. I don't know much about the German academic system, but I doubt that it was ever filled with 24-years-old professors. People born 1950 could well have gotten permanent positions at that time, however. That would agree with my observation.

 
At 8:39 AM, March 06, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Thomas,

Yeah, sorry, it should have been 'born somewhere around 55' and hired 'somewhere late seventies early eighties'. Like, I'm a theoretical physicist, as long as the order of magnitude is okay, don't trust me on the details. What I meant to say is that there must be a generation of Profs who got permanent considerably younger than you can possibly expect today. Check this CV as an example. PhD in '79, tenure track '82. I think he's not an exception. Those where the days ;-)

Best,

B.

 
At 10:43 AM, March 06, 2008, Blogger PerchéNo? said...

Bee, I completely agree with your complaints. Probably you've been more stubborn than me, but I quitted with research and everything related after I heard, from a 40 year old postdoc (virtually unenmployed in a couple of months) that he just didn't understand General Relativity and he didn't wanted to. And he was one of the leading Quantum Mechanichs researcher in my university. All of this while my father was dying of lung cancer, I was running really short on money and I desperately nedded a really good motivation to go on.
I just got completely sick of all these BS. And I did find myself a well paid job in software industry (yes, it's still a well paid job 11 years after that).
I try to keep myself well informed, because I still love the field I was going to dedicate my life in, but sometimes is just too hard, you cannot have two different minds working together, and sometimes I'm simply too focussed on my everyday job to think about simmetries and hadrons...

 
At 4:39 PM, March 06, 2008, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bee

Freeman Dyson and Evelyn Fox Keller have both written about how the PHD system is brutal to women. Take a look at what they have written on this matter.

It is psychologically healthy and normal to have a deep connection to place,people and ones history.

Uprootedness is a diseased state. America specializes in uprootedness. Not Healthy.Privincial very healthy.

Do you want to be an academic Gypsy at forty?

Have you thought about a field like Toplological Quantum Comuputing?

Go make some $$$$$$. The system you work in sucks.

Joshua Chemberlain(still deceased)

 
At 7:52 PM, March 06, 2008, Blogger Punk Floyd said...

I know it's probably obvious, but try to get Landed Resident status (if you aren't doing it already)

The benefits are manifold:
1) None of the restrictions on your working permit will apply.
2) You can receive all social benefits.
3) You can leave the country for up to 6 months.

Tip: if your Canadian SIN starts with a number other than 9, you qualify for unemployment benefits.

 
At 10:26 PM, March 06, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Punk,

Thanks. My SIN does begin with a 9.

Hi Joshua,

I am not actually interested in making much $$$$$ as long as I can live from what I have. (And PI pays well, while Waterloo is inexpensive.) Yes, I do think people neglect the importance of having a connection to their environment (natural, social, historical) in both, spatial and temporal, directions. I guess that this fragmentation of our societies is to a certain extend responsible for the disconnectedness people feel with the world they live in, and the sense to not to belong where they are. (It also negatively influences problems of environmental protection, neighborhood solidatity, social safety nets etc etc).

Hi Percheno,

I can relate to what you say, and I am very sorry to hear about your difficult time. My brain too lacks a switch to turn it off, and I tend to bring my work home, no matter what it is. I don't think I'd be able to work outside academia while following the research there.

Best,

B.

 
At 10:38 PM, March 06, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Tim,

Thanks for your interesting comment.

it's pretty clear that physics is not a growth industry. At least not in academic departments.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Physics is becoming increasingly 'industrialized' in the old-fashioned sense of work-sharing and production. Since there is in theoretical physics no market outside the sellers themselves (see the 'measurement problem' in my post on the 'marketplace of ideas'), there is a huge potential for growing 'bubbles of nothing', given that they are advertised appropriately (read NewScientist). I doubt though this will actually lead to much new insights (since you mention Lee's book, that system greatly favours craftsmen, I like to say the 'fittest' that survive in that system aren't the ones that are eventually needed to sustain its progress, so it will break down). Either way, it is just not a way science can be run. (I will have a follow up post on this if I come around to writing it.)

Reg. my name: With very very rare exceptions all English native speakers mispronounce it when they read it, and misspell it when they hear it. After I repeated a thousand times my name consists of three syllables, I decided it's a fight I can't win, the sheer numbers are against me. Bee is a name everybody can pronounce and spell. Since I've been a 'bee' as long as I can think (probably longer, but you'd have to ask my mum), i found it a good alternative. But actually, I agree, Sabine sounds nicer. At least if pronounced correctly (there seems to be no soft 's' in the English language).

Best,

B.

 
At 1:46 AM, March 07, 2008, Anonymous Thomas Larsson said...

The phenomenon of eternal postdocs is not new; Warren Siegal and John Schwartz come to mind, but most eternal postdocs probably did not end as famous professor. Perhaps there were more jobs around 1980 due to a fluctuation, but it can also be that your sample is biased - you don't know about those who quit because they didn't find a job after their postdocs.

In a steady-state situation the fraction of people getting tenure should remain the same. There is a fixed number of positions, which eventually will be filled by people of different ages. However, if each professor on average produces ten PhDs, 90% of your peers will not become advisors themselves, in good agreement with my observations. This is unavoidable unless academic physics as a whole grows, which is unlikely, but the process is of course painful for those involved.

One way to reduce the problem would be to introduce draconian age limits - you are not eligible to apply for a postdoc if you are above 30 and not for a tenure-track position if you are above 34, say. It is better to kick people out of academia at 30 rather than at 35 or 40, when you age is becoming a serious handicap when applying for non-academic jobs.

 
At 4:40 AM, March 07, 2008, Anonymous Domenic said...

Off-topic, but in response to your recent comment about your name: could you post a sound file of you saying it? I was caught completely off-guard by the facts you present... three syllables? Soft 's'? I can't really imagine what that would sound like.

Just curious!

 
At 7:07 AM, March 07, 2008, Anonymous Chris Oakley said...

Domenic,

Based on my O-level German, it would be "Zabeena", which if you write it like that, sounds like the female lead in a budget Science Fiction movie. Maybe there's more to Bee than she's letting on in this blog...

Thomas,

I like your age limit suggestion, but to my mind it does not go far enough.

The academic research system ought to safeguard the process, not any individuals involved in it. Research is haphazard - sometimes ideas work: most times they don't. My proposal of having no tenured research positions at all at least would allow more attempts by a wider variety of individuals & not the current flogging to death of truly dead ideas simply because some tenured person is promoting it. The depressing thing is that the tenured researchers who even have an idea worth the name are a rarity. In my view, the only way to encourage young people to think outside a box is not to have a box to start with.

 
At 8:53 AM, March 07, 2008, Anonymous chimpanzee said...

"I fought the Law [ Bureacratic Crap: Academia, et al ], & the LAW WON"
-- Tim Flock, NASCAR racer (1950's)

Um, not!

"If you [ corrupt Bureacracy ] don't control the media [ Blogs ], the media [ Blogs ] will control you [ corrupt Bureacracy ]"
-- Freedom of the Press

You can tell by Bee's language (s**t, f**g) she is unhappy, just like Shaq:

Shaq curses on TV
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-BoeBedZ3k

Bureacratic Idiocy exists in all fields (the scientific term is "Convergent Evolution"), there was a notable one in NBA in 2004:

transcript:
Reporter:
"...I know you're frustrated at how the officiating [ "meritocracy", "peer review", "grant funding" ] went down the stretch.."

Shaq:
"David Stern/NBA commissioner [ Bureacrats: Washington, Universities, etc ] wondering why the League [ Science Research ] is losing money, that's why. People pay good money [ tax payers ] to see these athletes play [ Scientists doing Research ], & they [ Bureacrats ] try to take over the F**K**G game."

Reporter:
"Shaq [ Bee, et al ], we're on LIVE.."

Shaq:
"I don't give a S**T!"


TORONTO-- Shaquille O'Neal ripped the officiating [ "peer review" ] in a profane post-game tirade Sunday after scoring 36 points in the Lakers' 84-83 victory over the Raptors.

Shaq told KCAL-TV that the fans came to watch the players [ physicists ], not the officials, then used the f-bomb while complaining that officials were "taking over the game.'' [ bureacrats overruling real research ]

"My message to [commissioner] David Stern is get some people in there that understand the game [ Physics ] and don't try to take over the game because people pay good money to see good athletes play,'' O'Neal said. "Let us play [ let Physics research thrive ], don't be trying to take over the game. [ bad departmental policy jeopardizing REAL research, as per Lee Smolin ]"

"I thought the last five times I shot the ball was a foul too," O'Neal said. "He got fouled, I got fouled, and they didn't call it. [ physicists are getting fouled: good papers/grants declined, bad papers/grants accepted ]"

O'Neal said official Scott Foster has it in for him.

"Don't be calling bull because you don't like a guy," O'Neal said. "That guy has a clear understanding over the years that he don't like me. If you don't like a person, you can't do your job with them."

[ blackballing on arxiv, idealogical fights between research factions, etc ]
============

Interdisciplinary Comparative Models: Solutions

The above scenarios in Sports is a useful metaphor, to find solutions for the Academia problem. It plays into Bee's interest in Social & Natural Sciences, since it comes down to a "people problem".

Hockey has found the solution to bad "officiating" [ bad peer review ]: fighters/enforcers among the players

"I can see the point of arguing, as many old-timers do, that you need a fighter on your team to protect your skilled players from cheap shots & stickwork. Unfortunately, this is only the case if the cheap shots & stickwork aren't being called by the referees [ bad "peer review" ] or punished by the league. In other words, if the officials [ "peer reviewers" ] are bozos. Alas, many of the officials [ "peer reviewers" ] in the NHL _are_ bozos."

"You can have games of hockey without fights, but there will come times in the course of action where fights *must* occur. It's part of the game [ physics research, e.g. legendary battles between R. Feynman vs M. Gell-Mann ]. To outlaw fights that occur in the course of playing at a high level of competition infers lowering the level of competition and cheapening the game."

2nd order peer review via Physics Blogs

I noticed that Physics blogs have had disputes/fights, so this is a natural progression to an evolutionary checks-and-balances.

"There, Melissa [ Franklin ] built it [ gas calorimeter ], nursed it to life, & defended its qualities..with her life practically"
-- Dr. Drasko Jovanovic/Fermilab
[ "Discovering Women: Melissa Franklin" ]

L. Motl gets a bad rap for his *perceived* unusual behavior (in person he's charming & devoted teacher), but he is simply being the enforcer for his team ("String Theory"). No different than w/M. Franklin defending her "baby".

“Billy Jack..maaaaannnn!!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v325wdgoFH4

Background:
“The town Sheriff and his Deputies [ corrupt Bureacrats: Washington, Academia, etc ] were harassing the Native Americans and Pacifist community [ Physicists ] living in the area. Billy Jack [ Bee ], bitter, back from Vietnam [ Germany, U of A, UCSB, PI ] and half Indian himself, tried to abide by the pacifism [ quiet, unassuming proper German girl ] at their request, including responding nonviolently in prior scenes. Sheriff and Buddies felt it was okay to assault and rape one of the Pacifist [ Bee & her buddies (scattered out of Physics) ], causing Billy Jack went on a quiet, self righteous rampage of revenge. [ cussing ala Shaq ]”

Note that L. Motl is doing the same thing, defending his "territory":
[ Sheriff and Buddies [ P. Woit & L. Smolin ] felt it was okay to assault and rape one of the Pacifist [ String Theory ], causing Billy Jack [ Lumo ] went on a quiet, self righteous rampage of revenge.” ]

R. Knop did the same on "Galactic Interactions", a verbal assault on Research Infrastructure flaws.

And, now Bee.

Bottomline:

"Loose lips [ criticism by disgruntled physicists over Blogs ] sinks Ships [ broken Research Infrastructure ]"

Blogs are a way for physicists to apply "negative reinforcement", a 2nd order level of "peer review" of broken Research Infrastructure. Blogs "took down" CBS 60 minutes/Dan Rather scandal (resigned in disgrace), so look for a similar result in Research Infrastructure.

"More power to 'ya!!"

"May your S**T come to Life [ corrupt Research Infrastructure ], & hit you in the face [ physics bloggers ]"

"The higher the monkey goes up the pole [ Corrupt Research Infrastructure ], the more you see [ via physics blogs ] of his behind [ lowest common denominator: research driven by $$, not quality of research ]"

 
At 10:50 AM, March 07, 2008, Anonymous chimpanzee said...

[ posted on Kea's blog, you may find it of interest ]

Problems/Solutions

You're falling into a "cycle of negativity", so you need to get out of it & focus on solutions (positives).

I'm in a similar situation, & the CREATIVITY of finding a solution is downright fun.

Read below.

I met a couple of profs @SIGGRAPH 2001 (Scientific Visualization & Computer Graphics research), who were teaching a course on Geometric Algebra. Cross pollinating CS/Computer Science with Math/Physics. They were *marketing* their initiative with a T-shirt (which they gave me)

http://www.caltechscience.com/physics/geometricalgebra/dorst.jpg
[ can you relate this to your field? ]

i.e., a "walking billboard". I put on the shirt, & @Reception (Universal Studios/Hollywood) was approached by K. Turkowski (led the QTVR group @Apple, now at Google, a math whiz who is a UIUC alumni like myself) & we talked & had future collaborations. The power of marketing/networking.

Leo Dorst (background in Physics)

http://staff.science.uva.nl/~leo
[ click on "Geometric Algebra", "CV", "description". Note that he has a diploma in "teaching physics & math (HS & university)", like your original goal. ]

teamed up with S. Mann (CS prof @U. of Waterloo). I.e., he decided to cross-over to a growth field (Electrical Engineering/Computer Science) & found a cross-over partner (hint: you need to find a team partner) . They just published a book together "Geometric Algebra for Computer Science".

The above field (Scientific Visualization/Computer Graphics) is very RICH, lots of $$.

- 2D graphics
Adobe Photoshop (founded by CS professor John Warnock), etc

- 3D computer animation
computational physics: simulation of light & motion, video & Film. PIXAR, Disney Animation, etc

- Gaming Industry
it EXCEEDS revenues of the Film industry!

I know some ex-physicists (deplorable employment situation back in '94) who are jumping into this field. CG Research has a LOT of researchers doing fancy math (Monte Carlo methods, Diophantine Equations, Level Set methods, Adjoint Methods, Wavelets, etc), many of them are Math PhDs (that 1 Caltech CS prof I keep referring to). You would have no problem contributing, with your math skills/physics skills.

I noticed you took a liking to Ratatouille animated film by PIXAR. The head of PIXAR studied CS & physics in college.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixar

http://www.science.nl/blog.php?id=12

http://www.timeinc.net/fortune/conferences/innovation2006/images/fortunearticles/pixar_innovation.pdf

"Finally, from the early days of Disney, animated films have always been driven by
technology
, and that is especially true now that the artists' easels are computers. And
since Pixar has a flotilla of propeller-heads [ CS & Math PhDs ] whose job is to continually invent better technology to enhance the look of the images and increase the efficiency of the animators, directors become infected by the same virus. "There's a wonderful yin-yang at the foundation of Pixar," says Lasseter, whose official title is executive vice president, creative. "The art challenges the technology, and the technology inspires the art."

" CATMULL IS THE BRAIN behind most of Pixar's technical achievements, and his
name is on many of its patents. But the idea he's proudest of is Pixar University, a
continuing-education program aimed at giving every employee, even the accountants,
enough training in the fine arts and cinema to think like a filmmaker. The curriculum runs from drawing to acting to belly dancing--there are 111 courses in all, and every employee
takes a half-dozen or so each year."

[ note their infrastructure is "progressive/creative" ]

They would see your background in math/physics & arts (painting, perfect match for their visual-imagery product) as a good match, & probably hire you as a consultant. A couple of well-known CG researchers (at Stanford & Caltech) have on their research agenda "looking for more mathematical rigor". I.e., they need help in mathematics. PIXAR is in N. California (near Silicon Valley), so it would satisfy your desire for some "sun & beach".

More info:

http://www.siggraph.org/

I know people @PIXAR (I interviewed with them after my PhD, & was told that I was overqualified, i.e. "overspecialized/unemployable"). This was my field 25 yrs ago. Funny thing, I lost interest in it & am now gravitating to your area (physics). Need a change. Whereas, I seem to be suggesting the opposite direction for yourself.

There is also similar type of opportunity @Google. K. Tutkowski (led Apple/QTVR group, friend & nice guy) & Lance W. (ex chief scientist @Disney Animation, friend & nice guy) have moved on to Google. It involves "search" technology to automate the whole funding process.

Standard Model:
submit proposals to various institutions, & get physically silo'd (term used by J. Chayes/MS Research Labs). Repeat, ad nauseum.

Incredibly, old-fashioned & primitive. Does NOT take advantage of networked communication (see below)

Alternative Model:
become a global mobile scientist ("distributed architecture" model of doing research), where you can do research from anywhere (beaches of Hawaii, deserts of Africa, etc). The web-connectivity supports this. I'm thinking of a web-based solution where you would *automatically* get paid for your research. It's based on Google keywords, or this "inference computing" thing (ex-UIUC colleague is now Director of Research @Intel, his specialty is grid-computing, i.e. distributed computing). An extension of Paypal (ex-UIUC alumni were involved, who left to start Youtube..now owned by Google!!), with automated negotiation between client (researcher) & server (funding source). A 0th order solution are these Google Ads, that many blogs are using for side revenue (CV, L. Motl, et al)

That PI conference your involved with on 9/08, involving Technology/Research would be a perfect opportunity to start this initiative.

"Snatching Victory [ New web-based funding-model ] from the Hands of Defeat [ antiquated funding model ]"

 
At 11:58 AM, March 07, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Domenic, Hi Chris,

it would be "Zabeena", which if you write it like that, sounds like the female lead in a budget Science Fiction movie.

;-)

Indeed, that's like most native speakers pronounce my name. It comes as close as it can possibly get using English consonants and vowels. For the finetuning: the last 'e' is not an 'a' (Sabina is also a name though), and the 'S' is not a 'Z'. If you hear a difference between the humming of a wasp and of a bee, that's about the difference between the 'zzz' and the 'sss'. Chances are however you wouldn't hear a difference, for much the same reason I can't figure out what is German about my pronunciation of English words.

(I had a similar encounter with an Indian colleague who tried to explain how her name was pronounced. We were a group of five Germans or so, and whenever one of us tried, she'd say 'No, it's .... not ....', but neither of us could hear any difference.)

Will see what I can do about the sound file (will have to get a micro). It would be useful probably more for Stefan's name, which most often ends up as a 'Steven' (most people don't realize the 'St' is actually pronounced as a 'Sht').

Best,

B.

 
At 12:08 PM, March 07, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Chimpanzee,

become a global mobile scientist ("distributed architecture" model of doing research), where you can do research from anywhere (beaches of Hawaii, deserts of Africa, etc).

Well, I AM a global mobile scientist and can do research from anywhere (provided I have internet/library access). The problem is one of work permit. I can't just move to Hawaii and place myself onto a beach when on a visa waiver. The work permit is usually tied to an employment contract (well, alternatively, I could go marry a citizen). The only country where I am legally allowed to be unemployed is Germany. I can understand this - you don't want immigrants who just sleep on the beach, or need social help.

Best,

B.

 
At 3:13 PM, March 07, 2008, Anonymous ali said...

Bee,
As a german citizen, you are eligible to work in any EU country without any extra work permit(e.g. you can go to a job interview in London) thus you have a lot of room to play in. Work permit is the last thing you should be concerned about. As soon as you get a job offer you will be able to work in any country essentually(My postdoc advisor is a tenured professor in canada and he is still a german citizen) thus the key thing here is to be able to get a job offer. The rest is just technicality. Your prospective employer (be it a university or a company) is going to take care of the legal stuff if they want to hire you thus the key here is to be able to get a job offer. USA is in economic recession at the moment and there will not be any new jobs here for this year and a good part of the next probably. I definitely would explore my options in europe. A friend of mine recently got a junior professor position in France and she is german too.

 
At 4:12 PM, March 07, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Ali,

Yes, you are of course correct. I guess though, should I become unemployed I'd prefer to be unemployed in the vicinity of my friends and family. Maybe I should brush up my French. Merci beaucoup :-)

B.

 
At 5:00 PM, March 07, 2008, Blogger Punk Floyd said...

Why you cannot work on a beach in Hawaii? It is another country. Canadian govt is only really concerned with you working in Canada (and thus possibly taking away jobs from Canadians).

Also I want to join Chimpanzee in recommending Lance W. @ Google. He is a super-cool guy, always bursting with ideas. Right now, he works in the research arm of StreetView team. Google itself is also a pretty sweet place.

 
At 7:15 PM, March 07, 2008, Anonymous ali said...

Hi Bee,
Well, in my previous post, I just wanted to say that you should keep an open mind regarding the job search. High energy physics is just fading out and unless you have a couple of stellar recommendation letters from big name senior people in your field, it is highly unlikely that you will spend the rest of your life doing research on relativity. It was just unsolicited advice in response to your blog post. When you get tenure at Harvard, I will be the first to congratulate.

 
At 7:53 PM, March 07, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Ali,

High energy physics is just fading out and unless you have a couple of stellar recommendation letters from big name senior people in your field, it is highly unlikely that you will spend the rest of your life doing research on relativity.

Thanks for your advice. I assure you I will keep my eyes and my mind open wide. Leaving aside my personal future options, I think on a general level both of your above assertions are wrong.

A) I find it likely that collider hep will lose support unless the LHC makes some new discovery beyond the standard model. But hep isn't just collider physics. Many people will swap to astrophysics. Other hep's will swap to high precision measurement in particle physics, the fields are close enough to allow this. Besides this, that kind of change doesn't take place from today to tomorrow. The center of momentum in collider physics is already shifting towards Europe, and the US funding will further make that manifest. The Europeans however have a huge inertia, and there are plenty of hep physicists in influential positions. Things will change, but it will take maybe a decade. (I.e. my generation might just slip through.)

B) GR is a central ingredient to literally every theory of quantum gravity, as well as to astrophysics and cosmology. If anything the field will grow in importance again. Look at all the guys doing stability analysis of higher dimensional black things etc, as well as numerical solutions (black hole mergers), think of the whole gravitational wave sector etc etc.

Best,

B.

 
At 8:16 PM, March 07, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Punk,

Why you cannot work on a beach in Hawaii? It is another country. Canadian govt is only really concerned with you working in Canada (and thus possibly taking away jobs from Canadians).

Well, for one my remark to condition 4. in the work permit was meant as a joke - I just find the wording funny (there is probably some fineprint that clarifies they are talking about paid work).

The Canadian government is probably not only concerned about me taking away jobs from other Canadians, but also about me actually doing the job I am supposed to, i.e. not working meanwhile also for somebody in another country (unless 'authorized' to do so).

My comment above about Hawaii referred to the fact that unless I have a work permit, I am indeed not allowed to work (for money) on a beach in Hawaii. Especially as long as I travel on a visa waiver, this can potentially result in a lot of problems which is likely to induce a whole chain of future visa problems. (That's nothing specific to the USA though. Generally, tourists (though 'legal') aren't just allowed to accept jobs in the country they are visiting.)

Best,

B.

 
At 1:36 AM, March 08, 2008, Blogger amaragraps said...

Dear Bee: You blew me away again. This is one of the most honest and heartfelt descriptions of working in science that I've read on the Internet. Speaking as a mobile researcher myself (and a lot older than you), I would put myself in the place of the the seeds which you have planted already.

(And then you can put all of that travel money you are spending now into savings to build the rest of your life ;-) )

 
At 11:15 AM, March 08, 2008, Anonymous DaveC said...

Hi Bee,

If you ever have a chance to apply to my department I will be jumping up and down in support. You are just the type of colleague I would love to have. Your blog is a source of information and sensible thinking with few peers. I am impressed. Best of luck,

DaveC

 
At 11:24 AM, March 08, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Hi Dave,

I believe your department is on my address list, I expect you to jump in November ;-) Thanks for the nice words. Best,

B.

 
At 11:27 AM, March 08, 2008, Blogger Bee said...

Dear Amara,

The seeds are mobile themselves, so the target is moving. (At least it should be moving.) Thanks for your email,

B.

 
At 10:40 AM, March 19, 2009, Anonymous Academic Career Links said...

You could also consider fellowships in the UK: http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/ResearchFunding/Opportunities/Fellowships/default.htm

 
At 8:38 AM, March 31, 2009, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bee, would you PLEASE care at some point to blog about the "scientific life behind the scenes", the very things you touched upon in your post: how some folks get to get invited lectures and invitations to great places without having any great results to show, etc. And perhaps, on a more positive note, you could share some tips (beyond the standard rejoinders like "Do the great work, and everything will come by itself...") how one can become an invited speaker at the conference without being an organizer's student, etc. Many thanks in advance! You won't believe how many people would appreciate honest advice on these matters!

 

Comment Rules:

  1. Please submit only comments that are related to the topic of the post. To do so, you will have to read it.
  2. Further, please also read the existing comments in order to avoid redundancies.
  3. If you want to introduce a topic different from the one that is posted, please consider starting a blog of your own instead.
  4. Also, this is not an open 'ask-the-expert' forum. If you have a question that is not related to the post, please ask it in a forum that can accomodate random questions.
  5. Do not bother to submit any kind of advertisement, we will delete it immediately.
  6. We hope you help us in maintaining a welcoming and pleasant atmosphere in our comment section.

  7. Thanks!

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Internet Free Zone Level 2

Economic Manhattan Project