Mid-life crisis or good idea?

[RandBlade]

I was recently made redundant and am wondering what to do next. I went to university graduating with a BSc Economics and a MSc Finance and IT but haven't really worked in that field since graduating. While passing the BSc with honours, I didn't get the best results I could have. Under the English grading system I got a 2:2 with a First or 2:1 being required for most good jobs in the industry. I am sure I could have got a First if I had spent less time drinking and goofing off (including at these Forums too often) while being young and out of my parents house for the first time.

I'm 30 now and am considering going back to university, I looked into studying perhaps for a PhD but having been out of academia for a decade am not sure about it. One thing I have started to consider is changing completely and going into science (especially Physics). I have always loved science and was torn between studying Physics or Economics. I'm considering applying for a BSc in Physics though am really torn - it seems perhaps a big step backwards to go back to undergrad studies and am I just being silly to do so? I only know one person who's done their undergrad twice and that was to become a doctor. If I was to do a BSc Physics by the time I'd graduate again I'd be around my 35th birthday.

I have some money saved up from the last decade. Enough to either pay off my mortgage/deposit on bigger house if I don't, or enough to both pay tuition, fees and living expenses throughout for Amanda and I without getting into debt - there might not be much left by the end though. I don't want to rely on any income from Amanda as we're getting married next month and may quite probably want to have kids after that some point in this period.

Is it a realistic idea to start again and go back to uni? To change field? Is it too late?

[Ominous Gamer]

Start again. For the lone fact of seeing how those prices you were quoting the other thread almost never tell the whole story

[Aimless]

It doesn't have to be too late but I honestly don't think you should be getting into physics, and I strongly urge you to paint for yourself a clear, accurate and honest picture of just how rough your life may look like as a married man of 30 and a father to boot slogging your way through uni studies all over again. If the picture looks great and you find something amazing, by all means, go for it. Otherwise consider starting a business or becoming some sort of management consultant or project manager. If you want to conduct research, consider research in those fields or related ones, maybe research into how organisations work. If you want to keep old fashions alive you can focus on tech/science oriented organisations.

All of this is of course easier said than done and in the mean time some form of uni studies may serve to keep your brain alive but whatever you do don't get into physics. I think you've changed too much to try going down that particular path. I'd sooner see you writing up policy documents for a lib-dem think-tank than trying to make it as a physics Ph D

[Aimless]

Also, I'm sorry to hear you were made redundant I got the impression you liked your job even though it meant eating lots of junk food and no doubt had other down-sides both practical and emotional. I hope your sleep-wake cycle hasn't been too perturbed

[RandBlade]

Is there something about Physics itself or do you just think I wouldn't be right for it personally?

I appreciate the honesty, this is a tough decision and I wasn't thinking/expecting along those lines.

[Aimless]

Is there something about Physics itself or do you just think I wouldn't be right for it personally?

Both! Although it's true that people change and some area of physics may offer you a lifetime of inner peace by giving you well-defined ways to systematically discover fairly well-defined truths--as opposed to spending every day using messy processes to create good-enough truths. I admit I have preconceived notions about how a person's career in physics--if he is to be successful--should/must look, and those preconceived notions include starting earlier than 30. At the same time, there are many different jobs for physicists and perhaps my preconceived notions about age need not apply at all to eg. medical physicists and the like.

I gotta wonder, what do you love? What are your motives? Love of science isn't an answer in and of itself. There are aspects of science you love. Which aspects? Of which fields? Of which forms of occupation? Do you like discovering well-defined truths? Do you like translating messy reality into elegant formulae to make better sense of the world and to ferret out the unknown unknowns? Or would you rather bend microbes and enzymes to your will in order to eventually be able to save lives? Do you like competing against others with your ideas and your conception of truth? Or would you be content to be engaged in a a collective effort to just learn more? Do you like solving practical problems in order to find practical answers immediately applicable to real-world endeavours? Or would you be happy with beautiful relaxing blue-skies research? Do you want to play long games or short ones? The same kinds of games or a variety that nevertheless benefit from transferable skills?

Would you like to be working for someone, or would you prefer to be able to strike out kinda on your own after a few years of training and proving yourself? Would you like to be served problems to solve or find them on your own? Would you like to have the chance to become really really rich or would you be happy just having a decent salary as long as you have an excellent job? Do you want to work with something that will inspire all-consuming passion or would you more prefer a job that leaves time and energy and mental resources for enjoying domestic bliss? Do you want collegiality and a sociable climate or would you be able to thrive in greater isolation?

That's a lot of questions. I got a little carried away. Don't let the questions discourage or dissuade you. Use the answers to paint scenes from alternative future lives and ask yourself: which ones would you like to live and why? I really think the why is important, no matter what you end up doing. Most important is understanding why you might want to change from a duty-laden, people-centric, messy and perhaps insufficiently inspiring--but still good--kind of occupation to the kind where you spend years learning how to help some professor mess with the fabric of reality. Do you just want to be left alone to do your own thing for a while? Do you despair of ever getting to work with something that'll excite both you and your family/friends? Do you just want to work with more inspiring and more erudite people?

For what it's worth, I know many people who've switched fields in the way you're considering. Granted many of those have switched to medicine and for most of the obvious reasons, but there are myriad reasons for switching and I haven't yet come across anyone who I'd say was silly to switch. Every single one of these people switched to a life in which they felt more motivated. Perhaps the process of switching in itself helped them feel more motivated by making their life more fully theirs or by providing them with plenty of opportunities to reflect on what they value and why. The point is, apart from practical concerns such as money, age and hanging out with surly obnoxious Brits, switching fields doesn't have to be silly. whew

[Aimless]

I have the perfect occupation for you: a member--and ultimately the leader--of a team of accountants that use creative accounting to facilitate exciting projects geared towards increasing the productivity and the well-being of tech-focused organisations. It's a fuzzy picture but if you fill in the details I think you will agree it's a pretty sweet one. You can call yourselves "The A-Team" and build a new slideshow in every episode

[littlelolligagged]

Education is never a waste, simply for its own sake. Do what you're interested in, find something you love.

Just remember that going back as a proper adult can be a pretty weird experience.

[Loki]

FYI, you'd probably be able to apply for a masters in physics and take some remedial courses.

[Timbuk2]

What lolli said. It's never a waste.

And it's never too late to change direction.

A very capable cousin of mine went from the Royal Engineers in his twenties to Engineering Research in his thirties to going back to uni in his late thirties to study to become a doctor, qualified and became a prosthetics research and development type person in his forties, studied again and is now an obstetrician.

[wiggin]

First things first, RB, I'm sorry you were made redundant - that's a real bummer, and it can lead to all sorts of challenges. I hope that whatever you decide gets sorted out soon to your satisfaction.

As for the rest, I think you really have to just think carefully about what you want to do with your life. I know many people who have reinvented their careers as they went along, but most of them (aside from the occasional person who needs to get a professional qualification like a doctor or lawyer) did it 'on the job', where they just started exploring other working options while being employed, and slowly retrained in that direction. I'm not sure if going back to school for another bachelor's is really such a good plan, then, given the time/money investment and the question over whether you could just retrain while working. The caveat, though, if that most people I know had technical educations, which they followed up with shifts into other aspects of the business - management, marketing, sales, whatever. Going the other direction without a technical background may be much more challenging without the qualification.

I do wonder if it's possible for you to skip most of a bachelor's, though, and just fill in holes in your technical education. A large chunk of a bachelor's can probably overlap between your current degree and your future one, which suggests you could compress a technical degree into a much shorter time frame. You may also be able to avoid a bachelor's entirely and go straight for a master's if you take some background coursework - sorta like a 'postbaccalaureate program', though I don't know if any exist for the kind of field you'r interested in exploring. This may be more valuable than just a bachelor's, and may be faster/cheaper as well.

Technical issues aside, I think you should think very carefully about what you actually want to do before plunging into a new field. Having one's job evolve from one role to another is one thing; it gives you some control over your career direction. But having a sharp break and going full-out into another field doesn't give you much to fall back on if you decide it sucks in the end. Just enjoying a few science classes doesn't mean you'll actually like the kinds of jobs you might do as a graduate with a technical qualification. I'd suggest you talk to people in fields you're interested in, try to get a sense of their day-to-day activities, etc.

Lastly, I think it's really important you have a frank discussion with Amanda about this. I'm sure you already have, but you should emphasize logistical concerns (will you have a student schedule that's less amenable to meshing with a work schedule), life planning issues (kids? how will that work out?), financial issues (do you really have enough money for this? what's the opportunity cost?), and more. I'm sure she's supportive, but she should be in the decision loop on something this important.

I've probably got more thoughts on this, but I haven't sorted them out yet. So I hope this helps at least a little bit. No matter what you choose, I hope it works out, and we'll be cheering for you!

[Lewkowski]

Education is never a waste, simply for its own sake. Do what you're interested in, find something you love.

Just remember that going back as a proper adult can be a pretty weird experience.

Opportunity Cost can make anything a waste...

[Lebanese Dragon]

Is there something about Physics itself or do you just think I wouldn't be right for it personally

I agree with Minx here. Not saying you'd be bad at it. I just don't know the future in this field for you. I don't really like it. If it was like architecture some field with a clear career path, I'd be more supportive. Perhaps getting a higher level of education like a PHD in a field you already know (have a good resume for), would be the best option and maybe you can get an even higher paying job than the one you had. I know you'll be fine RB, you're smart guy. I think I could beat you in an RTS though .

[Aimless]

I have it

Option 1: Some sort of food science followed by some sort of food business

The kind where you get to immerse yourself in the chemistry of food, apply some basic physics, tap into a bit of engineering, do a great deal of market research, develop crazy creative ideas and oh yeah make good food up to 10% of the time. You can have a small café of sorts on the side and sell experiments to hipsters. Evenings you can entertain the missus with your latest discoveries. You guys can travel the world to sample great food at the source.

Option 2: evil supervillain Ã* la Dr. Horrible. Leverages both chemistry and physics to a great extent

Option 3: urban planner. Once you're done you guys can move to Milton Keynes and fix it.

Option 4: Statistician working with scientists. You can exercise your judgement but still feel secure in the knowledge that you at least won't have to bullshit because the correct approach, however difficult it may be to discern, is nevertheless fairly well defined and can be clearly identified. You can work as a consultant and guide lost sheep and then you can come home and just enjoy coffee and games of chance with your family

[Flixy]

Sorry to hear about your redundancy.

On the one hand, I am inclined to say, go for your dreams, if it's what you want you should definitely do it. But I do think you should think carefully before making such a big step. Out of curiosity, why physics? Or other science, for that matter. Is it just because you like science, or do you actually want to do research? If it's the first, I'm not sure it might be worth spending so much money and time on a degree in it. While a degree in science does make you pretty employable even outside science careers, that is in a large part because the education (supposedly ) makes you good at creative thinking and handling complex problems. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you had management jobs, right? Which sounds to me like you already have those skills from work experience. Wiggin might be right though that it is easier to roll from a technical education into management/finance/etc than the other way around, so maybe it is still worth getting a new degree if you would like a career with a more technical side, even if it's not doing research yourself. With the BSc/MSc programs we have here you would not need a master's degree for that, I think - after a BSc in physics you're pretty well rounded, MSc is mostly specialization in a research field, which is not that important if you do not plan to do actual research.

If you do want to get into actual scientific research, you have to ask yourself if you really have the drive for that. You say you love science, but that's not necessarily enough. I mean, I love science, I study physics for a reason, but one thing I have learned while studying here is that people who go into research and are good at it, are, well, really driven. While I like reading about science in the newspaper or blogs or online articles, it does pretty much end there, I don't read research papers and publications for leisure. The researchers here do, they live for their jobs. It seems to be not so much a job for them, but a calling. To be honest, when I figured this out this worked pretty.. demotivating on me, so at least you are warned now

I am meeting with some recruiters next week actually, was planning to ask them about science-related-but-not-actual-research-jobs, and whether an MSc in physics is required for that kind of stuff, if you want I can let you know what they say?

FYI, you'd probably be able to apply for a masters in physics and take some remedial courses.

While that obviously depends from country to country (and possibly university to university), I do think 'some' remedial courses is a little bit of an understatement. Over here at least, even if you come straight from vocational college and have a Bachelor of Applied Science in physics, you still have to do a full one year special program before being admitted to a MSc in applied physics - and that's after a (professional/vocational) bachelor degree in a science direction, not after a degree in finance. There simply is a lot of math and physics to catch up on, not to mention experimenting skills and learning how to write scientific reports. Only a BSc in applied physics will get you straight in.

[Aimless]

This may also be appealing:

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

I know a couple of people who've studied this, and I know they're using their education in their current positions, but I unfortunately have no frickin' idea what it is exactly that they do. Nevertheless I have no doubt there are applications out there that would let you leverage your existing training in finance and IT as well as your experience with management and possibly even drunken cross-dressing

[Loki]

While that obviously depends from country to country (and possibly university to university), I do think 'some' remedial courses is a little bit of an understatement. Over here at least, even if you come straight from vocational college and have a Bachelor of Applied Science in physics, you still have to do a full one year special program before being admitted to a MSc in applied physics - and that's after a (professional/vocational) bachelor degree in a science direction, not after a degree in finance. There simply is a lot of math and physics to catch up on, not to mention experimenting skills and learning how to write scientific reports. Only a BSc in applied physics will get you straight in.

Rand has a masters in economics. I'm assuming that he already knows most of the required math. As far as I know, physics at the undergrad level isn't much more math-intensive than quantitative economics. He'd obviously need to catch up on the physics, and it probably would take a year to do so. But presumably it's better to get a masters in 2-3 years than to start from scratch and take 4-5 years. This is all under the assumption that Rand knows what he wants.

Rand, I think you should sit down and think about what kind of career you'd want. Contact people who are already in that career; we even have quite a few people working in science-related fields here. There's frequently a mismatch between what people think they'd do in career x and what they'd actually have to do. Once you're 99% certain about your end goal (no one's ever 100% sure), start figuring out the most efficient way of getting there. Only at that point does it really make sense to start talking about shortcuts and so on.

[Flixy]

Rand has a masters in economics. I'm assuming that he already knows most of the required math. As far as I know, physics at the undergrad level isn't much more math-intensive than quantitative economics. He'd obviously need to catch up on the physics, and it probably would take a year to do so. But presumably it's better to get a masters in 2-3 years than to start from scratch and take 4-5 years. This is all under the assumption that Rand knows what he wants.

Like I said, it probably differs from place to place, but over here it's like I said (I doubt you will get more than a year's worth of exemptions). It's not just more math intensive but also different math. And yeah, presumably better, but I wanted to warn it's not to be underestimated. And considering a master's degree is less about the basis of physics but more about specialization I would recommend doing the whole thing, but again that depends on the curriculum of your university.

[Dreadnaught]

I am inclined to agree with the gist Aimless' first post. I know it's very unsettling to lose a job, and I get the temptation to try and re-start everything.

But the truth is you've developed a great set of experiences and skills over the past ~10 years of work, plus with all your education. Surely there is another job somewhere on the horizon around the corner that would work well for you? It may just be too early in the morning after the post-redundancy night to even see where the horizon starts right now. <-- I know, shitty metaphor.

[GGT]

Is it a realistic idea to start again and go back to uni? To change field? Is it too late?

It's never too late to do either. You'll be 35 years old one day, whether you return to school or not. Since the 80's/90's, people have been changing career tracks at least three times over their life span, and working well past age 65. That's the new normal. Changing 'fields' doesn't have to mean getting an entirely new degree, though. Flexibility, adaptability, and innovation are the important skills.

Echoing what others have said, take some time to think it over, and discuss it at length with Amanda. Since you're going to be partners, and possibly parents, one suggestion I'd make is that her education/qualifications be as strong as yours. If she doesn't have a university degree, maybe she should get hers first before you get your second? That way, in tight times and tough job markets, your odds are better that at least one of you is gainfully employed....and hopefully above minimum wage. You can still take some uni-level Physics classes in the interim, without committing to the whole undergrad program.

That said, you never struck me as a Physics guy. Maybe it's this forum's topics, or your previous education and career.....but your penchant for math/numbers leans heavily toward economics and finance, ie money-systems. minx's link on Systems Science was interesting. Have you thought about Engineering 'sub-fields' that would combine your current skills with some kind of applied Physics?

You'd be great at combining logistics, time/efficiency management, technology, with an emphasis in economy and finance, in the global food service industry.

[GGT]

Also, most people experience a "life transition" around age 30, but it's not a mid-life crisis. Just sayin'.

[Wraith]

Sorry to hear you were made redundant, Rand. Do what you need to, but if I were you, I'd be pretty nervous about the prospect of starting all over. If you do decide to go back to school, maybe investigate degrees that will complement the ones you already have? I know there are some hard to fill jobs (and thus very well paid jobs) out there that often require two different degrees/backgrounds. Law, for example, goes well with just about anything.

[wiggin]

Probably want degrees that would complement his current one. The only way I can think of a degree complimenting another one is if it's so bad that it makes the first one look good in comparison.

[Loki]

Time for a ban, methinks.

[Timbuk2]

Yeah it's been a while.

[earthJoker]

Sorry to hear about your redundancy RB.

I agree with Wraith about the complement thing. I don't see how a scientific job goes that well with your economic and finance experience. Now if you where interested in engineering on the other hand, that would make a perfect fit.

I am biased in this, as an engineer myself I think (as many of my field) that it is the most interesting job in existence with and gets you a very good pay . Also it is quite close to the scientific fields. As a downside, you might will end up doing the just project management and finances in a tech company

[Khendraja'aro]

Well, at least then there would be someone in charge who at least knows something about the area he manages. Nothing worse than a penny pincher who doesn't have a clue

[RandBlade]

I hadn't really thought about Engineering, I suppose that is a more practical side. This may sound like a dumb question but what sort of opportunities are there with Engineering? What is it like in practice?

[Aimless]

Well, you know how they that the pessimist sees the glass as half full and the optimist sees it as half filled? Well, the engineer sees it as being twice as big as it needs to be

[earthJoker]

Well, at least then there would be someone in charge who at least knows something about the area he manages. Nothing worse than a penny pincher who doesn't have a clue

Indeed and that's exactly why this combination is so valuable.

I hadn't really thought about Engineering, I suppose that is a more practical side. This may sound like a dumb question but what sort of opportunities are there with Engineering? What is it like in practice?

Well, thousands. First you would need to ask yourself what kind of physics that you like can be used in engineering. Than think of your branch:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ering_branches

I am totally a electronic guy and if you look what role electronic devices play in the current world, you don't have to think twice about how many possible jobs I could to. But I would not underestimate the opportunities in the other fields. Mechanical engineering might sound old fashioned, but new materials like carbon fiber has let to new ways of construction.

In practice I see my job as very product centered, it is very much about the path from problem to solution. You start by finding our what the problem is, sometimes the hardest part as tasks are often not well defined. From there you start searching for previous solutions for similar problems. You need than to pick your solution, either by formal analysis or from experience (or both). Then you start implementing and finally test your work against your expectations. All this is a continuous task. Your task might change during implementations, new problems or specification are added to your task. Test might show you some faults in your analysis. Then you need to redo some of your work, but hopefully not all.

One of the things I like the most is that you can quickly see how your work improves. You start with an unsolved problem and step by step you end up by something that works. And a good engineer always ends up with something that works or with a clear statement why it doesn't or even better why it can't work. This is quite important if you think about becoming an engineer, you need deep inner interest in understanding how things work, why things work and why some don't. And you will sometime hate your job if things don't work as you want to and finding out why they don't work is probably one of the hardest task. Fining new solutions is also hard but it is far more enjoyable. And you will never search for the same solution twice, but you will search for the same errors over and over again.

And as I said, you earn good money, at least in the field of electronics and I think also in mechanics. The reason is simple, there is a much higher demand then there are good engineers. Of course this implies that you are good in what you do.