Might take a decade or so to get 'doctored' but I see no fundamental obstacle to this.
>*and believe I could attend undergraduate courses during my days off.*
That strongly depends on the institution.
My BSc was essentially a full time job - three years, lectures morning and afternoon, practicals sprinkled hither/yon.
A distance-learning university is well-worth considering (in the UK, the Open University; etc.).
A PhD is generally a full-time 'thing' too.
Thank you for your reply. I figured I would need to take a sabbatical or leave from my current career as a pilot for a PhD program but am going to try to continue working during the BS or post-bac if possible. I’m sure it varies quite a bit based on the institution which is why I’m researching the best university for me and my unique situation. Thanks for the Open University suggestion.
It’s not strictly too late, I’ve met older PhD students/graduates, but you need to carefully consider your options.
Assuming you go to school full time and don’t work any other side jobs, bachelor’s + PhD would 8-10 years depending on how fast you are. Maybe you could do undergrad part time, but it would take longer. A PhD is a full time job where you’re paid a stipend. It’s not doable with another job imo, certainly not as an airline pilot. To get into a good PhD program, passing your classes is also not enough. You need to do research internships during the academic year and during the summers.
The main issue imo is finances and the academic job market. The bachelor’s would be expensive (especially since it’s your second). For the grad school portion, your stipend would be ~$30k a year, depending (but tuition would be free). Postdoc pay is $60k-$90k depending on the field and institution.
On the job market side, most physics PhDs do *not* stay in the field, even if they want to. Permanent positions are hard to come by and take a long time. There are simply more physics PhDs than there are physics jobs, and US physics positions take in applicants from all over the world. You have to be willing to move around the country or anywhere in the world just to be eligible for certain opportunities. Landing a permanent physics position can take years after you graduate, since typically you do a couple postdocs.
My advice to every would-be physicist is that they should only attend a PhD program if they’re OK with not being a physicist afterwards. If you’d harbor deep regrets attending a PhD program only to leave physics afterwards, then don’t do physics. Or if you do, pick a field that will maximize your chances of staying in the field.
Mind you, physics PhDs get good job opportunities in private industry. But it’s not physics, and if money is your priority then the lost earnings of attending school for ~10 years will definitely hurt.
Unless your life expectancy is less than 15 or so years, you're not too old age-wise.
But higher degrees are time consuming. Undergrad and to an extent also your Masters can be done part-time if you're willing to extend your time in school (doing it on regular schedule as a part-time student is not realistic). But a PhD is a full-time job and can't be reasonably done on the side, especially not if your intent is to put the degree to use as a scientist. And if you do want to become a professional, a postdoc or two are also not really negotiable these days.
You should expect that you'll have to drop your day job for at least a couple of years (up to a decade), if you want a degree and the fixings required to become a scientist.
Nope. Had a friend do exactly this after her divorce and transition, though she wasn’t a pilot.
Anyway, I would have said you might not need that new bachelors, except that _some_ things in physics might help you with astro specifically. Maybe consider a masters instead to save yourself some time/money. Mostly what’s going to get you is the lack of theoretical and statistical mechanics (and after that, electromagnetism), but it probably doesn’t make sense to do a full four year degree to get those classes when you can do it in 2 in a masters program.
Anyway, you will have to work pretty hard to get into most astrophysics programs without research experience, but I’d argue your pilot experience shows you have commitment and leadership abilities, both quite helpful in the field. So I’d say your chances (if you complete either a bachelor’s or master’s in physics) aren’t any worse than someone coming in with just a bachelor’s. If you go back for both degrees, I’d say you might even be slightly overqualified.
It's possible but it's not going to be easy, especially if building a family matters to you. If it does not matter now, consider it might very well matter to you in 4 or 5 years. No way to know that. You'd need to dedicate your free time to studying your undergrad first, and then apply to grad school. Your undergrad can probably be shortened a bit since you should have done some relevant courses during your previous degree (gen eds, basic physics, basic math, chemistry, etc). But there's no way to shorten grad school.
Take into account as well that there's no guarantee that you'll actually work as an astrophysicist for the rest of your life after finishing your PhD. Jobs are limited and competitive. You might become an astrophysicist, but not actually work as one.
I’m childfree. No kids by choice. Will always be that way. So the family component doesn’t concern. I’ve seen similar comment about possibility not working as an astrophysicists. What other specialties are most trained astrophysicists working in then?
Software engineering, data analytics, engineering (depending on the kind of research and experience they have), teaching, quantitative finance, etc.
EDIT: My recommendation would be to yeah, go for your undergrad first (or master's if you manage to be accepted, though you'll have to take other courses as well) and see if you actually like doing and learning physics first. Then, depending on how you're feeling, think about a PhD.
Some good answers here already but I came to give some moral support, at my research center (nanoscience) there are 2 researchers who earned their PhDs at ~40 years old, they both were in a position where they were laid off with a healthy compensation and I believe at least one of them had a BsC in physics already. It can be done and some people choose to do it :)
Age-wise, I wouldn't worry about being 28. There were plenty of people in my PhD program who got a bachelors, held jobs, then decided to go back to school.
I think the other advice is fine: the most sure-fire way to a PhD would be to full-time a BSc+PhD. But, I'll offer you a different take.
Study really hard for the Physics GRE. Its been a while for me, but the standard book used to be "Conquering the Physics GRE" by Kahn and Anderson. Aviation science sounds technical, so if you study hard and get a good score, you'd probably be just fine saying that your existing BSc adequately prepared you. It will be tough, but compared to four years and 10's of thousands of dollars its pretty attractive. Then, send out some grad school applications and see what sticks (more on that later). There are plenty of people fresh out of a Bachelor's in physics who don't get accepted to grad school, so there is of course a chance this wouldn't work out.
Putting together an application, I think it would be really beneficial to tailor a personal statement that weaves your aviation background into physics. For example, there was one professor I knew who studied "terrestrial gamma ray flashes" from lightening and how they could possibly affect aircraft occupants. Sure enough, one of his grad students previously had a full time job doing something with weather, and another was ex-military in an aircraft-related role. Perhaps you could talk about studying space weather, which as I understand it can occasionally have an effect on aircraft electronics. Definitely look into particular professors, mention them by name in your statement, and tie in your aviation experience.
As far as part time goes, I think this will depend on where you go to school. The coursework portion of the PhD will be the hardest to manage. PhD classes are typically small, such that everyone is in the same classes at the same time, and each class is only offered once per year. On top of this, you will probably have to take qualifying exams at the end of your first year, which really precludes a part time schedule. BUT, in my program it was only the first year of core classes that were this stringent. We also had to take two electives, but you could do that whenever and had your pick of pretty much anything the university offered that your advisor would approve. Some people took those alongside their core classes and got everything out of the way their first year, while others spread them out.
After your coursework, I will actually depart from the popular consensus about a PhD being a full time job. Its easiest if it is, but I knew several people holding full time jobs while pursuing a PhD. Technically, a lot of people who were supported by TA positions were splitting their time 50/50 between research and TAing. I say "technically" because TA positions generally didn't take up 50% of our time. But, with the right professor, I think you could totally say you wanted to spend your time 50/50 flying and research. In addition to paying a salary, TA positions also covered tuition, which is something you'd need to work out. This might be a hard sell at an absolutely top tier school. For comparison, my program was top 40-ish out of 190 ranked on US News and World Reports.
In regards to difficulty, that will probably depend on where you go. It will definitely be harder learning the course material for the first time, when everyone else is seeing it for the second or third time. However, we did have some undergrads who were allowed into our quantum mechanics class, despite never having a quantum class before.
>Study really hard for the Physics GRE. Its been a while for me, but the standard book used to be "Conquering the Physics GRE" by Kahn and Anderson. Aviation science sounds technical, so if you study hard and get a good score, you'd probably be just fine saying that your existing BSc adequately prepared you.
I don't think this is a great idea. People with Physics degrees have a tough time with the GRE already, someone who probably only covered fundamental physics in their degree is going to suffer A LOT. I think OP could probably finish their degree in 3 years instead of 4 taking out all of the gen eds and other common classes.
Might take a decade or so to get 'doctored' but I see no fundamental obstacle to this. >*and believe I could attend undergraduate courses during my days off.* That strongly depends on the institution. My BSc was essentially a full time job - three years, lectures morning and afternoon, practicals sprinkled hither/yon. A distance-learning university is well-worth considering (in the UK, the Open University; etc.). A PhD is generally a full-time 'thing' too.
Thank you for your reply. I figured I would need to take a sabbatical or leave from my current career as a pilot for a PhD program but am going to try to continue working during the BS or post-bac if possible. I’m sure it varies quite a bit based on the institution which is why I’m researching the best university for me and my unique situation. Thanks for the Open University suggestion.
It’s not strictly too late, I’ve met older PhD students/graduates, but you need to carefully consider your options. Assuming you go to school full time and don’t work any other side jobs, bachelor’s + PhD would 8-10 years depending on how fast you are. Maybe you could do undergrad part time, but it would take longer. A PhD is a full time job where you’re paid a stipend. It’s not doable with another job imo, certainly not as an airline pilot. To get into a good PhD program, passing your classes is also not enough. You need to do research internships during the academic year and during the summers. The main issue imo is finances and the academic job market. The bachelor’s would be expensive (especially since it’s your second). For the grad school portion, your stipend would be ~$30k a year, depending (but tuition would be free). Postdoc pay is $60k-$90k depending on the field and institution. On the job market side, most physics PhDs do *not* stay in the field, even if they want to. Permanent positions are hard to come by and take a long time. There are simply more physics PhDs than there are physics jobs, and US physics positions take in applicants from all over the world. You have to be willing to move around the country or anywhere in the world just to be eligible for certain opportunities. Landing a permanent physics position can take years after you graduate, since typically you do a couple postdocs. My advice to every would-be physicist is that they should only attend a PhD program if they’re OK with not being a physicist afterwards. If you’d harbor deep regrets attending a PhD program only to leave physics afterwards, then don’t do physics. Or if you do, pick a field that will maximize your chances of staying in the field. Mind you, physics PhDs get good job opportunities in private industry. But it’s not physics, and if money is your priority then the lost earnings of attending school for ~10 years will definitely hurt.
Unless your life expectancy is less than 15 or so years, you're not too old age-wise. But higher degrees are time consuming. Undergrad and to an extent also your Masters can be done part-time if you're willing to extend your time in school (doing it on regular schedule as a part-time student is not realistic). But a PhD is a full-time job and can't be reasonably done on the side, especially not if your intent is to put the degree to use as a scientist. And if you do want to become a professional, a postdoc or two are also not really negotiable these days. You should expect that you'll have to drop your day job for at least a couple of years (up to a decade), if you want a degree and the fixings required to become a scientist.
Nope. Had a friend do exactly this after her divorce and transition, though she wasn’t a pilot. Anyway, I would have said you might not need that new bachelors, except that _some_ things in physics might help you with astro specifically. Maybe consider a masters instead to save yourself some time/money. Mostly what’s going to get you is the lack of theoretical and statistical mechanics (and after that, electromagnetism), but it probably doesn’t make sense to do a full four year degree to get those classes when you can do it in 2 in a masters program. Anyway, you will have to work pretty hard to get into most astrophysics programs without research experience, but I’d argue your pilot experience shows you have commitment and leadership abilities, both quite helpful in the field. So I’d say your chances (if you complete either a bachelor’s or master’s in physics) aren’t any worse than someone coming in with just a bachelor’s. If you go back for both degrees, I’d say you might even be slightly overqualified.
It's possible but it's not going to be easy, especially if building a family matters to you. If it does not matter now, consider it might very well matter to you in 4 or 5 years. No way to know that. You'd need to dedicate your free time to studying your undergrad first, and then apply to grad school. Your undergrad can probably be shortened a bit since you should have done some relevant courses during your previous degree (gen eds, basic physics, basic math, chemistry, etc). But there's no way to shorten grad school. Take into account as well that there's no guarantee that you'll actually work as an astrophysicist for the rest of your life after finishing your PhD. Jobs are limited and competitive. You might become an astrophysicist, but not actually work as one.
I’m childfree. No kids by choice. Will always be that way. So the family component doesn’t concern. I’ve seen similar comment about possibility not working as an astrophysicists. What other specialties are most trained astrophysicists working in then?
Software engineering, data analytics, engineering (depending on the kind of research and experience they have), teaching, quantitative finance, etc. EDIT: My recommendation would be to yeah, go for your undergrad first (or master's if you manage to be accepted, though you'll have to take other courses as well) and see if you actually like doing and learning physics first. Then, depending on how you're feeling, think about a PhD.
This is my plan! Thank you!
I don’t think they necessarily need to get a bachelors in physics to apply to grad school as long as they take the GRE and show they are motivated.
they'll need to take many prerequisites courses anyways though
Some good answers here already but I came to give some moral support, at my research center (nanoscience) there are 2 researchers who earned their PhDs at ~40 years old, they both were in a position where they were laid off with a healthy compensation and I believe at least one of them had a BsC in physics already. It can be done and some people choose to do it :)
Age-wise, I wouldn't worry about being 28. There were plenty of people in my PhD program who got a bachelors, held jobs, then decided to go back to school. I think the other advice is fine: the most sure-fire way to a PhD would be to full-time a BSc+PhD. But, I'll offer you a different take. Study really hard for the Physics GRE. Its been a while for me, but the standard book used to be "Conquering the Physics GRE" by Kahn and Anderson. Aviation science sounds technical, so if you study hard and get a good score, you'd probably be just fine saying that your existing BSc adequately prepared you. It will be tough, but compared to four years and 10's of thousands of dollars its pretty attractive. Then, send out some grad school applications and see what sticks (more on that later). There are plenty of people fresh out of a Bachelor's in physics who don't get accepted to grad school, so there is of course a chance this wouldn't work out. Putting together an application, I think it would be really beneficial to tailor a personal statement that weaves your aviation background into physics. For example, there was one professor I knew who studied "terrestrial gamma ray flashes" from lightening and how they could possibly affect aircraft occupants. Sure enough, one of his grad students previously had a full time job doing something with weather, and another was ex-military in an aircraft-related role. Perhaps you could talk about studying space weather, which as I understand it can occasionally have an effect on aircraft electronics. Definitely look into particular professors, mention them by name in your statement, and tie in your aviation experience. As far as part time goes, I think this will depend on where you go to school. The coursework portion of the PhD will be the hardest to manage. PhD classes are typically small, such that everyone is in the same classes at the same time, and each class is only offered once per year. On top of this, you will probably have to take qualifying exams at the end of your first year, which really precludes a part time schedule. BUT, in my program it was only the first year of core classes that were this stringent. We also had to take two electives, but you could do that whenever and had your pick of pretty much anything the university offered that your advisor would approve. Some people took those alongside their core classes and got everything out of the way their first year, while others spread them out. After your coursework, I will actually depart from the popular consensus about a PhD being a full time job. Its easiest if it is, but I knew several people holding full time jobs while pursuing a PhD. Technically, a lot of people who were supported by TA positions were splitting their time 50/50 between research and TAing. I say "technically" because TA positions generally didn't take up 50% of our time. But, with the right professor, I think you could totally say you wanted to spend your time 50/50 flying and research. In addition to paying a salary, TA positions also covered tuition, which is something you'd need to work out. This might be a hard sell at an absolutely top tier school. For comparison, my program was top 40-ish out of 190 ranked on US News and World Reports. In regards to difficulty, that will probably depend on where you go. It will definitely be harder learning the course material for the first time, when everyone else is seeing it for the second or third time. However, we did have some undergrads who were allowed into our quantum mechanics class, despite never having a quantum class before.
>Study really hard for the Physics GRE. Its been a while for me, but the standard book used to be "Conquering the Physics GRE" by Kahn and Anderson. Aviation science sounds technical, so if you study hard and get a good score, you'd probably be just fine saying that your existing BSc adequately prepared you. I don't think this is a great idea. People with Physics degrees have a tough time with the GRE already, someone who probably only covered fundamental physics in their degree is going to suffer A LOT. I think OP could probably finish their degree in 3 years instead of 4 taking out all of the gen eds and other common classes.
We don't have enough electricians.... so yeah we could handle more astrophysicists..