<p>Sorry for the above statement. I did not mean good research scientists in engineering. I just meant that engineering, at least from what I see in my college, is a popular major, as opposed to the very few who are doing pure sciences. </p>
<p>I think I would probably enjoy working in a lab much more, but I don’t know if their research necessarily involves the more theoretical side of physics, and especially pure mathematics. </p>
<p>Just wondering though, how come most individuals/groups that receive awards are often professors, or groups working in universities, and not those in national labs. I would think that those that spend the major portion of their time doing research, would be able to find more novel things related to the field. Do they also conduct as many seminars or talks as professors do? Or it may be as you said, that they can’t publish all their results in math or physics journals.</p>
<p>National labs often cannot publish their work except in internal journals, so it their scientists aren’t eligible for things like the Nobel Prize. After all, the Nobel committee doesn’t even know about it, as that would defeat the purpose of classifying it in the first place. It is just one price you have to pay for the benefits of working in a national lab.</p>
<p>I see a few scientists working in labs that did win a few awards. And, searching around, I see that some scientists often work on their projects in addition to their duty in the lab. I don’t really see any reason for one inclined only towards research to work in academia and not in the lab unless they also want to teach.</p>
<p>Like I said, there are certain advantages to being able to research anything you want and that you can get funded. Research is very expensive, and difficult to finance as an individual not affiliated with some sort of research institution, so it would be difficult to do side projects of the large scope typically tackled at national labs or universities. Smaller projects would maybe be doable but you’d likely have to finance them yourself.</p>
<p>Oh. So it wouldn’t make much sense to work both in academia and lab right? I see a lot of postdoctoral and scientist positions at labs for theoretical physics but not as much for pure math like topics professors usually work on.</p>
<p>Are topics in pure mathematics like number theory, analysis, or algebra accessible in national laboratories though? It seems like national labs emphasize more on practicality, and not many, if at all, delve into purely theoretical things that don’t as of now, have any direct practical application.</p>
<p>Does the NSA count as a national lab?</p>
<p>If so then yes. Very much so.</p>
<p>Thanks for pointing that out. Just one more question that I’ve also been wondering about. Is it harder to switch between research fields or work in multiple fields of research at the same time in a national laboratory? I would be interested in working in multiple fields, or interdisciplinary fields with both pure mathematics and theoretical physics, and I’m not sure whether being a professor or working at a national lab would be better for such interests, even though it does seem that the latter is the more favorable option if I was not interested in teaching at all.</p>
<p>There are various kinds of national laboratories. The more defense oriented ones like Los Alamos, Sandia, and Lawrence Livermore have classified and non-classified sections. Those like Argonne, NREL, Brookhaven, and Lawrence Berkeley are more open and they have user facilities which involve researchers from universities. Finally there are more single purpose labs like Fermilab and JLab which are practically all particle and nuclear physics and they are almost completely open and involve university researchers. The labs I have mentioned are all Department of Energy Labs. There are also military labs and labs run by NASA and the EPA for example.</p>
<p>I would say that most scientists at national labs publish significantly and it is not too hard to do so. At Argonne, which is a lab I know quite well, publications are extremely important for building careers and getting promotions. In addition, these researchers need to generate funds for their research by writing proposals both internal and external to the agency they belong to. In the case of Department of Energy labs, there is also the factor that the labs are officially run by universities and private companies. Argonne is operated by the University of Chicago and Lawrence Berkeley is operated by U.C. Berkeley. Scientists at national Labs usually supervise postdoctoral researchers rather than graduate students but that is not always true. However, since the labs do not grant degrees, the students are affiliated with a university and have an academic advisor as well as a lab advisor.</p>
<p>@boneh3ad is pretty much right on with his characterization of the differences between a university researcher and a lab researcher. They both need to publish and get grant funding and a lot of excellent research is done in both places but I would say that the labs have a more mission-oriented focus to their research than a university might and of course there are no formal teaching obligations.</p>
<p>There are a number of university professors who have a joint appointment with a national lab. This is pretty common at Lawrence Berkeley and have been growing at Argonne and FermiLab. At my university, Illinois Tech, we have two joint appointments in physics with FermiLab, one in Chemistry with Argonne, and one in Physics with the Idaho National Laboratory. Other universities have the same. Furthermore, since a number of universities (IIT among them) operate experimental facilities at synchrotron sources such as the Advanced Photon Source, they have university employees who are permanently located at the national lab.</p>
<p>Now for your very last question, there are positions in both national labs and in universities for interdisciplinary research in theoretical physics and mathematics but, frankly, a pure mathematician is probably more likely to be found in a university because of the mission orientation of the labs.</p>
<p>Thanks a lot. What would you suggest more for me? Do I have to be a professor in order to do the kind of wide research I would want, or have joint appointments, or just work in a national lab.</p>
<p>Since you are just now in your third (second?) year of college, my advice is not to fret too much about it. There is along road ahead before you get to that point. First, do all the things you are doing now, get good grades, study what you are most interested in, get research experience, get to know your professors (who will provide you with letter so of reference and good advice). </p>
<p>Next, apply to strong graduate programs in your field of interest, be it mathematics or physics (or both). Once you decide where to go for your Ph.D. it will take about 5-6 years before you finish and by that time, you will have a much clearer idea of what you want to do as a career. You will also have gained additional mentors and advisors who can help you.</p>
<p>Then if you want to pursue a research career, you will have to do at least one postdoctoral research stint for a few years. During this time, you will have new mentors and more experience in managing a research program on your own.</p>
<p>Finally, you will have to decide on a national lab, university, or industrial position and the years you have spent refining your research skills and learning from your mentors will be essential for your decision making. Who know what you will decide? A lot can change in that time and you might even find yourself in a completely different field than the one you envision now. I wanted to be a particle theorist when I left for graduate school 36 years ago, I found myself getting a Ph.D. in experimental condensed mater physics and now, after 30 years in a faculty position, I am working simultaneously on x-ray physics, condensed matter physics and materials science, and electrochemistry (batteries and fuel cells) as well as the occasional foray into archaeometry. You never really know where you will go but if the ride is fun, who cares! </p>
<p>PS - I was a double major in physics and chemistry as an undergraduate and I took lots of computer science and electrical engineering courses for “fun”. All of those have contributed to my career…</p>