<p>Would these combo work well as a set-up to go into a graduate program in nuclear engineering? I'll be going to the University of Maryland this fall, and they do not offer nuclear engineering as an undergraduate major.</p>
<p>I imagine most nuclear engineering grad programs have a lot of students that weren’t nuclear engineering undergrads due to the lack of schools that offer it as an undergrad major. Short answer: should be fine.</p>
<p>I would recommend an undergrad in mechanical paired with a nuclear graduate degree. There are lots of MEs in the nuclear industry.</p>
<p>Yeah, Physics+NucE(minor) should work just fine. NucE is sort of interdisciplinary anyway, and your background in Physics - esp. modern and atomic physics - will give you a leg up compared to people without that background (most engineering disciplines I’m aware of, save for Engineering Physics maybe).</p>
<p>Alright, thanks, I should be able to work this out then. I was going to go to either MIT or GaTech for NucE, but a situation came up, lol.</p>
<p>just so you know, if you plan to get an engineering job after getting your BS, then majoring in physics is a terrible idea if you don’t have an engineering background. By the time i wanted to switch out of physics and go into engineering, i was only a few classes away from finishing my major so i kept with physics. Now i just graduated, and have applied to 100s of mechanical engineering positions and can’t get hired, even though i’ve done research projects in physics, have an internship in operations research, and have a solid programming background, so i’ve been reduced to taking engineering classes even though i already got my BA in physics</p>
<p>BA? Wouldn’t that be a BS?</p>
<p>Well, most science programs will have a BS and a BA route, depending on how many required courses there are, etc. There’s really no hard and fast difference between the two as far as I’m aware, although some people feel that the BA designation is a turn off because, well, you’d think a degree in a science major would be a BS, and people who think highly of “sciences” tend to devalue the intellectual rigor associated with “arts”.</p>
<p>I don’t think majoring in Physics is a terrible idea for the OP. S/he wants to go to graduate school, first off, and after admitting that, all bets are off as far as undergraduate major is concerned. It will be more a question of research experience and coursework at that point. And even for getting a job in nuclear engineering, well, not everybody even has bachelor’s programs in NukE. I’d wager that anybody hiring NukEs probably accepts applicants with an appropriate background, rather than focusing on specific degrees. Of course, since demand is so much lower for NukE than for MechE, perhaps it does matter? I don’t know.</p>
<p>I think it’s it a good plan. What area of Nuclear Engineering are you interested in?</p>
<p>I’d think ChemE would be a superior undergraduate major than either Physics or ME if preparing for NucE. That’s just my first inclination with very little research.</p>
<p>Yes, ME or physics</p>
<p>Mr Payne, just curious… why ChemE? That’s definitely not one I would have thought of. Even EE seems more applicable to NukE to me than does ChemE…</p>
<p>Hey, that’s funny. I am majoring in Chem E and for Grad school I plan on doing Nuclear Engineering.</p>
<p>There was a breadth of people in my Nuc E class from EE, ME, Chem E…it doesn’t really matter sense it boils down to a common transition from classical to modern physics. Same concepts of physics (conservation of energy, modes of energy transport) but presented differently accounting for Relativistic Effects (Einsteins special theory of relativity)</p>
<p>I was only saying ME is because without any knowledge of Nuc E you can still get hired in the industry; where there are enormous steam driven turbines ME’s will be there. </p>
<p>But if you want to do research on the development of next gen. reactors, then no matter if your an ME or EE or whatever you’ve gotta go to grad school for Nuc E or Physics and make that transition I mentioned earlier. </p>
<p>BTW, I’m highly skeptical of the field though, the material fascinated the heck out of me, and the job would be rewarding, but the politics involved suck big time.</p>
<p>I think the skeptics are going to die down with a new generation entering the world of politics and the workforce. The doubts about nuclear power were caused by things that happened in the past, but this fear is going to diminish quickly once the powers that be realize that it is by far the more efficient and environmentally friendly energy source. The fact is nuclear power has great potential and once the fear is gone there will be a huge shift in our energy production. This is what has prompted me to study undergrad NukE. Even if this shift does not happen in the near future, there are still plenty of other exciting opportunities in this field.</p>
<p>No doubt what you say is true, the nuclear renaissance is real…and there are plenty of other exciting opportunities, yes.</p>
<p>I’m highly skeptical for a different reason though…remember my friend that coal is dirt cheap, and the US has the world’s largest supply of it; granted this will greatly influence the economics and politics of nuclear or any other alternative energy utilization in the US</p>
<p>The most sobering moment thus far in college, for me, was realizing that the countries that had seemed so ‘smart’ and ‘rational’ to me, i.e. Germany and others utilizing alternative energy; well, they have far less cheap n’ dirty energy resources than we do; it’s ironic I say that we do not have this luxury.</p>
<p>I believe that most engineers will agree that more commercial nuclear power would be a great thing for engineering as a profession and the power industry. However, it is not our fellow engineers that need convinced. It is mainly people with no engineering background that are afraid of nuclear energy and unfortunately, the vast majority of this country is made up of non engineers.</p>
<p>In my mind, the commercial nuclear industry is a toss up. Will it make a comeback or will it continue in its current state? I’m not sure anyone knows. I’d like to be optimistic but the politics behind the issue are a major obstacle.</p>
<p>^^^^^</p>
<p>Yeah it sucks that those who need convincing aren’t engineers. Its the politicans and the civilians who live near nuclear facilities. But power consumption is going to increase substantially. There is some gas company (exxon maybe?) that has a commercial stating power needs will grow 50% over something like 20-50 years. Thats massive. Can wind provide for a 50% spike? How bout bio fuels? Or solar? I don’t think so. I don’t even think they could combined. They’ll help, but wont solve our problems.</p>
<p>That being said, those who aren’t in favor of nuclear will have to smell the roses… eventually. Nuclear must grow and expand if the world intends on progressing as planned. This “renaissance” is real. I dunno, maybe I’m off in my thinking but thats how I feel.</p>
<p>And back to the OP. Physics should do fine. I would reccomend a mechanical engineering degree if possible. All of the Nuclear personel I have talked to hear in VA were, or wished they were, MEs. Hell, even my MIT interviewer said I should go mechanical for undergrad (I plan on mastering in nuclear too) as opposed to going straight into nuclear. Even Penn State has their nuclear program within their Mechanical department. Mechanical simply provides a better base of understanding. I know switching into engineering departments isn’t easy. So if you can’t, don’t sweat it. Physics would definitely be my next best option. But if you are able to do mechanical then I would highly reccomend it.</p>
<p>
It seems like the skillset in nuclear reactor (and plant) design would be something that ChemE’s would be better trained at.</p>
<p>i second mr. payne. chemical engr/physic would be my top bet. possbily chemistry if you have a good choice of electives…</p>
<p>mech e can do the work at a nuclear plant, but the problem is most mech e’s wouldnt have to take a whole lot of of classes/training relevant to the nuclear field (quantum and particle physics).</p>