random_soldier1337

Well in the case of the coin it tells me that there are 2 random events that can happen when I flip a coin. The chance that one or the other takes place is 1/2 under the assumption both sides are affected by the same unbiased factors. Now, taking for example the probability of a nucleus decaying, I know that the number of nuclei in a sample N = Noexp(-λt), where No is the initial amount. Looking at the probability of a nucleus decaying another way, I could put it as 1-N/No. I'm not really sure I understand. 1- the percentage of nuclei remaining at a given time gives me the probability? EDIT: Or do you mean to say that they are derived by observation and large sample sizes of a phenomenon?

Discrete examples are easy enough. Toss a coin, 1/2, toss a die, 1/6. Continuous examples, Probability of a nucleus decaying during observation, 1-exp(-λt), Probability of a neutron moves x without interaction, exp(-Σx), where Σ can be assumed to be the inverse of the mean free path i.e. the distance a neutron travels without interaction on average. My point is that I don't really have an idea as to how these continuous probabilities are derived. Any assistance?

Thank you. I think I have a bit more of an understanding. However, in the following link to the wikipedia topic, in the equation for the expectation value of Q, why is the equation formulated as such (x being replaceable by any general function f(x)): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expectation_value_(quantum_mechanics)#Example_in_configuration_space I may be mistaken but I thought in general in mathematics, expectation value was another term for the mean or the average.

Math definition: integral of function within limits divided by difference of limits. QM definition: integral of complex conjugate of wave equation times function times wave equation within limits of minus to plus infinity.

Why is it that when integrating over all angles, integration is over the solid angle omega composed of theta and phi but the vector angle within flux, phi( r, E , omega), is resolved into the cartesian coordinates by cos(theta)sin(phi), sin(theta)sin(phi) and cos(phi) which is essentially the dot product of the radius vector from spherical coordinates with the cartesian coordinate vectors i.e. why is integration over theta and phi to remove angular dependence but when resolving the angle the dot product is as if using the radius vector?

Well, I see the procedure is different. However, looking up the particular solution to use would be easier if I actually knew what f(x) was. I am basically trying to solve for neutron population with a source term but the source function isn't known. I would hazard a guess as to exponential nature which seems most accurate but is there any reason to believe it would not be a polynomial?

E.g. y'(x) + ay(x) = f(x) where a is a constant. I know we basically get exp(ax), then equation becomes [exp(ax)y(x)]' = exp(ax)f(x). But since f(x) is abstract/not defined, I don't know how I would not get stuck with a recursive integral on RHS after trying to integrate. Anyone know how to evaluate integral of exp(ax)f(x)?

Eh, whatever. I'm burned out on all these discussions. As I said, instrumentation and control. Maybe I'll luck out and get to work closely on a fusion project. If not, there are many industries that require circuitry and automation, from automobiles to cell phones. I may switch branches altogether if my coursework is heavily leaning towards another more common branch and if the option is there.

Well, the whole point was to go into fusion research. I've discussed this a fair bit and I think I my general path will be something like instrumentation and control. Most discussions make it seem like it would be applicable in many areas relying on any sort of circuitry/electrical setup, even in fusion. What do you think?

Somewhat. I mean I realize the mathematical, programming and analytical skills of a STEM person can be used in fairly available jobs like IT/business. But I mean to ask, would I, as a nuclear engineer, only be available to the Indian market since there is a lot of security that most countries have surrounding nuclear technology? That would severely limit job opportunities since I can only work for/with one nation.

I've mentioned my admission to MS Nuclear Engineering in the University of Florida earlier. Thing is I am a foreigner. What with all the security most countries have surrounding nuclear technology, would I be limiting myself in the number of parties I can work with? I am aware I have other career options but I am asking strictly about options in engineering. I did speak of taking instrumentation and control specialization possibly earlier which from the general definition of it would seem to open up more fields than nuclear. But then again, my degree would say I did an MS in Nuclear Engineering and not something like mechanical or electrical.

Honestly, I just want the point I've reached, I just want to work within STEM (non-IT). But what is more important is leaving a legacy. Something actually helpful to future generations. Just don't want to end up another cog in the system that will get rusty sooner or later and get easily replaced once I'm done. That's what my worries are about really. Just don't want to end up on dead end path.

Haha, thanks! I'll be going for the MS with Thesis. I guess that'd be more research oriented.

I have B.Tech (Indian degree) in Electronics and Communications engineering. I have already been admitted to the MS in Nuclear Engineering at the University of Florida. I hadn't looked much at the job route because I had a rough time in my B.Tech and limited to IT and management jobs.

So, another question came about. Assuming I don't go into academia but want to either work in the industry or, more desirably, go into industrial research, what path would be better in that case and would I benefit from a P.hD? Earlier, it was said that academic experience reflects more negatively if one moves towards industry. Unsure if that is for both work as well as research or just work. Either way, it made it sound like going for a P.hD may not necessarily be the best idea.

I absolutely agree. Hmm... let's not speak with reference to myself for a moment. If one wished to receive the broadest knowledge of STEM possible, (without being reduced to a jack of all and master of none) then earn a modest income applying this knowledge to aid those who need it most in the world, what would generally be the best path? How would one become well educated enough to be an expert in many areas? Then, what should he do to achieve the aforementioned goal of aiding others? Applying his knowledge to develop highly experimental technology (cold fusion or quantum computing, etc.)? Or should he apply what he knows to what exists i.e. to refine existing technology?

I'm not even sure I want to do research per se anymore. I just want to give significant aid to people, especially, looking at the conditions of the third world country that I am from. I have always been better in STEM as opposed to more socioeconomic fields (that may better and more directly aid them). I thought I would go for nuclear fusion. I want to see economical fusion reactors become a reality. I just don't want to risk becoming absolutely incapable of doing anything in the false pursuit of such. I can't muster a degree from an ivy league right now. You've all been very reassuring but I can't for the life of me erase my doubts.

That disclaimer pushed me a little towards what's stable rather than what's more interesting. Well I suppose you were only being honest to help inform me. I don't know. Maybe I'll just leave the dream research for the ivy leagues.

So I've been asking the same questions elsewhere and it seems that they suggest instrumentation might be better for a stable career and that fusion might not take off given it's been some 80 years since the conception of the idea but no strong outcomes. What should I do? I want to do something big and helpful but don't want to live in a cardboard box if things don't turn out well.

Okay say one gets the worst of it, how can they salvage that? Second, if everything fails, what option does one have? Not from the POV of being in the field, but any job prospects. That is what I meant by job security. I mean I have heard several times that people from STEM are still quite welcome at higher positions in more regularly available jobs, maybe even IT due to programming experience and general problem solving skills. I can't really backdown either way at this point, but it is still a scary prospect thinking that one works themselves for something they believe in only to not be able to reach their goal as well as having to break their back to regain some of their original semblance of wealth which may have been retained if they just consolidated it instead of going for further education.

1) Is this true of pretty much every STEM P.hD? Or maybe even every P.hD? 2) What can one do with a P.hD if they don't find success where you mentioned difficulties to be present? Regardless of the P.hD, what is one left with if they do not find success on this path? 3) How does one get into more research and less of what you mentioned? It seems like it's all part of the package and one needs to accept the non-research parts to get the research. 4) Is the path to becoming a staff scientist the same?

I don't mind going up to P.hD. Just wondering how to go about this to make sure all my bases are covered.

Don't worry. I come running for advice often. I'm sure you'll hear from me sooner than later.

I am not actually at my university currently. I have enrolled for Fall 2017 onwards. I didn't realize that was how it worked. I thought students had to do their own independent research or is that P.hD only? Anyway, I just wanted the gist of how things work. I will see how to acquire the appropriate information ASAP and think on that.

So, I have a Bachelor's degree in Electronics and Communications (outside of US) and I wanted to pursue work in nuclear fusion so I had applied for an MS in nuclear engineering in the US. I have gotten admission in the University of Florida. Anyway, I was sharing this information elsewhere on the internet and one participant of the discussion said that with my background, I would be suited to instrumentation and control. I want to know will I be able to pursue a career in nuclear fusion or would it be wiser to do as that person suggested and go into instrumentation and control? Personally, I love being within STEM and I would love to just be able to innovate to produce something helpful to people. That is the most important to me. I believe a career within the nuclear fusion field would allow this greatly. But at the same time I do want some measure of job security. Not a great measure. I can be frugal, live with only the absolute bare necessities, but that is better than being unemployed which is why just a a little bit of advice on this matter would be nice.